text:
Daijō-kan

The Daijō-kan or Dajō-kan (太政官), also known as the Great Council of State, was (i) (Daijō-kan) the highest organ of Japan's premodern Imperial government under the Ritsuryō legal system during and after the Nara period or (ii) (Dajō-kan) the highest organ of Japan's government briefly restored to power after the Meiji Restoration, which was replaced by the Cabinet.

It was consolidated in the Taihō Code of 702. The Asuka Kiyomihara Code of 689 marks the initial appearance of this central administrative body composed of the three ministers—the Daijō-daijin (Chancellor), the Sadaijin (Minister of the Left) and the Udaijin (Minister of the Right).

The Imperial governing structure was headed by the Daijō-kan. This council and its subsidiary ministries handled all secular administrative affairs of the country, while the Jingi-kan or Department of Worship, oversaw all matters regarding Shintō ritual, clergy, and shrines.

This structured organization gradually lost power over the 10th and 11th centuries, as the Fujiwara clan, dominating the post of Imperial regent, began to dominate the Daijō-kan as well. It became increasingly common for the regent to hold the post of chancellor or other office simultaneously. By the 12th century, the council was essentially powerless as a separate entity, though it seems clear that the system was never formally dismantled. Over centuries, the ritsuryō state produced more and more information which was carefully archived; however, over time in the Heian period, ritsuryō institutions evolved into a political and cultural system without feedback.

By the time of the Emperor Kōmei, the kuge aristocracy was joined in common goals by several newly powerful provincial figures from outside Kyoto. Together, this tenuous, undefined coalition of men worked to restore the long latent prestige, persuasive power, and active strengths of a re-invigorated Imperial center. This combination of factors thrust an archaic hierarchy into the center of national attention, but with so many other high-priority matters demanding immediate attention, there was little time or energy to invest in reforming or re-organizing the Daijō-kan.

Ritsuryō organization and hierarchy
The eighth century ritsuryō innovations would prove to be remarkably durable and resilient across the span of centuries.

Any exercise of meaningful powers of court officials reached its nadir during the years of the Tokugawa shogunate, and yet the Daijō-kan did manage to persist intact through the initial years of the Meiji Restoration. It is not possible to assess or evaluate any individual office without assessing its role in the context of a durable yet flexible network and hierarchy of functionaries.

In the early Meiji period, the appointed Imperial Daijo-kan was filled with princes, aristocrats, loyalists domain lords (daimyō), and samurai.

Within months after Emperor Meiji's Charter Oath, the ancient ritsuryō structure was slightly modified with an express focus on the separation of legislative, administrative, and judicial functions within the Daijō-kan system. The evolution of a deliberative body within a modern constitutional system was gradual, and its constituent differences from the old Daijō-kan were not entirely self-evident at first, as revealed in an Imperial message in 1869: "The Assembly shall be for the wide ranging consultation of public opinion and, respecting the Imperial will which laid the foundations of national government, it will be a place where the energies of the multitude are harnessed. Thus, it is necessary that proceedings will show respect for the Imperial rescript, be united in purpose with the Daijō-kan, take the fundamentals of government to heart, judiciously address matters which arise, and act to ensure that unity within the country is not compromised."

Some months later, another major reform of the Daijō-kan re-united the legislative and executive functions which had been clearly separated earlier.

In 1871, The office of Daijō-daijin in the Great Council of State was briefly resurrected under the Meiji Constitution with the appointment of Sanjō Sanetomi. Despite the similarity of names for its constituent offices, this Daijō-kan would have been unrecognizable to Fujiwara courtiers of the Heian period. Nor would it have seemed at all familiar to those men who surrounded the emperor in the days of the Kenmu Restoration. In due course, it was decided that a modern integrated cabinet system would better serve a modern Japan. The Daijō-kan system, which had been divided into ministerial committees, would be replaced by a more modern model.

In December 1885, the old system was abolished completely; and yet, even afterwards, some elements of old system were adapted to new uses. For example, in that year, the title of Naidaijin was reconfigured to mean the Lord Keeper of the Privy Seal of Japan in the Imperial Court. The man who had previously held the office of prime minister or chief minister of the initial restoration government was the Daijō-daijin, Sanjō Sanetomi. Sanjō petitioned the emperor to be relieved of his ancient ritsuryō office; and he was then immediately appointed Naidaijin, or Lord Keeper of the Privy Seal. The office of the Privy Seal was identical with the old Naidaijin only in its Japanese title—not in terms of function or powers.

