Hedy Lamarr

[DavidW]

I just watched a doco on Hedy Lamarr. In 1966 she was charged with shoplifting
$86 worth of items. The case went to a jury trial lasting 6 days. Are they
kidding? Is that a good use of the justice system? I can't believe it.

P.S. The bare facts given suggested that she was guilty but she apparently put
on a marvellous performance and was acquitted. She became rich later when her
radio frequency hopping invention, patented in 1942 and intended to guide
torpedos, was used by mobile phones, though they didn't say whether the money
came from the patent or just because she became famous once more.

 

[Peter Jason]

On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 10:24:24 +1000, "DavidW"
<no@email.provided> wrote:

I just watched a doco on Hedy Lamarr. In 1966 she was charged with shoplifting
$86 worth of items. The case went to a jury trial lasting 6 days. Are they
kidding? Is that a good use of the justice system? I can't believe it.

P.S. The bare facts given suggested that she was guilty but she apparently put
on a marvellous performance and was acquitted. She became rich later when her
radio frequency hopping invention, patented in 1942 and intended to guide
torpedos, was used by mobile phones, though they didn't say whether the money
came from the patent or just because she became famous once more.

They never tell the full story..

 

[Don McKenzie]

On 25-Apr-13 10:24 AM, DavidW wrote:

I just watched a doco on Hedy Lamarr. In 1966 she was charged with shoplifting
$86 worth of items. The case went to a jury trial lasting 6 days. Are they
kidding? Is that a good use of the justice system? I can't believe it.

P.S. The bare facts given suggested that she was guilty but she apparently put
on a marvellous performance and was acquitted. She became rich later when her
radio frequency hopping invention, patented in 1942 and intended to guide
torpedos, was used by mobile phones, though they didn't say whether the money
came from the patent or just because she became famous once more.

Forerunner of CDMA
Govt of the day wasn't interested.

Don...



--
Don McKenzie

$30 for an Olinuxino Linux PC:
http://www.dontronics-shop.com/olinuxino.html

The World's Cheapest Computer:
DuinoMite the PIC32 $25 Basic Computer-MicroController
http://www.dontronics-shop.com/the-maximite-computer.html
Add VGA Monitor/TV, and PS2 Keyboard, or use USB Terminal
Arduino Shield, Programmed in Basic, or C.

 

[Peter Newby]

On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 20:05:11 -0700 (PDT), Coach <suvvdj@yahoo.fr>
wrote:

Apparently her left boobie was 4 sizes smaller than her right one,
which back then, the opposite was far more common (although not to
THAT degree). Her "fame" was not limited to her radio frequency
hopping invention. You can't help but wonder if her boobs were the
same size, would she probably not be a household name these days.

How strange - an obsession with odd-sized female seconday sexual
characteristics AND dog excreta - just what OTHER bodily functions
can't you control?

 

[DavidW]

Coach wrote:

Apparently her left boobie was 4 sizes smaller than her right one,

Thanks for your comment. I always enjoy a good discusion on legal cases and the
courts.

 

[Coach]

On Apr 25, 10:24 am, "DavidW" <n...@email.provided> wrote:

I just watched a doco on Hedy Lamarr. In 1966 she was charged with shoplifting
$86 worth of items. The case went to a jury trial lasting 6 days. Are they
kidding? Is that a good use of the justice system? I can't believe it.

P.S. The bare facts given suggested that she was guilty but she apparently put
on a marvellous performance and was acquitted. She became rich later when her
radio frequency hopping invention, patented in 1942 and intended to guide
torpedos, was used by mobile phones, though they didn't say whether the money
came from the patent or just because she became famous once more.

Apparently her left boobie was 4 sizes smaller than her right one,
which back then, the opposite was far more common (although not to
THAT degree). Her "fame" was not limited to her radio frequency
hopping invention. You can't help but wonder if her boobs were the
same size, would she probably not be a household name these days.

 

[Rheilly Phoull]

On 25/04/13 12:11, Coach wrote:

On Apr 25, 2:03 pm, "DavidW" <n...@email.provided> wrote:
Coach wrote:
Apparently her left boobie was 4 sizes smaller than her right one,

Thanks for your comment. I always enjoy a good discusion on legal cases and the
courts.

No problem. It is sad however that another poster above completely
missed the point and substance of the discussion, and tried to turn it
into a discussion of female genitalia. Especially on Anzac/ANZAC day.

KERRRRR-WHOOOSHSSSSH

 

[Coach]

On Apr 25, 1:30 pm, Peter Newby <pnewb...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 20:05:11 -0700 (PDT), Coach <suv...@yahoo.fr
wrote:

Apparently her left boobie was 4 sizes smaller than her right one,
which back then, the opposite was far more common (although not to
THAT degree). Her "fame" was not limited to her radio frequency
hopping invention. You can't help but wonder if her boobs were the
same size, would she probably not be a household name these days.

How strange - an obsession with odd-sized female seconday sexual
characteristics AND dog excreta - just what OTHER bodily functions
can't you control?

