tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post3606171625191156166..comments2024-03-29T09:21:58.696+00:00Comments on The IPKat: 512 Characters in Search of Semi-Colonic CleansingVerónica RodrÃguez Arguijohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05763207846940036921noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-63844322290906427832014-02-18T09:10:54.448+00:002014-02-18T09:10:54.448+00:00Is it 'cos they can't spell 42?Is it 'cos they can't spell 42?Meldrewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09841440718012449720noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-20968135950927531882014-02-18T09:06:35.705+00:002014-02-18T09:06:35.705+00:00As Jeremy has rightly pointed out, 512 is exactly ...As Jeremy has rightly pointed out, 512 is exactly 2 to the power 9. More to the point, however, a single character (assuming Unicode encoding) takes up two bytes of storage, so 512 characters is exactly one kilobyte.<br /><br />All this suggests that the limit is due to some memory allocation, or database record limit, i.e. practitioners filing trade mark applications are having an artificial and irrelevant constraint imposed upon them by some technical factor that a developer does not want to resolve.<br /><br />This is stupid beyond words. But anybody who has ever had to deal with the IT department in a large, bureaucratic organisation, will not in the least surprised!Mark Summerfieldhttp://blog.patentology.com.aunoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-9180214106667194402014-02-17T20:28:19.111+00:002014-02-17T20:28:19.111+00:00Sally, You ask why 512: it's a magic number: 2...Sally, You ask why 512: it's a magic number: 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 -- so it's probably something to do with binary computer operation. Other than that, I've no clue.Jeremyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01123244020588707776noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-53868411190448207572014-02-17T17:16:50.911+00:002014-02-17T17:16:50.911+00:00512 is a problem. It is a problem if you have a r...512 is a problem. It is a problem if you have a reasonably extensive list of products, such as a retailer of clothing (who also wants retail services for goods in classes 3, 9, 14, 18, 20 and 24). <br /><br />The answer seems to be to chop it up and repeat the "reatil services" bit, and then await the tedious fax from OHIM raising a deficiency notice because it would be better as a single list.<br /><br />The phrase used to be lions led by donkeys. For OHIM I say donkeys led by non-assembled IKEA furnitureThe iPuffinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-35903820812867937262014-02-17T14:47:21.894+00:002014-02-17T14:47:21.894+00:00Interesting ! And I can understand the difficulty ...Interesting ! And I can understand the difficulty in the relevant context of Class 35 and retail services. I had a (small) moment of panic recalling the late 1990s and wanting to be sure that if there was publicity about astronauts playing (computer or video) games in outer-space - we had it covered. The (then) solutions was : "digital games provided by means of local computer networks, global computer networks, the Internet, cable or wire communications services, wireless telecommunications services and broadband telecommunications services". This, I'm told by Microsoft / Tools / Word Count is <br />217 including spaces. So two questions : (1) is 512 really a problem ? (2) why 512 ?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17547963789032954274noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-32444667092497043562014-02-17T12:03:41.653+00:002014-02-17T12:03:41.653+00:00I wonder how OHIM would react if users started fax...I wonder how OHIM would react if users started fax filing their applications instead..? Ben Mooneapillaynoreply@blogger.com