Council of State
This dry catalog does provide a superficial glimpse inside the complexity of what was initially designed as a pre-feudal court structure. What this list cannot easily explain is how or why the Daijō-kan turned out to be both flexible and useful across a span of centuries:
 * Chancellor of the Realm (太政大臣) See also, Acting Chancellor (知太政官事).
 * Minister of the Left (左大臣).
 * Minister of the Right (右大臣).
 * Minister of the Center (内大臣).
 * Major Counselor (大納言), three positions. There are commonly three Dainagon, sometimes more.
 * Middle Counselor (中納言), three positions. There are commonly three Chunagon, sometimes more.
 * Minor Counselor (少納言), three positions. There are commonly three Shōnagon.
 * Associate Counselor (参議). This office functions as a manager of daijō-kan activities within the palace.
 * External secretariat (外記). These are specifically named men who act at the sole discretion of the emperor.
 * Major controller of the left (左大弁). This administrator was charged or tasked with supervising four ministries: Center, Civil Services, Ceremonies, and Popular Affairs.
 * Major controller of the right (右大弁) This administrator was charged or tasked with supervising four ministries: Military, Justice, Treasury and Imperial Household.
 * First assistant controller of the left (左中弁).
 * First assistant controller of the right (右中弁).
 * Second assistant controller of the left (左少弁).
 * Second assistant controller of the right (右少弁).
 * First secretary of the left (左大史).
 * First secretary of the right (右大史).
 * Assistant secretaries of the left or right (史生), 20 positions. There are twenty officials with this title.

Ritsuryō Eight Ministries
The Asuka-, Nara- and Heian-period Imperial court hierarchy encompassed a multi-faceted bureaucracy focused on serving the needs of the Emperor, the Imperial family, the Imperial household and the Imperial state.

Imperial power and prestige would wax and wane during the subsequent Kamakura-, Kenmu-, Muromachi-, Nanboku-chō-, Sengoku-, Azuchi–Momoyama-, and Edo-periods; nevertheless, the basic structure of the Imperial household remained largely unchanged. A mere list of the court titles cannot reveal nearly enough about the actual functioning of the Daijō-kan; but the hierarchical relationships sketch a general context.

Ministry of the Center
The Taihō Code established a Ministry of the Center (中務省), sometimes identified as the "Ministry of Central Affairs." This ministry became the governmental agency for matters most closely pertaining to the emperor.

In the 18th century, the top ritsuryō official within this subdivision of the daijō-kan was the chief administrator of the Ministry of the Center (中務卿). This official had the responsibility to oversee the inspection of the interior apartments of the palace; and he was granted the privilege of retaining his swords in the presence of the emperor.

Considered central were the Emperor's equerries (侍従,), 8 positions. There are 8 officials with this title, all equal in rank and in the confidence of the Emperor. In the Meiji period, a variant equerry was introduced as part of the Imperial retinue. As explained in an excerpt from the 113th Imperial decree of 1896 (Meiji 29) (明治29年勅令第113号): "Aides-de-camp to the Emperor of Japan (侍従武官) will perform attendant duties and will relay to him military matters and orders, be present at military reviews [in his name] and accompanying him to formal ceremonies and interviews."

Ministry of Civil Services
The Taihō Code established a Ministry of the Civil Services (式部省); also known as the "Ministry of Legislative Direction and Public Instruction". This ministry collected and maintained biographical archives of meritorious subjects.

In the 18th century, the top ritsuryō official within this subdivision of the daijō-kan was the chief administrator of the Ministry of Civil Services (式部卿); also known as "Chief minister of public instruction." This office is ordinarily filled by a son or close relative of the emperor. Two of the offices which were deemed to fit in this "civil services" context were the Imperial court's Chief judge (式部大輔). and the Emperor's chief education expert (大学頭).

Ministry of Ceremonies
The Taihō Code established a Ministry of Ceremonies (治部省); also known as the "Ministry of the Interior".

In the 18th century, the top ritsuryō official within this subdivision of the daijō-kan was the chief administrator of the Ministry of Ceremonies (治部卿,).

