Zambia Daily Mail ? Overcome unforgiveness in your marriage

WORDS OF FAITH with PASTOR KATAI
DOES your flesh seem to scuttle when you come into contact with certain people? When you hear the sound of their voice, does every fibre of your being recoil? Does your chest tighten when you think of them?
Are you embarrassed to admit this is the way you feel about the person you share your life with? There is a possibility Satan has you in his grip through unforgiveness.
Recently, at our local church, we had a hot service; the main service came with a sermon theme, ?Overcoming the spirit of unforgiveness in our lives?, which I wish to share with you. This theme got its main text from I Samuel 24, where King Saul made a decision to kill David. Reason? King Saul became envious and jealous of young David?s achievements (I Samuel 18:7-8). From that day King Saul declared war against the innocent, weaker and defenseless mortal answering to the name of David son of Jesse.
In the quest to restore any relationship, the first step is to identify your enemy. Too often in marriage when there is offense and conflict, we identify our partners as the enemy. I strongly feel that our partners are never the enemy. If we learn who our enemies really are, we can effectively fight the battles in our marriages and rise to victory. Our real enemies are the powers of darkness and our own flesh. These enemies often go unnoticed in the heat of battle. Our flesh seeks to please itself and cannot please God. The apostle Paul warns us about our flesh, in Romans 8:8, ?Those who are still under the control of their sinful nature can never please God.?
The powers of darkness intend for all marriages to be destroyed. If you commit to God and your partner, you will wrestle with the forces of darkness. Ephesians 6:12 declares, ?For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.? When we recognise our enemies, we are more effective in loosening Satan?s grip of un-forgiveness.
We often equate forgiveness with something warm and fuzzy. Truthfully, forgiveness is quite the opposite. Forgiveness can be quite painful when it involves someone you are madly in love with. In marriage, forgiveness is not ?Don?t worry about what you did, I?m fine with it and we all make mistakes.? It sounds spiritual and great coming out of our mouths, but inside we are struggling with hypocrisy. We are plagued by an abyss of pain, anger, bitterness, and resentment. Forgiveness is not lip service.
These unchecked feelings can potentially become emotionally, mentally, verbally, or physically murderous. Remember King Saul?s behaviour toward the young David. Forgiveness is not being so numb to pain that we are oblivious to reality. In marriage, when we embrace numbness our hearts transform into ice. Forgiveness is not forgetting the offense. Forgiveness is not choosing to inflict the price for the offense. We should all learn to honour God with our hearts and not just our mouth. We are being hypocritical or lying when we say we have forgiven but unforgiveness still rots our souls. Satan grips and weakens us through unforgiveness. He tightens his grip through a religious spirit that says the right thing while refusing to confront the offense and heal.
Are you struggling to forgive your partner? Read on please! How do you forgive someone who was never supposed to hurt you in the first place? Why forgive them? What about all the damage to your marriage and family? The best answer is you must; forgiveness was extended to you. Jesus said in Matthew 6:14-15, ?If you forgive those who sin against you, your heavenly Father will forgive you. But if you refuse to forgive others, your Father will not forgive your sins.? If you refuse to forgive, you operate in sin and in covenant with Satan.
These questions and declarations are hard to swallow. You may have battled with them in your marriage, but today I urge you to come out victorious. We battle so much with unforgiveness because we cannot see our own sin. I cannot see that my unwillingness to forgive is just as ugly to God as the things I blame my spouse for. The reason we battle unforgiveness is because we can only see the depravity in the souls of others, ignoring the beams in our own eyes.
We can only win the battle of unforgiveness when we realise that we?re in need of forgiveness from God and our sweet partners. Furthermore, we can only win the battle when we?re willing to face the ugliness of our own heart and surrender our heart to God. We should realise our enemies are our own flesh and Satan, who loves to work in our flesh. Unforgiveness is a work of the flesh, and it will remain until you crucify it on the altar of forgiveness.
We struggle to forgive because we justify our rights and inappropriately apply God?s Word. Many of us have declared inwardly or outwardly, ?The Bible says, ?Be ye angry.? ? We forget the rest of the Scripture verse: ? ? and sin not: let not the sun go down upon your wrath? (Ephesians 4:26, KJV). If we are honest, many of us are angry and sin for days, weeks, months, years. Many of us will carry the sin of unforgiveness to our grave.
Forgiveness becomes a struggle when we seek to please our flesh. We struggle because God demands that we be like Christ. God is as displeased with unforgiveness as he is with sexual sins, deception, lying, and envy. We must remember that any sin either of us could commit, Jesus paid for at Calvary. Who gave us the right to make our spouses pay for sin when we did not?
Due to the gravity of their offenses, we believe we have the authority to execute judgment on our partners. But God would never entrust vengeance into our hands (Romans 12:17-19). Why? Our sin-stricken souls will never view our spouses purely through the eyes of God?s grace. We should be concerned for ourselves when we seek revenge on the people we promised to love, honour, and cherish. Unforgiveness unequivocally implicates the wickedness hidden in our hearts and the depravity of our own souls.
Through many offenses, trials, betrayal, and calamity, I have learned real forgiveness. I have learned that the world?s standards for marriage are a slap in the face to God. When we decide not to forgive, we call it ?irreconcilable differences? or irreparable marriage?.? God calls it unforgiveness. Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is the only biblical sin for which there is no forgiveness. In most divorce cases, blasphemy is never mentioned.
Real forgiveness is threefold. Forgiveness means excusing the penalty for an offense, offering pardon. Forgiveness means renouncing anger and resentment. Finally, forgiveness is a choice. God gave all of us the power to choose. These definitions are simplistic, but they pack enough power to loosen the stronghold of unforgiveness.
We hinder the move of God because of too much pride to forgive. I learned that forgiveness is a choice. We make the decision to forgive, even if our emotions, feelings, and desires have not surrendered in obedience to God. As children of God, we live and walk by faith, not feelings. When we make decisions based upon feelings, we give Satan the rope to hang us with. Real forgiveness is demonstrating what Christ did for us on the cross.
The devil understands the power of forgiveness. He had the opportunity to behold the glory of God and the kingdom of heaven. He has been doomed to hell and is mad and desires us to share his fate. Satan knows that forgiveness redeems and restores relationships. Satan is self-employed to steal, kill, and destroy (John10:10). Unforgiveness opens the door for him to hold us back. Each day we incite harsh words because of offense and inflict the silent treatment, we strengthen Satan?s rope of entanglement. As the sun sets and we nurse anger, bitterness, and resentment, the devil smiles. We have embraced the power of darkness.
Satan is selfish and proud; when we are unforgiving we act like him. Unforgiveness is laced with pride, which cost the devil the kingdom of heaven. Loosen Satan?s grip and forgive. God?s forgiveness propels us into salvation and restoration. When we let go of wrongs, we loosen Satan?s grasp on our relationships. Your marriage can be restored and bring glory to God again. Blessings! Comments email:pkatai@yahoo.com or thabokatai@gmail.com or sms 0955/0967-778068.

