Now that Calgary Parking Authority (CPA) has settled the Parkplus parking management system ownership dispute and disclosed some key information (see endnotes), this reporter feels comfortable in sharing an exclusive inside look at one piece of evidence against Mr. Dale Fraser’s ownership claim without risking harm to the city and CPA’s legal case.
This key piece of evidence (you can judge for yourself to see if you agree it is “key” or not) was an August 2008 video interview with Mr. Dale Fraser conducted by this reporter. In the extensive August 2008 interview (where Alderman Dale Hodges was also interviewed), a variety of ParkPlus topics (including patents) were discussed. This video evidence was almost “lost” at one point as it was originally uploaded and stored on the now discontinued Google Video service!
Fortunately, after some help from a Google engineer friend, the August 2008 interview was recovered along with a few hundred uploaded videos. The video interview was useful enough that Calgary Parking Authority licensed it to help its case which is why I’m claiming this as an “exclusive inside look“.
Unlike the parties involved in the legal settlement (Calgary Parking Authority, City of Calgary, Mr. Dale Fraser, and Mr. Allan Bazar), I am an independent reporter and not bound by any confidentiality agreement.
An exclusive inside look at a key piece of evidence
In the August 2008 interview, former Calgary Parking Authority General Manager Mr. Dale Fraser told this reporter,
”Calgary Parking Authority did create the proprietary approach to this new parking system. And we [CPA] do have a patent-pending on this approach at this time.”
During the 30+ minutes interview, at NO point did Mr. Fraser leave this reporter with the impression the pending Canada/US ParkPlus patent was his (or his & Mr. Allan Bazar’s) personal invention or intellectual property. In fact, Mr. Fraser seemed to me quite clear in explaining the system was developed by MTS Allstream with the funds/resources from Calgary Parking Authority.
US patent is one of the most important ones to apply for, simply because the US is one of the largest markets and it has a reasonably strong patent protection regime.
[Please note that the interview is protected by copyright. License and use requests (including for press and media) are to be submitted via email and will be handled promptly.]
Endnotes: Although the settlement agreement has confidentiality clauses, the parties agree to disclose the following information (emphasis added) and I quote from the Media Release – ParkPlus Settlement – April 2013,
“(1) The Defendants, Dale Fraser, Allan Bazar and 1707626 Alberta Ltd., (now Intelli-Park Corporation) acknowledge that the City of Calgary and CPA are the exclusive owners of the ParkPlus SystemTM and that none of the Defendants has any right, title or interest whatsoever in the ParkPlus SystemTM; (2) While the ParkPlus SystemTM is valuable and all necessary consideration for settlement is acknowledged, there is no payment by the City of Calgary or CPA of any money whatsoever to any of the Defendants or any other person; (3) The claims and counterclaims in the action will be wholly discontinued without costs; and (4) The parties release each other from all claims and counterclaims in the action including any claims relating to the ParkPlus SystemTM or the employment of Dale Fraser and Allan Bazar with the City of Calgary and CPA.“
“The code says that LAC staff, which includes Canada’s leading librarians and archivists, who set foot in classrooms, attend conferences or speak up at public meetings on their own time are engaging in “high risk” activities.
Given the dangers, the code says, the department’s staff must clear such “personal” activities with their managers in advance to ensure there are no conflicts or “other risks to LAC.”
The code is already having a “chilling” effect on federal archivists and librarians, who used to be encouraged to actively engage and interact with groups interested in everything from genealogy to preserving historical documents, says archivist Loryl MacDonald at the University of Toronto.“
Shall Copyright Law trump Freedom of Press? The senior executives NASCAR and Encana seem to think copyright law should be more powerful than many people will permit it to be. I for one would love the Supreme Court of US and Supreme Court of Canada to decide some of these “copyright” cases so that any potentially ruthless & illegal actions cannot be taken again in US and Canada! Of course, IANAL (I am not a lawyer) and I rely on further instructions and guidelines from the justices at the two Supreme Courts to decide one way or another in each of the countries. Quoting an Feb 21st article by me,
“It should be noted that copyright law has been used in Canada in recent years to over-reach (in my opinion) into other unrelated areas. Take Euro-Excellence Inc. v. Kraft Canada Inc., 2007 SCC 37, [2007] 3 S.C.R. 20, a Supreme Court of Canada judgment on Canadian copyright law as an example, it ultimately is a case about the import of chocolate that somehow got twisted into a case about copyright.”