Ministry of Popular Affairs
The Taihō Code established a Ministry of Popular Affairs (民部省). This ministry is concerned with the general populace, with  police activities, and with land survey records. Registries for all towns and villages are maintained, including census records as well as birth and death records.

In the 18th century, the top ritsuryō official within this subdivision of the daijō-kan was the chief administrator of the Ministry of Popular Affairs (民部卿).

Ministry of War
The Taihō Code established a Ministry of War (兵部省).

In the 18th century, the top ritsuryō official within this subdivision of the daijō-kan was the chief administrator of the Ministry of War (兵部卿).

Ministry of Justice
The Taihō Code established a Ministry of Justice (刑部省).

In the 18th century, the top ritsuryō official within this subdivision of the daijō-kan was the chief administrator of the ministry of justice (刑部卿).

Ministry of the Treasury
The Taihō Code established a Ministry of the Treasury (大蔵省).

In the 18th century, the top ritsuryō official within this subdivision of the daijō-kan was the chief administrator of the ministry of the treasury (大蔵卿). This official supervises the receipt of tributes from the provinces and imposes tribute on others.

Ministry of the Imperial Household
The Taihō Code established a Ministry of the Imperial Household (宮内省). The origins of the current Imperial Household Agency (宮内庁) can be traced back to structures which were put into effect during the reign of Emperor Monmu, with some subsequent modifications.

In 1702, the Taika era name for the palace organization, kunai -kan  or "government" of the palace, was changed to the kunai -shō  or "ministry" of the palace. Accompanying this modification, the chief administrative official was afterwards called kunai-kyō. After the Meiji Restoration, the kunai-shō name remained unchanged. There were two other periods of modification and in 1889.

In the 18th century, the top ritsuryō officials within this hierarchic structure were:
 * Chief administrator of the Imperial household (宮内卿), the surveyor of all works which are executed within the interior of the palace.
 * First assistant to the chief of the imperial Household (宮内大輔).
 * Second assistant to the chief of the imperial household (宮内少輔), two persons.
 * Third assistant to the chief of the imperial household (宮内丞), two persons.
 * Alternate assistants to the chief of the imperial household (宮内録), two persons.

The deliberate redundancies at the top were common features of each position in this stable hierarchic schema. Many positions typically mirrored the -kyō, -taifu, -shō, -jō, and -sakan pattern.

Tokugawa courtiers
Even nominal administrative powers of court officials reached a nadir during the years of the Tokugawa shogunate. In this impoverished period, titles and court rank were still prized by those outside the traditional kuge. The Tokugawa shōguns did not demur when the Emperor offered rank and an office in the court:
 * Tokugawa Ieyasu had the rank of Jūichii (First Rank, Second Class) and the office of Udaijin (Great Minister of the Right, i.e., inferior to the Minister of the Left)
 * Tokugawa Hidetada had the rank of Jūichii and was Daijō Daijin (the Great Minister or Chancellor of the Realm)
 * Tokugawa Iemitsu had the same rank and was Sadaijin (Great Minister of the Left, i.e., superior to the Minister of the Right)
 * Tokugawa Ietsuna had the rank of Shōnii (Second Rank, First Class) and was Udaijin
 * Tokugawa Tsunayoshi had the rank of Shōnii and was Udaijin
 * Tokugawa Ienobu had the rank of Shōnii was Naidaijin (Great Minister of the center, i.e., inferior to the Minister of the Left)
 * Tokugawa Ietsugu had the rank of Shōnii was also Nadaijin
 * Tokugawa Yoshimune held the rank of Shōnii and was Udaijin
 * Tokugawa Ieshige also held the rank of Shōnii and was Udaijin
 * Tokugawa Ieharu also held the rank of Shōnii and was Udaijin
 * Tokugawa Ienari was Dainagon (Great Counselor)
 * Tokugawa Ieyoshi
 * Tokugawa Iesada
 * Tokugawa Iemochi
 * Tokugawa Yoshinobu

Geo-political sub-divisions
The country was divided into provinces called kuni (国), which were administered by governors kokushi (国司) appointed by the Daijō-kan. The provinces were then further divided into districts called gun (郡), under district governors gunji (郡司) who were appointed by the local nobility. At the beginning of the eighth century, there were 592 districts making up 66 provinces.

title: Daijō-kan


text:
Deep End Live!