Source: http://www.daily-mail.co.zm/?p=5800

jet crash in virginia beach john tortorella nicki minaj beez in the trap video food network f/a 18 f 18 crash virginia tenebrae

Huffington Post to launch German edition

BERLIN (AP) ? The Huffington Post is expanding its footprint in Europe with a German language edition.

The online news portal says it is partnering with German company Tomorrow Focus AG to launch the site in Europe's biggest news market this fall.

Tomorrow Focus said in a statement Monday that the site will be produced in Munich and cater to readers in Germany, Austria and Switzerland.

The Huffington Post already has international editions in Britain, Canada, France, Italy and Spain. A Japanese version is due to launch in May.

The U.S. version of the site was founded by Ariana Huffington in 2005 and bought by AOL Inc. in 2011.

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/huffington-post-launch-german-edition-083452737.html

north korea threat brandon jacobs brandon jacobs brian dawkins emma roberts north korea news north korea news

92% The Gatekeepers

All Critics (89) | Top Critics (30) | Fresh (82) | Rotten (7)

The film and its talking head participants paint the picture in both broad strokes and fine detail.

Whatever one's political stripe regarding Israel, it's hard to dispute the impressions and perspective of the film's six eyewitnesses.

The level of candor here may not satisfy hard-liners of either stripe, but it can help viewers begin to formulate new questions about the philosophical, strategic and moral challenges of conflict, in particular "wars on terror."

Ultimately the movie feels evasive, and its flashy, digitally animated re-creations of military surveillance footage unpleasantly evoke the Call of Duty video games.

It offers startlingly honest insight into the Israeli-Palestinian conflict from some of those who called the shots.

As a political testament, the result is revealing and important.

...a riveting and sobering documentary about Shin Bet that raises important if unanswerable questions about the morality of state-sanctioned violence in the name of internal security.

[Moreh] asks just the right questions, never prodding these understandably private men too far but getting what he needs.

A riveting but depressing history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

It's a depressing movie, yet there is encouragement to be found in the manifest decency and reasonableness of these six honest, articulate men ...

The former heads of Israel's military anti-terrorism agency Shin Bet break their silence in this unnerving, eye-opening documentary.

The film, though based on the exploits of Shin Bet, gives us reason to think about the drones that take out more than just terrorists.

Makes for truly bracing viewing.

A fascinating film offering a startling look inside one of the most tightlipped intelligence agencies on the planet, and providing powerful resonances with the US and UK's "war on terror".

A compelling overview of a modern security agency - bred in a moral grey area, organising state-sanctioned violence, but uncertain of the strength of its political safety net.

While memorable in sometimes unexpected ways (1980 head Avraham Shalom's long unwashed nails), there is always the nagging feeling that any revelations are being pushed or sold a little too hard.

Dror Moreh's Oscar-nominated documentary is riveting, haunting and depressing in equal measure, offering a sobering assessment of the Israel-Palestine conflict from a unique perspective.

[T]he Oscar-nominated documentary in which the six living former heads of Shin Bet, the ultrasecretive Israeli domestic security agency, talk about their antiterrorism work...

Although The Gatekeepers may not be quite theatrical nor dramatic enough for it to be highly recommended as a cinematic experience, this does feel like a film that really should be seen.

Many secrets are revealed and examined in director Dror Moreh's mind-blowingly fine film. If I have a quibble, it's that he never reveals the most tantalizing secret of all: how the hell he pulled it off.

[An] absorbing documentary, which charts the Israeli-Palestinian conflict from the Six Day War to the presentday.

Insightful, revelatory and profound, Moreh's Oscar-nominated documentary combines riveting interviews, archive footage and - yes - state-of-the-art photographic effects to offer a unique perspective on the Israel-Palestine issue.

Both journalistic coup and unsettling confirmation of the idea that 'you can't make peace using military means.'

Much like Errol Morris' "The Fog of War," Dror Moreh's film is a sobering inside look inside history, at mistakes made and opportunities missed.

Moreh employs a direct interviewing style, reminiscent of Errol Morris' work, to get the men to talk about their days leading Shin Bet.

Moreh gets some startling confessions and insights from each man but also misses the opportunity to truly challenge his subjects on their regard for democracy, basic human rights and their own accountability.

Source: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_gatekeepers_2012/

Steel Magnolias Niels Bohr the Rumble 2012 Columbus Day 2012 carlina white Sam Champion Engaged Infield fly rule

The IPKat: The rise of patent monetization entities Part Three ...

In Part Two of this series of Katposts, we looked at the diffusion of patent assertion entities in England and Wales, where data show that only 6% of patent cases involve a PAE (in the US, instead, PAEs filed 56% of patent lawsuits in 2012 - see Part One). In the absence of detailed data on the rise of patent assertion entities in other EU countries, this Kat decided to take an indirect approach to the issue, looking at similarities or differences in (1) the usage of patents and (2) the legal framework in the UK and the rest of the EU.

On the first aspect, the PatVal-EU study provides some useful evidence on 'unused blocking patents', a concept that refers to patents which are neither used internally by the right owner, nor licensed. Their most frequent use is strategic blocking, which aims to prevent competitors from using the patented innovations. It is therefore probable that PAEs may assert patents falling within this category. A look at the findings of the PatVal-EU study shows that, in respect to about 9000 patents with priority date in 1993-1997 (located in France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Spain and UK), the share of unused blocking patents is between 12,6 and 23% [these data, coupled with similar data on unused sleeping patents, brought concerns about low patent valorization in the EU: the Commission, here and here, suggested that the development of patent funds and pools may increase valorization, but noted that their activities could lead to anti-competitive and hold-up practices, unless they were committed to non exclusive licensing, based on reasonable remuneration - similar private-public funds are starting to appear in Korea (Intellectual Discovery Fund), France (Brevets) and Japan (Innovation Network Corp.), as reported by Reuters here]. The highest percentage of unused blocking patents is found in the UK, which suggests that the number of PAE cases in the UK and in other EU countries should be comparable, unless the former has a peculiar legal framework which discourages PAEs from filing lawsuits at the PHC.