This is the second (eps 02) of a series of extensive chats with Professor Emeritus C.C. Kelly Gotlieb, (Wikipedia) “Father of Computing in Canada”, Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto. In this video episode (as oppose to audio recording only in episode #1), we further discussed Google Driverless Cars and Google Glasses in a bit more details, and a few other topics. (I will try to provide a time code key when I have time later or if someone can help me with providing a time code key to the interview.)
P.S. Incidentally, I am happy to claim credit for suggesting Kelly to setup a Google+ account and then also helped him to setup his computer this morning so that we were able to conduct a successful Live Broadcast using the Google+ Hangout On Air technologies using its YouTube engine! It puts a smile on my face in helping the man who helped bought the second electronic computer (a Ferranti machine for $300,000) in the world in 1951 to use Google’s cutting edge technologies to broadcast live from his and my home!
This is an extensive interview with Professor Emeritus C.C. Kelly Gotlieb, (Wikipedia) “Father of Computing in Canada”, Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto, Feb 2013 interviewed by Independent reporter Kempton Lam KL: Kempton Lam KG: Professor Emeritus C.C. Kelly Gotlieb
Table of content (with time codes):
0:00 KL: Introducing Professor Emeritus C.C. (Kelly) Gotlieb, “Father of Computing in Canada”, University of Toronto
0:29 KL: My question about Google Driverless Cars. Three US states already has law permitting testing of Google Driverless Cars. Talking about California governor signed the bill, “SB-1298 Vehicles: autonomous vehicles: safety and performance requirements” into law.
2:07 KL: Bill SB-1298 allows Google to test the Google Driverless Car provided Google pays a $5 million insurance, and provided there is a driver in the car.
2:21 KG: “That’s what I expected.”
2:35 KL: My concerns were concerns raised by Kelly in an earlier speech of his.
2:47 KG: listing some of the concerns he has with concepts like Google Driverless Cars. “United States is a very litigious society.”
3:12 KG: Google Driverless Car gets into an accident, whose to blame? And who can you sue? The person who wrote the program? Google who authorize the car? Car manufacture? The person who is in the car? Or all of the above? […] Lots of questions to be asked when failure happen. Read the rest of this entry »
Happy belated 102nd Birthday to Nobel Economics Laureate Professor Ronald Coase. Wishing professor Coase good health and all the best in 2013!
In 2009, I took the initiative to spend a few days to download, process, upload, transcribe (small part of), and time-code professor Coase‘s 2003 Coase Lecture (a massive .mov file) to share on YouTube (6 clips in a playlist) to allow interested people from around the world to watch and learn as a way to celebrate professor Coase‘s 99th birthday.
For the last few birthdays of professor Coase, I mainly reshare the above video clips (with a new text interview in 2011). This time around, I’ve taken a new initiative to honour professor Coase‘s 102nd birthday. You see, a few years ago I went to the University of Calgary Law Library to conduct some US patent research for a client. As a bonus/treat for myself, I spent some time to download quite a few academic papers by professor Coase.
To celebrate professor Coase‘s 102nd birthday, I’ve uploaded the following three important papers plus a bonus paper as a special gift to readers of professor Coase‘s ideas.
“The only support I got was from my contemporaries. […] If this tale has any general significance, it is that new ideas are most likely to come from the young who are also the group most likely to recognize the significance of those ideas.”