Deep End Live! is an album containing excerpts of the live performance by Pete Townshend's Deep End band, at the Brixton Academy in London, England on 1-2 November 1985. In addition to Townshend, the band included Pink Floyd guitarist David Gilmour, drummer Simon Phillips, bassist Chucho Merchan, keyboardist John "Rabbit" Bundrick, percussionist Jody Linscott, harmonica player Peter Hope Evans, the horn section Kick Horns and backing vocalists. The album was originally released in the U.S. in August 1986 by Atco Records.

Apart from The Who and Townshend's solo repertoire, Townshend plays the covers "Barefootin'" by New Orleans singer Robert Parker, "I Put a Spell on You" by Screamin' Jay Hawkins, "Save It for Later" by the Beat, and Sonny Boy Williamson's "Eyesight to the Blind", already recorded by the Who for Tommy, is played here with an arrangement close to the original version.

"After the Fire" is a song written by Townshend that originally appeared on Roger Daltrey's solo album Under a Raging Moon, and later appearing on the Who's live album Blues to the Bush.

The full concert was later released as Live: Brixton Academy '85.

Track listing
All songs written by Pete Townshend unless otherwise noted.

 * Side one
 * 1) "Barefootin'" (Robert Parker) - 3:09
 * 2) "After the Fire" - 4:36
 * 3) "Behind Blue Eyes" - 3:40
 * 4) "Stop Hurting People" - 5:09
 * 5) "I'm One" - 2:36

 * Side two
 * 1) "I Put a Spell on You" (Jay Hawkins) - 4:03
 * 2) "Save It for Later" (Roger Charlery, Andy Cox, Everett Morton, David Steele, Dave Wakeling) - 4:10
 * 3) "Pinball Wizard" - 3:00
 * 4) "A Little Is Enough" - 5:20
 * 5) "Eyesight to the Blind" (Sonny Boy Williamson) - 3:02

 * 2006 bonus tracks
 * 1) "Magic Bus" - 4:03
 * 2) "Won't Get Fooled Again" - 6:08

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Deep End Live!


text:
Jet Generation

Jet Generation is the sixth studio album by Japanese rock band Guitar Wolf. It was released in Japan on 21 January 1999 and in the U.S. on 22 June 1999.

The album is labeled with a disclaimer sticker that semi-humorously states, "Warning: this is the loudest album ever recorded. Playing at normal volume may cause irreparable damage to stereo equipment. Use at your own risk". It includes a cover of Eddie Cochran's "Summertime Blues".

Critical reception
Exclaim! wrote that "while so many other great bands dry up or go soft over time, it's great to hear Guitar Wolf pounding it out like it's still their first rehearsal". The Village Voice declared that "Guitar Wolf are a regular (albeit mildly psychotic) guitar-bass-drums rock band, who excel at the most primal sort of no-frills trash-rock". CMJ New Music Report deemed the album "raw, rebellious and sonically nihilistic".

Track listing

 * 1) "Jet Generation"
 * 2) "Fujiyama Attack"
 * 3) "Kaminari One" (Jet Version) (Thunder/Lightning One)
 * 4) "Kung Fu Ramone"
 * 5) "Teenage U.F.O."
 * 6) "Cosmic Space Girl"
 * 7) "Roaring Blood"
 * 8) "Gakulan Rider" (Schoolboy Rider)
 * 9) "Refrigerator Zero"
 * 10) "Shimane Slim"
 * 11) "Cyborg Kids"
 * 12) "Summertime Blues"
 * 13) "Can"-Nana Fever (Jet Version)

title: Jet Generation


text:
User talk:TangParadise

Welcome to the Wikipedia!
Welcome to the Wikipedia, TangParadise! And thanks for your adding a link to the Antipsychotic article...

Here are some perfunctory tips to speed your indoctrination into the Wikipedia experience:

 * Take a look at the Wikipedia Tutorial.
 * When it strikes your fancy, try to grasp some of the nuances at Manual of Style, Assume good faith and Policies and Guidelines.  But keep in mind the unique style you brought to the Wiki!
 * Don't worry about keeping up with the Jones' learning curve on NPOV, but be respectful of others' POV and use a neutral point of view; your unique perspective on the meaning of neutrality is invaluable!
 * If you need any help, post your question at the Help Desk.
 * Explore, be bold in editing, and, above all else, have fun!