This finding is corroborated by a research conducted by S. Fusco, who found that the number of known PAE cases in Italy and Germany is particularly low. According to her paper, in the period 2000-2012, only five lawsuits involved a patent assertion entity in Italy (out of about 1,000 patent cases); in Germany, again, Fusco was only able to gather evidence of five PAE cases (out of about 8,000 patent cases) in the same span of time (although these data were collected through indirect evidence). A study that examined the activity of patent assertion entities in the German patent market also confirmed these data: T. Fischer and J. Henkel found that PAEs are not particularly active in the market for technology, a conclusion which falls in line with the UK data (particularly, with the low activity in patent filing and litigation). The researchers were able to identify only 107 patent transfers to known PAEs in Germany, while similar entities acquired 458 patents in the US [the data, however, also suggest that the entities operating in the EU differ from those active in the US and vice versa: of all the PAEs listed in the study, only Intergraph and Rambus had engaged in patent transfers in both markets]. Although there may not be an exact correspondence between patent transfers and litigation, this study certainly suggests that PAEs' activity in Germany remains low, as highlighted in Fusco's work.

Since (1) patent usage (and market) looks uniform, attention should be devoted to (2) the differences in the legal framework of patent litigation around Europe. If one or more of the elements that are commonly regarded as safeguards against the spread of PAE litigation cannot be found in one or more of the EU member states, it could mean that the reassuring data on PAE cases in England and Wales cannot be extended to other countries. Before digging deeper, however, it may be useful to list these 'safeguards'. According to several studies (for example, here and here), these elements comprise:

(a) strict rules on the patentability of software and business method;
(b) fragmented enforceability, which increases the costs and complexity of litigation (and the likelihood of inconsistent decisions);
(c) unavailability of contingency fees;
(d) low litigation costs and damage awards in comparison to the US [similarly, low damage awards appear to be a factor in limiting PAE litigation in India - thanks Rahul!];
(e) implementation of the 'loser pays' rule.

Although they may be interpreted in slightly different ways, these safeguards appear to be present all over the EU. However, the major threat comes from the fragmented enforceability, which brings with it the risk of conflicting decisions. This certainly increases the litigation's complexity, but also allows a patent assertion entity to exploit the inconsistencies to identify the most PAE-friendly courts (look here for a comparison between UK, Germany, France and Netherlands). A prime example of this risk may be found in the different attitude of the courts on the issuance of injunctions in PAE cases. Sir Robin Jacob, at the 2008 GRUR Meeting in Stuttgart, offered a humorous perspective on the issue, discussing the different approach of UK and German courts:

[I]t comes out of a little discussion I had with a prominent German lawyer. He said to me: "for us, there is no problem." "Why?" I said. "Because if a valid patent is infringed, there will be an injunction." "Suppose", I asked, "the patent was for a life saving drug and the patentee had not enough product to supply the market. Would a German court really stop the supply of an infringer?s product?" "Well", he said, conceding the point: "Maybe not. But it would have to be a very extreme case."

In Germany, an injunction is usually granted if there is a finding or likelihood of infringement, and its use as an incentive to force settlement is openly acknowledged. In the PAE case IPCom v HTC, a German judge held that:

The Chamber does assume in principle that the enforcement of a cease-and-desist claim can be disproportionate since rights arising from a patent are not granted without limits (Art. 14 (2) of the Basic Law, ? 242 of the German Civil Code). However, since the legislator does not make the cease-and-desist claim subject to any general prohibition on commensurability (not so: ? 140a (4), ? 140b (4), ? 140c (2), ? 140d (2) of the Patent Act) and the cease-and-desist claim secures the exclusivity right protected under constitutional law, the scope of the disproportionality defense remains restricted to atypical exceptional cases which could not be foreseen by the legislator. The fact that the patent licensing entity is attempting to enforce a cease-and-desist claim in order to urge infringing parties to pay for a license does not, in the view of the Chamber, constitute such an exception but rather is an inherent part of the patent system as part of the applicable legal and economic system, especially since a patent licensing entity will usually be urged to take such action with respect to existing license agreements.

The German approach seems at odds with the one taken by the PHC. Again, Sir Robin Jacob explained that judges in England and Wales are prepared to grant injunctions, but maintain a degree of discretion in relation to the relief, which they exercise taking into account the plaintiff's interest and previous conduct. He noted that UK courts reject absolutism and affirm the right to refuse an injunction when damages appear to be an adequate remedy. Reciting Seager v Copydex and Banks v EMI Songs, the former judge stated that 'where an inventor wanted to sell his idea for money, money is what he got'. A similar approach is adopted by courts in the Netherlands, which generally also exhibit a more sensitive attitude, than German courts, towards foreign judgments (head here and here for some food for thought on the topic). The practical consequence is that some companies are moving away from Germany, to relocate their headquarters in the Netherlands, citing legal concerns as the main reason for the relocation (Microsoft is probably the most prominent example - test your German here). The recent judgment of the CJEU in Case C?616/10, Solvay SA v Honeywell et al.?(IPKat comments here), stirred things up, as it recognized the possibility of granting pan-European injunctions, if there is 'a real connecting link between the subject-matter of the provisional measures sought and the territorial jurisdiction of the Member State of the court seised' (a paper just published offers a perspective on the case). The Court did not move away from its previous ruling in Case C-4/03, Gesellschaft f?r Antriebstechnik mbH & Co. v Lamellen und Kupplungsbau Beteiligungs, which taught that a national court may assess infringement (or non-infringement) beyond national boundaries, but cannot rule on the validity of the patent at issue, as the courts of the member state where the patent was registered have exclusive jurisdiction on questions of validity, pursuant to the mandatory rule of Article 22(4) of Regulation 44/2001 (Article 16(4) of the Brussels Convention). Instead, the judges recognized that a pan-European interim injunction is permitted, if it does not lead to a final decision on the patent's validity:

According to the referring court, the court before which the interim proceedings have been brought does not make a final decision on the validity of the patent invoked but makes an assessment as to how the court having jurisdiction under Article 22(4) of the regulation would rule in that regard, and will refuse to adopt the provisional measure sought if it considers that there is a reasonable, non-negligible possibility that the patent invoked would be declared invalid by the competent court. In those circumstances, it is apparent that there is no risk of conflicting decisions ..., since the provisional decision taken by the court before which the interim proceedings have been brought will not in any way prejudice the decision to be taken on the substance by the court having jurisdiction under Article 22(4) of Regulation No 44/2001.

Further, the Court ruled that Article 6(1) of Regulation 44/2001 may be applied in cases where two or more companies from different Member States, in proceedings pending before a court of one of those Member States, 'are each separately accused of committing an infringement of the same national part of a European patent which is in force in yet another Member State by virtue of their performance of reserved actions with regard to the same product'. In Actavis Group HF v Eli Lilly & Company, the High Court for England and Wales accepted to hear foreign patent claims (if no question of validity is involved), declining arguments pointing to the forum non conveniens (and the AdvoKat commented it here).

It is difficult to predict whether these recent development may fuel or hinder the rise of patent assertion entities in the EU. The prospect of obtaining a pan-European injunction could potentially help the spread of PAE cases, while pan-European infringement proceedings might reduce fragmentation, inconsistency and litigation costs. This Kat, however, does not think that these elements could cause a sudden surge in PAE litigation: on one side, the judges' attitude towards the issuance of injunctions in PAE cases has so far been cautious; on the other, fragmentation could be restored, and usually will, through an invalidity claim.

