The Lounge is rated PG. If you're about to post something you wouldn't want your
kid sister to read then don't post it. No flame wars, no abusive conduct, no programming
questions and please don't post ads.
"Now you can continue what you were doing. We're sorry for the inconvenience—we're trying to stop spammers, not you!"
This message, I'm getting after "successfully" answering a LONG captcha code in my hotmail account while trying to send a mail.
Bad things get more visibility, & try to reach users' eyes faster. When I read the line, I only read, "Sorry your captcha was wrong, You look like a spammer". I mean, in a reflex read that happens in a milliseconds. But immediately after, we get the message right. Even this UX lag in ms shouldn't happen.
The good news rather be in bold or some kind of focus applied.
The excuses must be in small fonts.
I empathize Microsoft. Not just these, as I'm using a lot of products of them, I'm encountering a lot of "could be better" thing. Why do they have problems every little corners.
Starting to think people post kid pics in their profiles because that was the last time they were cute - Jeremy.
I am not asking for legal advice. Ok, now that everyone's butt has been covered....
I've gotten very curious about why some of my articles have gotten a very high amount of traffic, so I started poking around. It turns out that one of my articles[^] is referenced in U. S. Patent #8296730[^], held by Microsoft. Presumably, Microsoft would not have filed this patent if they did not expect to see some kind of commercial return on it.
Question 1: Does the Code Project use license permit for-profit use of the articles that people post here?
Question 2: Would I be entitled to any financial gain that Microsoft might see from this patent, seeing as my work is a reference to the patent? (Ignore, for the moment, the issues involved in trying to initiate a patent dispute with M$.)
The CodeProject Open License is summarized here and detailed here. I'd say go review those and make your own conclusions, but from what I can tell there aren't the sort of restrictions you seem to be implying for that license.
You can patent a derivative work, as long as it is unique enough. When you file a patent, you have to list any citations you know of. The patent examiner may add more, though if the citation were to fully describe the new invention, the patent wouldn't be granted. The question is whether the citations are complete and enough to fully describe the invention or make it obvious. This list can get both long and extremely obscure. Being cited generally increases the value of a patent and perhaps other sources as well, however that's as far as it goes. If being cited in a patent implied a monetary relationship, the entire system would become untenable.