And some odds and ends:

 * Policy Library
 * Utilities
 * Cite your sources
 * Verifiability
 * Wikiquette
 * Civility
 * Conflict resolution
 * Brilliant prose
 * Pages needing attention
 * Peer review
 * Bad jokes and other deleted nonsense
 * Village pump
 * Boilerplate text

You can sign your name on any page by typing 4 tildes: ~~~~.

Best of luck, TangParadise, and have fun! Ombudsman 16:51, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:TangParadise


text:
Louis-Pierre Montbrun

 Louis Pierre, comte Montbrun (1770, Florensac, Hérault – 1812), French cavalry general, served with distinction in the cavalry arm throughout the wars of the Revolution and the Consulate, and in 1800 was appointed to command his regiment, having served therein from trooper upwards.

After serving at the Battle of Austerlitz on 2 December 1805, he was promoted to General of Brigade. He earned further distinction in Germany and Poland, and in 1808 he was sent to Spain.

Some doubt exists as to the events of the famous cavalry charge at the Battle of Somosierra (November 1808), but Montbrun's share in it was conspicuous.

Soon afterwards he was promoted to General of division, and in 1809 his light cavalry division took no inconsiderable part in the victories of Eckmühl (April 1809) and Raab (June 1809).

Back in Spain by 1810, he fought at the battles of Bussaco (September 1810) and Fuentes de Oñoro (May 1811), where he commanded Marshal André Masséna's cavalry reserve.

He was killed while commanding the II Cavalry Corps (Grande Armée) at the beginning of the Battle of Borodino (7 September 1812).

title: Louis-Pierre Montbrun


text:
Chris Wiggins

Christopher John Wiggins (January 13, 1931 – February 19, 2017) was an English-born Canadian actor.

Career
Wiggins was born January 13, 1931, in Blackpool, England. He started out as a banker in his home country before he began his acting career in Canada, where he moved in 1952.

Wiggins is probably best recognized for his role as Jack Marshak, the benevolent, resourceful expert on the occult in the syndicated television horror show Friday the 13th: The Series, and which ran from 1987 to 1990. Another well known role was Johann Robinson (Father) on Swiss Family Robinson.

He won a Canadian Film Award in 1969 for Best Actor in a Non-Feature for his role in The Best Damn Fiddler from Calabogie to Kaladar.

In addition to his television and film work, Wiggins was also a very popular radio actor, making over 1,200 appearances in various series over the years, particularly on CBC Radio. One of his most popular roles was that of Dante, the insufferably brilliant (and insufferably arrogant) computer that ran the Aleph-9: the high-speed interdimensional spacecraft belonging to Johnny Chase: Secret Agent of Space. Wiggins' also made numerous guest appearances on such CBC Radio programs as CBC Playhouse, Nightfall, Vanishing Point and dozens of others.

Wiggins also lent his voice to many animated TV series and movies. He was the voice of Thor and his human host Dr. Donald Blake from Marvel Comics in the 1966 The Marvel Super Heroes TV series, the voice of the villain Mysterio in the 1960s animated cartoon Spider-Man, the voice of Will Scarlet on Rocket Robin Hood, the Great Wishing Star in 1986's Care Bears Movie II: A New Generation, and the Care Bears' head villain, No Heart, on the Nelvana version of their TV show. He also voiced the character Dimetro in the 1980s cartoon Dinosaucers. His other roles in animated series and films included ALF Tales, Star Wars: Droids, Rock & Rule, Star Wars: Ewoks, Babar, Babar and the Adventures of Badou, Rupert, Richard Scarry, Franklin, and Redwall.

Death
Wiggins died at a nursing home in Elora, Ontario, on February 19, 2017, from complications from Alzheimer's disease. His wife, Sandra Crysler-Wiggins, predeceased him (she passed in 2009), and he had no children.