The same concerns expressed above accompanied the Unified Patent Court Agreement (UPC), which many studies depicted as a test for the EU patent litigation system's resistance to the diffusion of PAEs. In particular, commentators (European Scrutiny Committee report here) pointed to bifurcation, forum shopping (and pro-patentee attitude, determined by competition between local divisions - see a recap of issues here) and pan-European injunctions as the main issues that might transform the EU into a 'trolls' paradise'. Professor Harhoff?however stated that the UPC is designed with an emphasis on revocation, low costs and cautious use of injunctions, elements which should be adequate to counter 'trolling' activities. Certainly, that seems to be one of the aims of the UPC, as a recital states: '[w]ishing to improve the enforcement of patents and the defence against unfounded claims and patents which should be revoked and to enhance legal certainty by setting up a Unified Patent Court for litigation relating to the infringement and validity of patents'.

Of relevance to assess potential effects on PAE lawsuits are, inter alia, the following provisions:

* Article 19: the establishment of a training framework for the judges should ensure, or at least contribute to, the uniformity of judicial decisions among the different divisions (as expressly stated by the provision itself: 'Regular meetings shall be organised between all judges of the Court in order to discuss developments in patent law and to ensure the consistency of the Court's case law');
*?Article 33(1)(b): allowing the plaintiff to bring an action under Article 32(1)(a), (c), (f) and (g) against multiple defendants 'only where the defendants have a commercial relationship and where the action relates to the same alleged infringement' should prevent the EU from suffering from one of the issues that plagued US litigation before the America Invents Act, which introduced stricter joinder rules;
*?Article 33(3): bifurcation may be feared by many, but the real effects of the provision remain to be discovered, as two out of three options allow the case to proceed safely united. The risk, here, is that judges across the different divisions may adopt different practices with regard to bifurcation, effectively creating a pro-patentee enclave [shall we call it Eastern District for Europe, perhaps?];
*?Article 33(10): as evidenced by the study cited in Part One of this post, information asymmetry may play a key role in favouring PAE litigation [Merpel cannot make up her mind on whether the adoption of a fair play rule in patent litigation - or in any fields of litigation - would be beneficial or deadly];
*?Article 42: principles of proportionality and fairness, albeit theoretical premises which might be disregarded, certainly point the system in the right direction, as far as PAE (or any type of) litigation is concerned (e.g. they may influence the judges' decisions on bifurcation, when a patent assertion entity is concerned, concentrating litigation to avoid unfair use of the temporal discrepancy between the judgments of infringement and validity);
*?Article 62: discretionary grant of provisional injunctions challenges the courts with the task of defining clear and consistent standards, giving actual shape to the elements indicated in Article 62(2) (interests of the parties and potential harm from granting or refusal). Once again, as with bifurcation, uniformity appears to be the key to a PAE-proof system;
*?Article 63: similarly, allowing discretionary grant of permanent injunctions could lead courts to take a UK-inspired approach, limiting the award of permanent injunctions in PAE cases (again, uniformity is the issue here);
*?Article 69: the adoption of the 'loser pays' rule is likely to be a disincentive for exploratory lawsuits and is commonly thought to be a powerful antidote to PAE litigation.

On a train to Milan, the

Kat saw something familiar...

To this Kat, the risk that the UPC Agreement may provide fertile ground for PAE cases does not appear significantly higher than that embedded in the current situation. The system, however, seems characterized by a degree of fragmentation, and perhaps incoherency [as shown by readers' comments to a recent IPKat post], which makes it hard to foresee how judges are going to apply the provisions of the Agreement. Usually, trolling activity thrives in situations where complexity and confusion rule. Thus, the challenge that awaits judges, practitioners and scholars is to shed light on the obscure issues and to ensure that the divisions' decisions will be consistent and uniform [Merpel adds that a good starting point would be to address some of the Max Planck's criticisms, examined by the AmeriKat here].

The analysis conducted so far, in Parts Two and Three, showed that (1) England and Wales enjoy a relatively PAE-adverse environment, (2) PAE litigation in other EU member states is equally constricted, although there is some inconsistency with respect to the use of injunctions, (3) the trend towards pan-European litigation should not significantly alter the current situation, and (4) the UPC Agreement contains potentially dangerous provisions, whose effects can [should, says Merpel] be contrasted by an effort to achieve consistency and to establish clear and shared standards for issuing injunctive remedies and dealing with bifurcation.

There is still one issue which is worth mentioning, as it gives a preview of possible developments of PAE litigation in Europe. As highlighted at the beginning of Part Two, the expression 'patent assertion entity' commonly refers to a company who manages a portfolio of patents for the primary aim of assertion and litigation, without practising the invention. Recently, however, primary companies in the ICT sector started using PAEs (already existent or created ad hoc) to assert patents against each other, in an effort to gain a competitive advantage and to hold up competitors, relying on the ever growing phenomenon of patent thickets ('a dense web of overlapping intellectual property rights that a company must hack its way through in order to actually commercialize new technology' according to Shapiro, more here). In June 2012, for example, Google filed a complaint with the EU Commission, alleging that Microsoft and Nokia 'are colluding to raise the costs of mobile devices for consumers, creating patent trolls that sidestep promises both companies have made' (Guardian article here). The giant search-engine company demanded that the competitors be held accountable and invited the Commission to look into these practices. Further, intense litigation in the EU (and US) is currently surrounding standard essential patents and FRAND licensing (examples: Germany here and UK here).

It seems that, if the EU has been relatively immune from traditional patent trolling, a new wave of better looking, well dressed, yet secretly malicious PAEs is appearing on the horizon. A similar development would not only shake the safeguards that protected the EU from traditional PAE litigation, but would ultimately challenge the patent system itself, shifting the focus from protection of research and innovation, to strategic use of patents to alter competition on the merits. Thus closely observing and studying old and new PAEs, even if the phenomenon appears to be minor in the EU, might be a very wise thing to do.

Source: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2013/04/the-rise-of-patent-monetization_5980.html

gran torino gloria steinem war of the worlds rock and roll hall of fame severe weather wichita brian wilson

Justice Breyer Hospitalized After Accident (ABC News)

Share With Friends: | | Politics - Top Stories News, RSS and RSS Feed via Feedzilla.

Source: http://news.feedzilla.com/en_us/stories/politics/top-stories/302036119?client_source=feed&format=rss

tenebrae the lake house petrino arkansas roy williams divine mercy chaplet matt lauer albert pujols

Eisenhower was right (Unqualified Offerings)

Share With Friends: | | Politics - Top Stories News, RSS and RSS Feed via Feedzilla.