Actually, if you were educated enough to actually comprehend what I
wrote, you'd know that my obsession is with the clever inventer of the
now commonly used frequency hopping device that you yourself probably
benefit from every single day. But hey, trust you to try to turn a
discussion about electronic inventions into a discussion about female
genitalia. How odd you are.

 

[Coach]

On Apr 25, 2:03 pm, "DavidW" <n...@email.provided> wrote:

Coach wrote:
Apparently her left boobie was 4 sizes smaller than her right one,

Thanks for your comment. I always enjoy a good discusion on legal cases and the
courts.

No problem. It is sad however that another poster above completely
missed the point and substance of the discussion, and tried to turn it
into a discussion of female genitalia. Especially on Anzac/ANZAC day.

 

[Jasen Betts]

On 2013-04-25, DavidW <no@email.provided> wrote:

I just watched a doco on Hedy Lamarr. In 1966 she was charged with shoplifting
$86 worth of items. The case went to a jury trial lasting 6 days. Are they
kidding? Is that a good use of the justice system? I can't believe it.

P.S. The bare facts given suggested that she was guilty but she apparently put
on a marvellous performance and was acquitted. She became rich later when her
radio frequency hopping invention, patented in 1942 and intended to guide
torpedos, was used by mobile phones, though they didn't say whether the money
came from the patent or just because she became famous once more.

If it was patented in 1942 the patent expired in 1962

--
⚂⚃ 100% natural

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---

 

[Phil Allison]

"David Wanker"

I just watched a doco on Hedy Lamarr. In 1966 she was charged with
shoplifting
$86 worth of items. The case went to a jury trial lasting 6 days. Are they
kidding?

** A jury trial for a small offence is rare - and only happens at the
insistence of the accused who must bare the dramatically increased cost.

Is that a good use of the justice system? I can't believe it.

** Every citizen has the basic right to be judged by their peers - rather
than some pompous, corrupt git in a wig.

Despite what moronic fuck heads like you might think.

She became rich later when her
radio frequency hopping invention, patented in 1942 and intended to guide
torpedos, was used by mobile phones,

** Bollocks.

All patents have time limits.

Circa 20 years max unless something unusual ( like a war) prevents the
patent being exploited by the holder.



.... Phil

 

[DavidW]

Phil Allison wrote:

"David Wanker"
She became rich later when her
radio frequency hopping invention, patented in 1942 and intended to
guide torpedos, was used by mobile phones,

** Bollocks.

Once again you are wrong, Phil. Wikipedia says so:
"In 1998, Ottawa wireless technology developer Wi-LAN Inc. acquired a 49 percent
claim to the patent from Lamarr for an undisclosed amount of stock"

 

[Phil Allison]

"David Wanker is a LIAR "

Phil Allison wrote:
"David Wanker"

She became rich later when her
radio frequency hopping invention, patented in 1942 and intended to
guide torpedos, was used by mobile phones,

** Bollocks.

All patents have time limits.

Circa 20 years max unless something unusual ( like a war) prevents the
patent being exploited by the holder.


Once again you are wrong,

** I am never wrong - you psycho fuckwit pile of excrement !!!


What Wiki actually says is:

" The idea was not implemented in the USA until 1962, when it was
used by U.S. military ships during a blockade of Cuba after the

***patent had expired***.

Perhaps owing to this lag in development, the patent was little known
until 1997, when the Electronic Frontier Foundation gave Lamarr an
award for this contribution. In 1998, Ottawa wireless technology
developer Wi-LAN Inc. acquired a 49 percent claim to the patent from
Lamarr for an undisclosed amount of stock. "

WiLan Inc is a Canadian company that collects old and expired patents and
scams people.

Not one, single thing you posted was true.


.... Phil

 

[DavidW]

Phil Allison wrote:

What Wiki actually says is:

" The idea was not implemented in the USA until 1962, when it was
used by U.S. military ships during a blockade of Cuba after the

***patent had expired***.

So? That doesn't make the line I posted untrue.

WiLan Inc is a Canadian company that collects old and expired patents
and scams people.

How does it scam people when it is the buyer? "I'll buy your worthless patent
for such-and-such amount of stock." Great scam!

 

[Phil Allison]

"David Wanker = LIAR "

Phil Allison wrote:

What Wiki actually says is:

" The idea was not implemented in the USA until 1962, when it was
used by U.S. military ships during a blockade of Cuba after the

***patent had expired***.

So? That doesn't make the line I posted untrue.

** Of course it does.

Expired patents are WORTHLESS.

WiLan Inc is a Canadian company that collects old and expired patents
and scams people.

How does it scam people when it is the buyer?

** It does so when it is the SELLER !!

YOU FUCKING MORON !!!!


.... Phil

 

[DavidW]

Phil Allison wrote:

"David Wanker = LIAR "
Phil Allison wrote:
WiLan Inc is a Canadian company that collects old and expired
patents and scams people.

How does it scam people when it is the buyer?


** It does so when it is the SELLER !!

YOU FUCKING MORON !!!!

Uh, we are talking about the _acquisition_ of the patent in return for stock.
That's all that's relevant to Hedy Lamarr. Address that instead of going off on
tangents.