For me personally, I received these important papers for free from the Law Library. And I see them (Firm, FCC, Lighthouse) deserve to be read by as many people as possible instead of under the messed up limited JSTOR manner. The bottom line, to me, by having these papers available by a single click here is that this save people’s physical travel time to go down to their local university libraries where these papers can be downloaded for free anyway!
It has not escaped my attention and noticed the paradox that The Lighthouse in Economics is a paper that disprove, with facts, the incorrect belief by many people (including my former MBA classmate who has a B.A. degree in Economics) that Lighthouse services cannot be charged thus has to be made freely available by the governments!
*** Concluding thoughts ***
I want to emphasize that I totally agree with the many academics in the #PDFtribute movement and Aaron that it is about time we in Canada and US require academic papers to be made publicly downloadable for FREE in perpetuity if any part (or whole) of their research funding come from any level of government (thus tax payers’ money, our money)!
After viewing the following video clip, I have one simple question. Is Hong Kong Police Above the Law? 香港警察是否可以無法無天，凌駕於法律之上？Has Hong Kong become a police state/city where Hong Kong citizens’ rights and legal due process need not be protected nor respected by the police? Have a watch and see for yourself in this legal protest. According to what was stated by one of the peaceful protesters (based on the observable footage), the crowd (“over 100″) has been detained by the police without any reasons given. When the police seemed to be willing to release the crowd, a police officier who seemed to be in charge halted the release of the protesters and clearly stated no reason is to be given nor needed for the crowd’s detention.
Note: Raw video footagelinked to via Facebook status of HK Legislative Council member Leung Kwok-hung (梁國雄). Note that this reporter has no way to verify the video’s authenticity, there is no reason to believe it is doctored as there would likely be plenty of collaborating photographic and video evidences filmed by other media outlets present at the protest.
The patent application did not satisfy the disclosure requirements set out in the Patent Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. P‑4 (“Act”). The patent system is based on a “bargain”: the inventor is granted exclusive rights in a new and useful invention for a limited period in exchange for disclosure of the invention so that society can benefit from this knowledge. Sufficiency of disclosure lies at the very heart of the patent system, so adequate disclosure in the specification is a precondition for the granting of a patent.“
According to Globe & Mail, “Pfizer Canada made about $80-million last year from sales of Viagra.” Company doesn’t have to apply for patents and disclose the secrets of their inventions. Like Coke just keeps its formula as a trade secret. But if a company wants to get patents, the disclosure requirements are no joking matter and can mean billions as in this case.
Lets be clear on one thing, the declaration of Pfizer’s Viagra patent void doesn’t mean you get Viagra free as some men wish to! It does mean the patent protection afforded Pfizer exclusive right is now gone, and Canadian users of Viagra can expect cheaper generic version of Viagra type drugs to be available soon. In fact, according to CBC News,
“The unanimous decision opens the door for Teva to introduce a generic version of Viagra. By the afternoon on Thursday, Teva had already moved to do just that, posting a message on its website, announcing the creation of Novo-Sildenafil and noting the product is available via prescription.“
Good to read, “A Nova Scotia teenager has won the right to remain anonymous in a court battle against a cyberbully, but the Supreme Court of Canada rejected her request for a publication ban on some details of her case.“
“The critical importance of the open court principle and a free press has been tenaciously embedded in the jurisprudence. In this case, however, there are interests that are sufficiently compelling to justify restricting such access: privacy and the protection of children from cyberbullying.
Recognition of the inherent vulnerability of children has consistent and deep roots in Canadian law and results in the protection of young people’s privacy rights based on age, not the sensitivity of the particular child. In an application involving cyberbullying, there is no need for a child to demonstrate that he or she personally conforms to this legal paradigm. The law attributes the heightened vulnerability based on chronology, not temperament.