Source: http://news.feedzilla.com/en_us/stories/politics/top-stories/301817105?client_source=feed&format=rss

gi joe jason wu for target collection nick diaz vs carlos condit the patriot hall of fame occupy dc ufc 143 fight card

The Bird That Struts Its Stuff

Copyright ? 2013 NPR. For personal, noncommercial use only. See Terms of Use. For other uses, prior permission required.

IRA FLATOW, HOST:

Up next, it's our Video Pick of The Week. And here with me, as always, is our managing editor and correspondent for video, Flora Litchman. Hi, Flora.

FLORA LITCHMAN, BYLINE: Hi, Ira.

FLATOW: You went on a...

(APPLAUSE)

FLATOW: You went on a local expedition for us.

LITCHMAN: I love Salt Lake City.

FLATOW: Yeah.

LITCHMAN: I just want to...

FLATOW: They love you, it sounds like. Tell us about your expedition.

LITCHMAN: We went on an adventure for this week's video pick, and we went looking for a local celebrity. But I actually was hoping to sound check that with you guys, maybe via applause-o-meter. Who in the audience has heard a sage-grouse?

(APPLAUSE)

LITCHMAN: Well, there you go. OK. And who here has seen a sage-grouse strut?

(APPLAUSE)

FLATOW: Whoa...

LITCHMAN: Wow. Pretty good.

Before we get more into this, I want to bring on our sage on sage-grouse. Jason Robinson is the upland game coordinator for the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources. Thanks for joining us today and for being our tour guide for this week's Video Pick.

JASON ROBINSON: Thanks, Flora.

LITCHMAN: Describe what the strut looks like and why these birds do it.

ROBINSON: Well, it's kind of hard to explain, but I'll do my best. Basically a sage-grouse male has a white collar that's really bright. And what it does is they gather on this leks, and a lek is a location where males gather to kind of strut their stuff for the female hens.

And the males dance around a little bit, all puffed out, their tail feathers are all erect; they have very sharp pointy tail feathers, and they have these air sacs on their chest that they fill up with air and they rub their wings against those stiff feathers on the side and puff out to make kind of a unique noise that attracts the females, and hopefully is - makes them successful for mating.

FLORA LICHTMAN, BYLINE: And we have a little clip of the noise of the sage-grouse while it's strutting and puffing up its chest. Can we hear that?

(SOUNDBITE OF SAGE-GROUSE'S PUFFING)

FLATOW: Oh.

LICHTMAN: Oh.

(LAUGHTER)

FLATOW: Can you do that one? Can you do that noise?

ROBINSON: You know, I've been asked several times to do that and I'm not able to.

(LAUGHTER)

FLATOW: This is SCIENCE FRIDAY from NPR.

LICHTMAN: I'm Flora Lichtman.

FLATOW: And I'm Ira Flatow here at Salt Lake City talking about the sage grouse. You went on this expedition to look for one, right? And you found it right in the first - what did you got?

LICHTMAN: Unfortunately, no.

(LAUGHTER)

FLATOW: No?

LICHTMAN: We did not see any sage-grouse despite Jason's excellent effort. We went all over, mountain to mountain, and we were totally unsuccessful. But our viewers...

FLATOW: The good news is...

LICHTMAN: Yeah. The good news is if you go to our website you can see them, thanks to Jason's agency, which has beautiful footage of these birds strutting it around. And they do this every year at this time, right?

ROBINSON: Right. Yeah. So they go to the same locations, year after year, for generations, and so we keep tracked to that information. You know, normally on a good day - we didn't have the best weather, but usually they're pretty predictable when they're going to be there and what times that sort of thing.

LICHTMAN: And these birds are facing some challenges here.

ROBINSON: They are. They're actually a candidate species for listing under the Endangered Species Act. So there's a lot of conservation efforts to try and save sage grouse and keep the populations from declining.

FLATOW: Can I ask you a question? I found interesting - the video is up on our website at sciencefriday.com. And as part of the video - I watched your adventures, it was quite interesting - is - you said that it requires a huge range of area, lot of open space for it to be successful. Why is that? Why does it need so much territory?

ROBINSON: Well, kind of referencing that, sage-grouse are sagebrush obligate. That means they have to have sagebrush in order to exist, but not just a few plants. They need vast landscapes of sagebrush, anywhere from 10 to hundreds of square miles. And the main reason for that is sagebrush is arid. They don't get much precipitation. There's not a whole lot for them to eat so they're adapted to eat the sagebrush. So they need these large expanses to be able to fulfill the life requirements they have.

LICHTMAN: And they can even gain weight over the winter, you said, because they do so well.

ROBINSON: Yeah. So they're so highly adaptive to eating sagebrush, and sagebrush is actually quite nutritious, the leaves, that they can gain weight in the winter if they have enough sagebrush available.

LICHTMAN: So the populations are declining. Why can people still hunt these birds?

ROBINSON: Well, that's actually the question I get asked most often. And it's probably one of the more controversial things surrounding sage grouse. You know, our agency's primary goal and objective is to keep sage-grouse on the landscape. You know, we work very hard doing that.

One of the things to keep in mind is sage grouse (unintelligible) birds, who actually produce more young than will be able to survive. So some of those are going to die of predation, or starvation or other - other factors.

Here in the state of Utah, we actually harvest less than three percent of the total statewide sage grouse population. And one of the benefits that we get from that is we get a lot of data that we wouldn't get otherwise to help us manage the species.

We also have out sporting group, hunters or conservationists, and they're very good conserving species and being advocates for the species. In addition to that it also generates some funds for protection of habit, for hiring biologists to be spokesmen for sage grouse and for conservation.

FLATOW: Mm-hmm. Well, if you want to see Flora's great adventure out there, looking for the sage grouse, it's up on our website at sciencefriday.com. And also it's very funny.

LICHTMAN: Don't miss it - these birds are really striking.

FLATOW: They are. And I've never seen a sage grouse before, and it's really - I'm struck by how beautiful it is and how unusual is to see that. Thanks, Flora.

LICHTMAN: Thanks, Ira.

FLATOW: Thank you, Jason Robinson, for being our tour guide today.

ROBINSON: Thank you.

FLATOW: It's up on our website at sciencefriday.com. That's about all the time we have. And so we want to thank the folks, everybody here at Grand Theatre at Salt Lake Community College, everybody at KUER - your local public radio station - for making it possible for us to be here.

(APPLAUSE)

FLATOW: Thank you. We want to thank all of you out in the audience. It's well-bunch of people here. It's - what a great record for us to set here in Salt Lake City. Thank you all. You all deserved a round of applause to yourself for coming out to see us today.