Selected filmography

 * General Motors Presents (1954-1961, TV Series) .... Jonah Grundeen / Sweeney / George / Sgt Wyeth / Second booking agent
 * Hawkeye and the Last of the Mohicans (1957, TV Series) .... Mort Bailey / Major Conn / Major Duffy / Mr. Travers / Sheriff Peterson / Jess Adams
 * The Unforeseen (1958-1959, TV Series) .... King / Monfort
 * R.C.M.P. (1959-1960, TV Series) .... George Needham / Kurt Hummel / Bush Pilot Watt / Martinson
 * Playdate (1961-1964, TV Series) .... Heinrich / Grandpa / Vanderkemp / Dr. Bahn
 * The United States Steel Hour (1961, TV Series) .... Charles Blake
 * William Lyon Mackenzie: A Friend to His Country (1961, Short) .... Jeweller?
 * Vacation Time (1962, TV Series) .... Co-host (1964)
 * The Forest Rangers (1963-1966, TV Series) .... Prof. Mandell / Porter
 * Moment of Truth (1964, TV Series) .... Dexter
 * The Marvel Super Heroes (1966-1969) .... Balder (voice)
 * Julius Caesar (1966, TV Movie) .... Cassius
 * Once Upon a Prime Time (1966, Short)
 * Hatch's Mill (1967, TV Series) .... Donegan
 * Rocket Robin Hood (1967-1968, TV Series) .... Will Scarlet / Infinata / Baron Blank
 * Spiderman (1967-1970, TV Series) .... Mysterio / Harley Clivendon / Infinata (voice)
 * Wojeck (1968) .... Gilbert
 * The Best Damn Fiddler from Calabogie to Kaladar (1969) .... Emery
 * Adventures in Rainbow Country (1969, TV Series) .... Fred Vincent
 * King of the Grizzlies (1970) .... The Colonel
 * Paul Bernard, Psychiatrist (1971, TV Series) .... Dr. Paul Bernard
 * Follow the North Star (1972, TV Series) .... Dudley
 * Tom Sawyer (1973, TV Movie) .... Lawyer
 * The Neptune Factor (1973) .... Capt. Williams
 * The National Dream: Building the Impossible Railway (1974, TV Mini-Series documentary) .... Donald Smith
 * Swiss Family Robinson (1974-1976, TV Series) .... Johann Robinson / Buckley
 * Welcome to Blood City (1977) .... Gellor
 * Why Shoot the Teacher? (1977) .... Lyle Bishop
 * A Cosmic Christmas (1977, TV Short) .... Mayor (voice)
 * High-Ballin' (1978) .... King Caroll
 * Two Solitudes (1978) .... Captain Yardley
 * Voice of the Fugitive (1978, Short) .... Silas
 * The Devil and Daniel Mouse (1978, TV Movie) .... B.L. Zebub / The Devil (voice)
 * Johnny Chase: Secret Agent of Space (1978-1981, TV Series)
 * Murder by Decree (1979) .... Doctor Hardy
 * Jigsaw (1979) .... MacKenzie
 * Riel (1979, TV Movie) .... Middleton
 * Fish Hawk (1979) .... Marcus Boggs
 * Intergalactic Thanksgiving (1979, TV Short) .... Pa Spademinder (voice)
 * An American Christmas Carol (1979, TV Movie) .... Mr. Nathaniel Brewster
 * The Littlest Hobo (1979-1981, TV Series) .... Ed Thompson / Grandpa
 * The Courage of Kavik, the Wolf Dog (1980, TV Movie) .... Dr. Vic Walker
 * Easter Fever (1980, TV Movie) .... Santa Claus / Baker (voice)
 * Virus (1980) .... Dr. Borodinov
 * Escape from Iran: The Canadian Caper (1981, TV Movie) .... John Sheardown
 * Titans (1981, TV Series) .... Galieo
 * Billy Goat's Bluff (1981) .... Narrator
 * Shocktrauma (1982, TV Movie) .... Dr. McCall
 * Mazes and Monsters (1982, TV Movie) .... King
 * Hangin' In (1982-1986, TV Series) .... Ward / Abe
 * Faerie Tale Theatre (1982-1987)
 * Strawberry Shortcake: Housewarming Surprise (1983, TV Movie) .... Mr. Sun (voice)
 * Rock & Rule (1983) .... Toad (voice)
 * Cook & Peary: The Race to the Pole (1983, TV Movie) .... Roberts
 * A Case of Libel (1983, TV Movie) .... Colonel Douglas
 * Strawberry Shortcake and the Baby Without a Name (1984, TV Movie) .... Mr. Sun / Narrator (voice)
 * The Bay Boy (1984) .... Chief Charlie McInnes
 * Star Wars: Droids (1985, TV Series) .... (voice)
 * Strawberry Shortcake Meets the Berrykins (1985, TV Movie) .... Mr. Sun (voice)
 * Jimmy Valentine (1985, TV Short) .... Victor Adams
 * The Edison Twins (1985-1986, TV Series) .... Lafayette / Old Trainer
 * Star Wars: Ewoks (1985-1986, TV Series) .... (voice)
 * Night Heat (1985-1986, TV Series) .... Picard / Maxim Gates