While evidence of a direct, harmful consequence to an individual applicant is relevant, courts may also conclude that there is objectively discernable harm. It is logical to infer that children can suffer harm through cyberbullying, given the psychological toxicity of the phenomenon. Since children are entitled to protect themselves from bullying, cyber or otherwise, there is inevitable harm to them — and to the administration of justice — if they decline to take steps to protect themselves because of the risk of further harm from public disclosure. Since common sense and the evidence show that young victims of sexualized bullying are particularly vulnerable to the harms of revictimization upon publication, and since the right to protection will disappear for most children without the further protection of anonymity, the girl’s anonymous legal pursuit of the identity of her cyberbully should be allowed.”
Technologically, Google will need to do a lot of testing to make sure its system works in many different basic conditions and to prove that it is “safe” in basic conditions which is a challenge in itself. The bigger problem, at least as this reporter sees it, is a legal one.
As Google and its co-founder Sergey Brin indicated, the hope is to allow the driverless cars to be used by blind people and people who are too intoxicated to drive. Imagine a Google driverless car involving in a car accident (especially one with fatality), who will then be held accountable? The blind driver? The software developer? The software project manager? Or the autonomous vehicle technology providers (like Google)?
Comparison has been made of Google driverless car with self-driving train and that we have those trains for some years now, isn’t it ok? Well, self-driving train (or centrally controlled driver-less train) like the SkyTrain in Vancouver runs on “grade-separated tracks, running mostly on elevated guideways” thus are not subject to the randomness of roads filled by other cars, random animals, and most important of all, often unpredictable people/pedestrians.
In a litigious place like California, United States, it is worth mentioning one of the two unresolved issues in the signed bill (as stated in the 08/24/12 Assembly Floor Analysis, emphasis added),
“First, automobile makers fear that when this technology is added on to the vehicles they have designed for use by human operators, they may be drawn into liability litigation after an accident caused by the failure of that after-market equipment or of its installation rather than due to any inherent safety problem with the vehicle itself. Although existing tort law and case law can be interpreted to absolve them of any liability in such instances, the automakers sought to have explicit language incorporated into the bill to make this clear. Ultimately, the contending parties were unable to agree on a formula that met one another’s needs.“
California legal experts may have better insight of why the above issue remains unresolved. To the average Joe and Jane citizens, a valid question is whether Google or other autonomous vehicle technology providers should be trusted to be 100% correct all the time with no driver to provide override in the future (when blind/intoxicated people may be the only passengers in the car)? Given the automobile makers are worried enough to try (but unsuccessfully) to shield themselves with explicit language in the bill, may be citizens should ask Google or the legislators what happen if a driverless car is involved in an accident with/without fatality?
Note: Currently, the California bill has a five million dollars insurance provision in this testing phase when there will ALWAYS be a driver on the driver seat to take over when things go wrong. What amount of “evidence of insurance, surety bond, or self-insurance” should be required when the system is truly driverless?!
P.S. this article is cross-posted by me at examiner.com
My personal thanks to the doctor and medical student who spoke up on our behalf. Shame on our Canadian government. Shame on us Canadians that we are not more aware of this problem. Canadians are BETTER than the actions of our current government in power!
According to the YouTube clip info, the names of the doctor and medical student speaking up are Chris Keefer and Faria Kamal respectively. I applaud Chris and Faria’s brave protest, risking retribution from the Harper government and their hospital administration.
The conflicts in reality TV as we seen in the most recent “old days” were created by show creators’ or casting directors’ gut instinct. They put interesting people or people with opposing characteristics on a show and “hope” for the best.
I agree that tests like MMPI-2 will help screened out extreme contestants that should NOT to be allowed on TV in order to protect themselves from potential harm (sometimes self-inflicted). In some sense, even the contestants have probably signed their lives away and give up any rights to launch any legal actions if anything go wrong (an analogy is the forms you have to sign before your parachute jump), the reality TV shows makers should be more aware and ready to provide help to the contestants when troubles arises. The speakers of the session are aware the duty of care they are responsible of, even though they may not be legally bound to. Have a watch of the follow video clip and share your thoughts.