(APPLAUSE)

FLATOW: And if you missed any part of the program, or would like to see Flora's Video Pick of the Week, it's up there on our website. Also we podcast in this show, we have a Facebook page, we tweet all the time at SCIENCE FRIDAY. @scifri is our handle out there. And also you can take us along to join your - for anything that you carry along in one of those electronic devices that you have. Thank you again for coming out to see us today. We'll be back in New York. Thanks again. I'm Ira Flatow in Salt Lake City.

Copyright ? 2013 NPR. All rights reserved. No quotes from the materials contained herein may be used in any media without attribution to NPR. This transcript is provided for personal, noncommercial use only, pursuant to our Terms of Use. Any other use requires NPR's prior permission. Visit our permissions page for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by a contractor for NPR, and accuracy and availability may vary. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Please be aware that the authoritative record of NPR's programming is the audio.

Source: http://www.npr.org/2013/04/26/179224941/the-bird-that-struts-its-stuff?ft=1&f=1007

Robert Bork mark sanchez christina aguilera Mayan End Of The World Olivia Black World Ending 2012 gossip girl

Fujifilm's Finepix JZ700 compact shoots for speed with 8 fps burst, 200 fps video

Camera makers seem to be scrambling to equip their compact models with wireless options, all the better to work with the smartphones that are trying to replace them. Fujifilm's taking a different tack with the 14-megapixel FinePix JZ700 by going for raw performance instead, like 8 fps burst shooting and 1080/30p video, both quite rare in low-end compacts. You'll also get an 8x Fujinon lens equivalent to 24-192mm, optical image stabilization, a 2.7-inch, 230K-dot LCD, up to 3200 ISO sensitivity, numerous filters and, interestingly, 200 fps video capture -- though the resolution at that speed isn't specified and we can imagine it's pretty low. Still, the camera's already hit the streets for around £130 ($200) and we don't know of any other near time-stopping cameras you can grab for that sum.

Filed under: Cameras

Comments

Source: http://feeds.engadget.com/~r/weblogsinc/engadget/~3/NsV8g_ruEWY/

Electoral College map nyc marathon nyc marathon willie nelson khloe kardashian Wreck It Ralph Movember

Video: Power House: Motor City Real Estate

Sorry, Readability was unable to parse this page for content.

Source: http://www.nbcnews.com/video/cnbc/51664086/

mariana trench transcendental meditation trayvon martin obama care miss universe canada don draper gallagher

Mom of four kids killed in S. Carolina fire faces charges

COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) ? The mother of four South Carolina children killed in an accidental mobile home fire was charged Friday in their deaths, authorities said.

Hope Hawkins, 21, faces four counts each of homicide by child abuse and unlawful conduct toward a child, Darlington County Sheriff's Capt. Andy Locklair said. State and local authorities found no signs of arson and think the fire started Wednesday by accident in the kitchen, though exactly what sparked the blaze had not been determined.

Hawkins was not home when firefighters arrived, and showed up moments later, Locklair said. The woman has given conflicting stories about where she was. No one else was in the home at the time.

"It's almost like she may have arrived at the same time as the fire apparatus," Locklair said.

Locklair didn't know if Hawkins had an attorney. She is scheduled to have a bond hearing later Friday.

It took firefighters less than 10 minutes to put out the fire in Hartsville, a city of some 8,000 people that's about 60 miles east of the state capital of Columbia.

Authorities said 10-month-old sisters Myasia and Kynasia Hawkins and their brothers, 2-year-old Camaron Mason and 4-year-old Delonta Dixon, died of smoke inhalation. All four children were found in a bedroom next to the kitchen, Locklair said.

Hawkins could face life in prison if she's convicted of homicide by child abuse, a charge that stems from leaving the children at home alone. The unlawful conduct toward a child charges carry possible sentences of up to 10 years each.

Authorities were still going through records to determine if either law enforcement or social services officials had been called to the home before, Locklair said.

___

Kinnard can be reached at http://twitter.com/MegKinnardAP

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/mom-4-kids-killed-sc-fire-faces-more-163402034.html

jimmy fallon Pizza Lemon phillies phillies bryce harper dodgers

Reports Detail Amazon Appstore's Growing Influence, Revenue Potential

Amazon doesn’t share details on how well its Amazon Appstore apps sell, but according to mobile app analytics firm App Annie, the app marketplace is seeing growing traction among developers. The company surveyed over 1,500 developers, and found that 22.5 percent of them were now publishing to the Amazon Appstore, and half of that group (50 percent) cited the game category on the Amazon Appstore as their leading revenue driver. Previous reports have confirm roughly the same thing: that Android developers are turning to Amazon’s Appstore in greater numbers, and are seeing the benefits. Amazon Appstore’s revenue per user tops that of Google Play, or even iOS, in some cases. Last summer, for example, mobile gaming startup TinyCo, was saying that its revenue per user was higher on Amazon than on iTunes or Google Play. However, another report from Flurry?said that iTunes was number one, and Amazon was in second place in terms of its revenue generation capabilities. Flurry had found that for every $1 spent on the iOS store, Amazon’s store generated $0.89, and Google Play $0.23. But this was over a year ago;?App Annie itself said this month that Apple’s was still the store to beat, in terms of revenue. Today’s report also found that top paid iOS and Google Play applications have higher average price points than those on Amazon. Comparing the average price of the top 400 paid apps, the company noted that Amazon’s average was $1.73 compared with $2.21 on iPhone, $3.39 on iPad, and $3.55 on Google Play. However, it might be a little early to paint such a rosy picture, depending on whose data you believe more. For instance, App Annie competitor Distimo also released a report this month, examining similar trends among the two leading Android app marketplaces. Its findings were a bit different. Although it too saw Amazon’s influence growing, it found that overall, Google Play was still beating on revenue. Distimo said that the number of paid downloads in Google Play is twice the size of paid downloads on Amazon, but the revenue gap was smaller.?According to its analysis, the top 200 paid applications in Google Play in the U.S. made $5.2 million in March 2013, making Google Play 1.7 times bigger than the Amazon Appstore by revenue. However, that report noted that there were some examples of applications that did better on Amazon, which essentially backs up the broad

Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Techcrunch/~3/ClSwbVNyFC4/

biggie smalls lyrics azores emmylou harris disco inferno b.i.g 1000 words ron white

Google agrees to change search display in Europe

FILE- This April 12, 2012, photo shows a Google logo on a window at the company's headquarters in Mountain View, Calif. Google's latest quarterly results reported Thursday, April 18, 2013 provided further proof that the Internet search leader is figuring out how to make more money as Web surfers migrate from personal computers to mobile devices. (AP Photo/Paul Sakuma, File)

FILE- This April 12, 2012, photo shows a Google logo on a window at the company's headquarters in Mountain View, Calif. Google's latest quarterly results reported Thursday, April 18, 2013 provided further proof that the Internet search leader is figuring out how to make more money as Web surfers migrate from personal computers to mobile devices. (AP Photo/Paul Sakuma, File)

BRUSSELS (AP) ? Google has agreed to change how it displays search results in Europe ? including a better labeling of its promoted content and displaying links to competitors ? to appease concerns it might be abusing its dominant market position, the European Union's antitrust body said Thursday.