 * Care Bears Movie II: A New Generation (1986) .... Great Wishing Star (voice)
 * Barnum (1986, TV Movie) .... Olmstead
 * Spearfield's Daughter (1986, TV Mini-Series) .... Sylvester Spearfield
 * Adderly (1986, TV Series) .... Belkin
 * The Care Bears Family (1986-1988, TV Series) .... No Heart (voice)
 * The Liberators (1987, TV Series) .... Flour Merchant
 * Ford: The Man and the Machine (1987, TV Movie) .... Malcolmson
 * Mariah (1987, TV Series) .... Captain Timothy Quinlan
 * Dinosaucers (1987, TV Series) .... Dimetro (voice)
 * Friday the 13th: The Series (1987-1990, TV Series) .... Jack Marshak
 * ALF: The Animated Series (1987-1988, TV Series) .... (voice)
 * ALF Tales (1988-1989, TV Series) .... (voice)
 * ''Keroppi and Friends (1989-1994, TV Series) Narrator (voice)
 * Babar: The Movie (1989) .... Cornelius (voice)
 * Babar (1989-1991, TV Series) .... Cornelius (voice)
 * Divided Loyalties (1990) .... Sir William Johnson
 * Counterstrike (1990-1991, TV Series) .... Kistler / Police Inspector / Sgt. Luther
 * Street Legal (1990-1992, TV Series) .... Ronald Spencer Sr. / Judge Ritter
 * Maniac Mansion (1990, TV Series) .... Santa Claus
 * Married to It (1991) .... Dave
 * Sweating Bullets (1991, TV Series) .... Corliss
 * Mark Twain and Me (1991, TV Movie) .... Captain
 * Rupert (1991, TV Series) .... (voice)
 * Hello Kitty and Friends (1991-1995, TV Series) .... (voice)
 * Road to Avonlea (1992, TV Series) .... Mr. McCorkadale
 * A Cry in the Night (1992, TV Movie) .... Clyde
 * By Way Of The Stars (1992-1993, TV Mini-Series) .... Captain Harris
 * Kung Fu: The Legend Continues (1993, TV Series) .... Mike West
 * The Busy World of Richard Scarry (1993-1996, TV Series) .... (voice)
 * RoboCop: The Series (1994, TV Series) .... Dr. Roger Yung
 * Tales from the Cryptkeeper (1994, TV Series) ... Slim (voice)
 * Scales of Justice (1994, TV series) - Lawyer, episode "L'Affaire Belshaw"
 * Butterbox Babies (1995) .... Senator Danver
 * Black Fox (1995, TV Movie) .... Ralph Holtz
 * Black Fox: The Price of Peace (1995, TV Movie) .... Ralph Holtz
 * Voices (1995) .... Angus Fergusson
 * Ultraforce (1995, TV Series) .... (voice)
 * The New Adventures of Sherlock Holmes (1995–1998, TV Series) .... Robert Cansington (voice)
 * Sailor Moon (1995, TV Series) .... Narrator / Mr. Baxter (voice)
 * The Neverending Story (1995, TV Series) .... Mr. Correander (voice)
 * Little Bear (1995-2001, TV Series) .... Mr. Wind (voice)
 * Sins of Silence (1996, TV Movie) .... Father Flannigan
 * Pippi Longstocking (1997) .... Fridolf (voice)
 * Fast Track (1997, TV Series) .... Carl Scannel
 * Freaky Stories (1997, TV Series) .... Narrator ("Battleship")
 * Windsor Protocol (1997, TV Movie) .... Sir Charles Ferguson
 * Earth: Final Conflict (1998, TV Series) .... Tim O'Malley
 * Evidence of Blood (1998, TV Movie) .... Horace Talbott
 * Thunder Point (1998, TV Movie) .... Charles Ferguson
 * Pippi Longstocking (1998, TV Series) .... Fridolf (voice)
 * The Defenders: Taking the First (1998, TV Movie)
 * Birdz (1998, TV Series) .... Officer Pigeon (voice)
 * Mythic Warriors: Guardians of the Legend (1998-1999, TV Series) .... King Proetus / Elderly Stable Hand / Great Oracle
 * Babar: King of the Elephants (1999) .... Cornelius (voice)
 * Redwall (1999-2002, TV Series) .... Abbot Mortimer / Mangiz the Seer / Crow (voice)
 * Franklin (2000-2004, TV Series) .... Mr. Groundhog
 * Franklin's Magic Christmas (2001, Video) .... Mr. Collie (voice)
 * Pecola (2001-2003, TV Series) ... (English version, voice)
 * The Snowman Who Saved Summer (2002, Video short) .... Santa Claus
 * The Piano Man's Daughter (2003, TV Movie) .... James Kilworth
 * ReGenesis (2005, TV Series) .... Vascily Popov
 * Our Fathers (2005, TV Movie) .... Angelo's Old Priest
 * Four Minutes (2006, TV Movie) .... Burnett
 * Babar and the Adventures of Badou (2010-2015, TV Series) .... Cornelius (voice), (final appearance)