“The Chicken or The Egg – Casting For Reality
Uncovering the characters in reality television can be a challenge as producers search for engaging and genuine subjects. In this behind-the-scenes look at the nuances of discovering incredible individuals to participate in this ever growing genre, you will hear first-hand from a producer and personality expert from some of the hottest reality shows. They will discuss the fine line between creating television that is entertaining, yet not exploitative, that presents the nitty-gritty of real-life drama.
What is the creative process in finding the characters that drive our favourite reality shows?
What are some of the challenges in putting together the perfect ensemble cast of characters?
What is the network involvement in casting for reality series?”
Official 2012 Banff bio for Jonathan Glazier.
“Jonathan Glazier – Creative Director – Entertainment Master Class and Pepper Rafferty Read the rest of this entry »
Q: Why the Chinese government can always win in court?
A: The Chinese government can always lock up or magically make your lawyer “unreachable”. In addition, they can send police to block you from attending your own court hearing. And as if these are not enough, the judges will always follow the wishes of the central government to ensure prompt victory by the governments.
Yesterday, Bank of Canada unveiled four public service announcements (PSAs) at Toronto Police Service headquarters.
“The Bank of Canada takes counterfeiting very seriously and responds by researching and developing new notes with innovative security features that are both easy to check and hard to counterfeit. The Bank of Canada will be unveiling four new public service announcements to help educate the public and assist in the prevention of Financial Crimes.“
During the post-press conference Q&A, Bank of Canada representative confirmed with this reporter that since the launch of the new polymer $100 notes in November 2011, there have been attempts to counterfeit the polymer $100 notes and the counterfeit $100s were in circulation. Fortunately, according to the Bank representative, the quality of these counterfeit C$100 notes were of very poor quality, for example, these counterfeit notes didn’t even have the transparent windows, one of the most obvious and easily verifiable security features. Which is why the Bank is emphasizing the importance of educating the public to detect counterfeit polymer notes. You can watch my questions and the Bank representative’s answers at the 20:00 mark of this YouTube video.
Some readers may remember I’ve previously written about polymer banknotes since Bank of Canada first announced (in March 2011) that it would launch polymer notes in Canada. The following are my in-depth research articles based on information known or found at the time.
It was my honour to work with Toronto Police Constable +Scott Mills this afternoon in preparation for this Sunday (May 6th, 10:30am EST) Queen’s Park Ontario Police Memorial LIVE broadcast. More info here.
“He is best known for having been detained by the People’s Republic of China on allegations of spying for Taiwan. He was imprisoned from April 2005 to February 2008, spending more than 1000 days in prison.[1] Human rights advocates and Chinese patriots called for his release saying the charges were groundless. Throughout the process, he was viciously accused, deplorably defamed (falsely accused of having a mistress) and unreasonably imprisoned.”
I remember during Ching‘s groundless and unreasonable imprisonment, the media reports alway emphasize that he is a Chinese patriot and what had the Chinese government became when they put him in prison! This excerpt from “ST journalist recounts ordeal in China prison” really touched me.
“Background Story – BITTERSWEET FAMILY REUNION
I [Ching Cheong] looked around and realised that father was not among the family members present.
At first, I thought that perhaps father had stayed at home as he was weak and had problems moving about. I thought that one of my siblings would be bringing him over when dinner was ready to start.
So I asked: ‘Who is going to get father?’
It was only then that mother told me that father had passed away on May 20, 2006!
On hearing this, I knelt before mother and cried: ‘Father, I have let you down! Mother, I have let you down!’
I asked mother: ‘Did father blame me?’
She said: ‘No, of course not. Rather, your father comforted me, telling me not to worry. He said, ‘Don’t we know what our son is like?”
When I heard this, my tears fell uncontrollably. This is the greatest trust that a father can place in a child; this is the most precious legacy that he has left me.