Google's search engine, which is the world's most influential gateway to online information and commerce, enjoys a near-monopoly in Europe. The EU Commission, which acts as the 27-nation bloc's antitrust authority, has since 2010 been investigating whether the company is unfairly stifling competition. It pointed out several areas of concern that Google is now trying to address through the proposed concessions.

Google has offered to more clearly label search results stemming from its own services such as Google News, Google Maps or its shopping and flight search functions. That would allow users to distinguish between natural search results and others promoted by Google. It also agreed to display some search results from its competitors and links to their services, the EU Commission said.

The Commission has often taken a harder line with U.S. tech companies than its American counterparts, the Federal Trade Commission and the Justice Department. Google, which is based in Mountain View, California, was able to settle a similar antitrust complaint on its search business with the FTC in January without making any major concessions on how it runs its search engine.

The EU Commission is now proposing a market test of the concessions for a month. That would give competitors the chance to say whether they deem them sufficient.

"The objective of this process is to try to see if we can achieve a settled outcome in this antitrust investigation," said Commission spokesman Antoine Colombani.

A group of 17 companies competing with Google ? including tech giants and internet companies such as Microsoft, Nokia Expedia and TripAdvisor ? vowed to carefully study the concessions proposed by Google.

"The most important remedy to Google's abuse of dominance is to require the search monopoly (...) to subject its own products and services to the same policy it uses to rank and display all other websites," said the group, collectively called FairSearch.

Once the Commission accepts the concessions ? revised or not ? they become legally binding for the company for the next five years. If the deal is accepted, Google would avoid a fine and a finding of wrongdoing.

If Google were then to break its commitments, the Commission could impose a fine of up to 10 percent of its annual worldwide revenue ? that would be close to a whopping $5 billion in Google's case.

The Commission said Google will "clearly separate promoted links from other web search results by clear graphical features" and "display links to three rival specialized search services close to its own services, in a place that is clearly visible to users."

Google will also give all websites the option to keep their content from being used in Google's specialized search services, "while ensuring that any opt-out does not unduly affect the ranking of those web sites in Google's general web search results," it said.

In addition, the proposed remedies will give newspaper publishers greater control over what appears in Google's news aggregator, Google News. Google is also giving marketers greater ability to buy ads on rival networks ? one of several concessions aimed at appeasing fears it is abusing its dominance of the online advertising market.

To normal users in Europe, the changes in the display of search results will only be visible once the Commission accepts the settlement, most likely later this year.

However, Google's algorithm ? the unique mathematical formula that ranks its search results ? will remain unchanged. That means the company retains the power to decide what search results are displayed most prominently.

The Commission's investigation was initially triggered by complaints from Google's rivals.

One of them, British comparison-shopping site Foundem, said that at first glance the proposed concessions "fall far short" of ensuring a level playing field in the search results market.

"Instead of promising to end its abusive practices, Google's proposal seems to offer a half-hearted attempt to dilute their anti-competitive effects, by labeling Google's own services and throwing in some token links to competitors' services alongside them," the company said. The measures won't "make a dent in Google's ability to hijack the traffic and revenues of its rivals," it added.

Google worked closely with the Commission on the concessions' design until formally submitting them earlier this month.

"We continue to work cooperatively with the European Commission", Google spokesman Al Verney said Thursday.

Google's web search service has a market share of over 90 percent in the EU, a bloc of over 500 million people that makes up the world's largest economy. In the U.S., competitors Bing and Yahoo have a share of about 30 percent of the search market.

Separately, major tech companies led by Microsoft Corp. this month also filed another EU antitrust complaint against Google, alleging the company uses the dominant position of its Android smartphone operating system to illegitimately promote its own array of internet services.

Microsoft, which has been a leading player in the complaints against Google, has had its own protracted run-ins with the EU Commission. The company from Redmond, Washington, has paid 2.2 billion euros in various fines since investigations began in 1998.

___

Follow Juergen Baetz on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/jbaetz

Associated Press

Source: http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/495d344a0d10421e9baa8ee77029cfbd/Article_2013-04-25-Europe-Google/id-ab7a84405e0b48c0bcd4cf20b385bb4d

dexter paul mccartney Sandy Hook Victims columbine Newton virginia tech shooting China

Harvard Medical School to Shutter Primate Research Center

For youtube videos, paste embed code directly in the text box

- Notify me by email when future posts are made
Email:
Members do not need to provide an address

- Preview before posting

Rate Article

• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5

Total votes: 0 Select Comment Validation Method
Member
Name/URL (Guest)
FaceBook (Guest) Member Commenting:

Authenticate with Facebook before submitting

OR

Login: Password:

Make your LabSpaces comments count. Start earning LabSpaces points by becoming a member! Learn more. Name: Link:(Link to your site or blog) Please verify that you are human: Register for LabSpaces
Make your LabSpaces comments count. Start earning LabSpaces points by becoming a member! Learn more.

Please authenticate before trying to post a comment.

If you would like to remain anonymous, please enter a new name and link below

Name: Link:(Link to your site or blog)

Friends

Source: http://www.labspaces.net/127898/Harvard_Medical_School_to_Shutter_Primate_Research_Center

brooklyn nets may day protests tony nominations 2012 facebook organ donor jessica simpson gives birth carrie underwood blown away chk

Ford's first quarter profit up 15 pct to $1.6b

DEARBORN, Mich. (AP) ? Ford Motor Co. reported a better-than-expected $1.6 billion profit in the first quarter as growing demand in the U.S. and China for its new vehicles helped overcome steep losses in Europe and South America.

Ford said Wednesday that first-quarter net income rose 15 percent from a year ago. Worldwide sales rose 10 percent to nearly 1.5 million.

In North America, Ford saw 25-percent gains for both its redesigned Fusion sedan and Escape SUV as well as strong sales of its F-Series trucks as home construction picks up. In China, demand for the Focus helped sales jump 54 percent in the quarter, or more than three times the industry average.

"It's a very good start to the year for us," Chief Financial Officer Bob Shanks said Wednesday.

Ford beat Wall Street's forecast with earnings of 40 cents per share, up from 35 cents in the first quarter of 2012. Analysts polled by FactSet had forecast earnings of 37 cents per share.

Without one-time charges, including restructuring costs in Europe, Ford would have earned 41 cents.

Revenue rose 10 percent to $35.8 billion, beating Wall Street's forecast of $33.5 billion.

Ford earned $2.4 billion in North America, up from $2.1 billion a year ago. It was a quarterly record for the region. In the U.S., Ford's market share jumped to 16.2 percent from 15.5 percent in the first three months of 2012, the biggest increases for any car manufacturer.

Ford's operating margin fell slightly in North America to 11 percent, from 11.5 percent in the same period a year ago. Shanks said Ford added more workers at its plants to keep up with demand. It also is selling a higher percentage of low-margin cars and small SUVs, compared with higher-profit vehicles like large SUVs, which brings down profits. U.S. buyers paid an average $32,784 for a Ford in the first quarter, or around $1,000 more than the same period a year ago, according to Internet buying site TrueCar.com.

Ford eked out a $6 million profit in its Asia Pacific and Africa region, where it is investing heavily for future growth. The company is currently building five plants in China and two in India. Sales rose 30 percent in the region to 282,000.

Those results helped offset a $462 million loss in Europe, where Ford's sales fell 20 percent during the quarter. Shanks confirmed that Ford expects to lose $2 billion in the region this year as it closes plants and brings new vehicles to the market to try to reverse declining sales.

Ford also lost $218 million in South America, where it has been hurt by currency devaluation in Venezuela. Also, sales of the Fiesta subcompact have dropped as it brings an updated Fiesta to the market.

Associated Press

Source: http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/f70471f764144b2fab526d39972d37b3/Article_2013-04-24-Earns-Ford/id-4792cb5c5a434cb49b1e580898e6ea72

riley reiff david decastro aj jenkins shea mcclellin nfl draft 2012 whitney mercilus 2012 nfl draft picks

'Big cat' was on loose in UK in 1903

24 April 2013 Last updated at 21:13 ET By Rebecca Morelle Science reporter, BBC World Service

A "big cat" was on the loose in the English countryside at the turn of the last century, scientists say.

They believe a Canadian lynx was prowling around the fields of the South West in 1903 before being shot after attacking two dogs in Devon.

Tests on the animal revealed it had probably spent some time in captivity before escaping or being set free.

The animal had been donated to Bristol Museum at the time of its death and kept in its stores for decades.

The scientists' findings are published in the journal Historical Biology.

Dr Ross Barnett, a molecular biologist from the University of Copenhagen and the University of Durham, said: "I've seen one of these cats in the wild.

"They are pretty impressive cats - they are a reasonable size, and they have lots of fluffy fur which makes them look even bigger. They have sharp claws, teeth and strong muscles."

Beast of Bodmin

From blurry photos of the Beast of Bodmin Moor in Cornwall, to reports of a lion on the loose in Essex in 2012, the UK has a long tradition of spotting big cats.

Most of these claims are dismissed as misidentifications, hoaxes or even hallucinations, but not in this case.

In 1903, the unusual cat was donated to the Bristol Museum and Art Gallery. The museum's records state that it had been shot after attacking and killing two dogs close to Newton Abbot in Devon.

Unsure of exactly what it was, the exotic beast was stuffed, its skeleton preserved, and then the remains were tucked away in the museum's stores.

More than a century later, the cat was unearthed by a scientist who thought the find might be significant.

An analysis of the skeleton and mounted skin revealed that the animal was a Canadian lynx, which is about the size of a dog and usually found in Canada and the northern states of the US.

The researchers found that the animal's teeth were badly decayed.

Dr Barnett said: "We think it had probably been in captivity at some point in its life.

"It had lost all of its incisors, which would have been a pretty debilitating injury for a wild cat, but not a problem for one in captivity.

"It also had massive amounts of plaque on its molars, which are indication of it not having a wild diet - something with lots of wet cat food, essentially ready-processed meat like steaks."

The researchers believe that the lynx had been in captivity for some time, but they were unable to find any records of the cat's owner.

"Was it someone's pet? Was it part of a small menagerie that was travelling through the area? There aren't really any zoos nearby where it could have escaped from," Dr Barnett said.

The team is also unsure how long the animal had been at large in Devon before it was killed.

Its decayed teeth would have limited its chances in the wild, but the lynx is an adaptable animal, and may have been able to survive by preying on small mammals.

Felicity the Puma

While many big cat sightings remain unverified, sometimes the rumours do turn out to be true, and the team believes that the Canadian lynx is the earliest recorded example of an exotic cat on the loose in the UK.

Another case relates to a live puma that was captured in Inverness-shire in 1980 and had been living in the wild for a long period of time. It was called Felicity, and placed in a zoo.

But Dr Barnett said that these cases were few and far between.

He said: "It's all very good saying you saw a lion in Essex or a tiger in Shropshire, or wherever. But it is very difficult to estimate size of a species from a distance - especially if you are unfamiliar with them.

"So I would argue for continued scepticism, unless you have a body or specimen you can analyse."

Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22263874#sa-ns_mchannel=rss&ns_source=PublicRSS20-sa

lamichael james lamichael james acl earthquake los angeles unemployment 2012 nfl draft grades young justice

Two al Qaeda suspects arrested in Spain

(changes dateline, updates with Roura quotes) MUNICH, April 22 (Reuters) - Barcelona forward Lionel Messi, who has been struggling with a hamstring strain, is likely to face Bayern Munich in Tuesday's Champions League tie but his participation will be decided after a final training session, the Catalans said on Monday. "I wouldn't like to venture a definitive answer, but in these last few days, the injury has evolved well and we have a good sensation," interim coach Jordi Roura told a news conference. "But we will wait and see what happens in training. ...

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/two-al-qaeda-suspects-arrested-spain-092037970.html

London 2012 Slalom Canoe Alex Morgan Misty May Treanor Lolo Jones Marvin Hamlisch Megan Rossee grenada

TV Anchor Fired for On-Air Swearing, General Awkwardness

Source: http://www.thehollywoodgossip.com/2013/04/tv-anchor-fired-for-on-air-swearing-general-awkwardness/

teresa giudice atlanta hawks 2012 white house correspondents dinner forrest gump bernard hopkins nfl draft grades devils

FocusTwist app for iOS gives you Lytro-esque refocusable images

Arqball has just released the FocusTwist app for iOS that lets you selectively focus after taking an image -- without investing $400 in a Lytro light field camera. It works by automatically taking several shots with different focus points from your iPhone's camera, delivering the best results if you hold very still and have subjects in the near foreground and far background. You can then change focus by clicking different parts of the resulting image, which is hosted on the company's server and can be shared via a link. After playing with the app ourselves for a bit (see the More Coverage link), we've got to admit we're stupidly hooked -- you can grab it at the source for $1.99.

Filed under: Cellphones, Cameras, Software, Mobile, Apple

Comments

Source: Focus Twist (App Store)

Source: http://www.engadget.com/2013/04/23/focustwist-iOS-app-lytro-refocusable/?utm_medium=feed&utm_source=Feed_Classic&utm_campaign=Engadget

danny o brien alicia silverstone park slope food coop anchorman sequel safety not guaranteed lifehouse al gore