Now, whenever I recall his words, I would still cry uncontrollably.“
I was amazed when Mr. Ching told us he received full financial and legal support from The Straits Times, including full salary for the three years he was in prison and also fighting the Chinese government to give him proper legal representation. Unimaginable to westerns accustomed to a fair judicial system, his first Beijing based lawyer backed out the case because of government pressure and he was unable to hire another Beijing lawyer.
Note: As an aside because of the recentescape of Chinese rights activist and blind lawyer Chen Guangcheng (陳光誠), a friend was wearing a set Chen free t-shirt he got previously.
Yesterday, City of Edmontonannounced it “will become the first major municipal government in Canada to use Google email and other office technology apps for all City employees“. Google Enterprise stated, “While Edmonton may be the first city in Canada to go Google, it’s in great company with other city governments in North America ─ like Pittsburgh, Orlando and Zapopan, Mexico─ that have already made the move.” It is only natural for people in Calgary, Toronto, and other cities to ask and find out if there are anything we can learn from Edmonton?
In a video interview with Chris Moore, Chief Information Officier of City of Edmonton, Moore said all 6 departments, 31 branches, 10,000+ people, will move to use Google Apps for Government. The press release states, “The change will be phased in over the next few years with Google email and calendar put in place in late 2012, into 2013 and the other apps available for employees to use late next year.“
In fact, Moore told me a few hundred employees are already in pilot projects using Google Apps. (note: While the police services will stay on their separate system, the city’s fire services, parks & recreations, waste management/day-to-day garbage pickup, tax department, etc are part of this move.) In a phone interview with Dr. Jonathan Schaeffer, University of Alberta Vice Provost and Associate Vice President (Information Technology) responsible for moving the university to Google Apps for Education, he said U of A has successfully transition 125,000 people and have 3,000 people to go in a phased migration. The U of A project started in March 2011 and is expected to be completed in early fall 2012.
According to city of Edmonton manager Simon Farbrother, “This move supports our City Vision, The Way Ahead, to use the most innovative technologies available. We will now have a more inclusive work environment where all employees will have access and be able to share and collaborate in real time on the same document whenever they want, in any location, and on any device such as smartphones and laptops.“
By going to a cloud-based solution, Moore explained the city is moving away from the old model of software licenses installed on desktops and laptops, with upgrades every year or every other year, to the concept of iterative changes which people have already experiencing in their use of technologies at home.
According to Moore, 3.2 million dollars is the estimated up front cost for moving to Google Apps (e.g. implementation, training, documentation, etc). The cost savings over five years is about 9.2 million dollars, Read the rest of this entry »
“This feature documentary focuses on Wiebo Ludwig, a suspect in a recent string of pipeline bombings. The bombings echo a campaign of sabotage he waged against the oil and gas industry in the 90s – barricading roads and blowing up wells. And when a 16-year-old girl was fatally shot on the family farm in 1999, Wiebo’s fight with the industry was thrust further into the media spotlight.
The Ludwig family are part of a Christian community that lives in close adherence to their religious values. The community is comprised of 5 married couples, 7 unmarried adult children and 38 grandchildren. They are self-sufficient in food and energy, but live in isolation and believe that those that don’t share their religious beliefs, like filmmaker David York, are living in terrible darkness.“
RT @emmgryner: OMG just got off the phone w @Cmdr_Hadfield who signed off saying "see ya when I get back to Earth"...and I got chills 6 days ago
RT @WilliamShatner: I watch @Cmdr_Hadfield 's Space Oddity video last night and I have 2 words for him: "SHOW OFF!" I'd even look good floa… 6 days ago
RT @emmgryner: I am going to bed blown away by all the feedback and love re @Cmdr_Hadfield's Space Oddity. So proud to be a part of it. Wow… 6 days ago
Posted by kempton 
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Subscribe by email