title: Chris Wiggins


text:
Talk:Family (Buffy the Vampire Slayer)

Untitled
Please help complete the Angel/Buffy episode articles. See what needs to be done on this sub-page of WikiProject Buffy:

WikiProject Buffy/Episodes

Also please help update any major changes made to episode articles on that page so that progress can be mapped.

________________________________________________________

Writing and Acting
''It is unclear why Buffy can't see Spike. Since he is only half-demon, the same rules should apply as to Tara: Demon part hidden, human part visible.''

About the last line, is clarification really necessary? After all, Spike's chip ability prevents harm to only pure blood humans so the spell might as well work similarly. it's proven at the end that Tara isn't a demon so I'll remove the unnecessary reference to her. Ekarderif 03:53, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Never mind. I was just confused about the wording... I'll just leave it untouched. Ekarderif 03:55, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Errors
Is it really an error that the older scoobies have some beer before they turn 21? They've saved the world so many times they have literally lost track. Let them have a beer. Lots42 11:34, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
 * From the article on wikipedia, only possession is forbidden, not consumption. Therefore, it's not illegal. I won't remove the "error", but I let you consider removing it. Grrr 11:33, 23 february 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.195.228.225 (talk)
 * This is technically not an error. When Dawn says the line, Xander, Buffy, Riley, and Giles are in the frame. Buffy and Xander placed thier drinks down as Riley and Giles take their drinks up to sip. Dawn says the line, and both Riley and Giles look ashamed. Buffy and Xander don't react. Both Riley and Giles are older than 21 (Riley was a teaching assistant and de facto leader of the Initiative, so clearly of age). 160.10.98.106 (talk) 19:51, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Buffy506.jpg
Image:Buffy506.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:16, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Dark Secret?
"We find out that Riley has a dark secret." I'm watching through these for the first time myself, and I didn't notice anything dark or secretive from Riley in either the episode itself or the summary, unless you count a possible drinking problem. I sure wouldn't. 65.126.105.160 (talk) 07:12, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

(^ that was me without username, sorry) anyway, in light of knowing what the "dark secret" actually is, this episode gives absolutely no hint toward it. I'm taking the quote out. LoZfan03 (talk) 05:33, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

title: Talk:Family (Buffy the Vampire Slayer)


text:
User talk:Sashanan

I got your message and I've voted accordingly. At the risk of breaching Wikiquette, I'm more than a little bit miffed at what I view as your apparent attempt at trolling. At least I was able to vote to delete this thing. Sad part is, it's well-written and believable. Please consider using your skills to improve this site rather than to disrupt it. Thanks. - Lucky 6.9 16:53, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

I have attempted to use my skills to improve this site, by hopefully increasing knowledge of a little-known subject. It's a pity that you are miffed by such attempts to illuminate - maybe the entire site offends? The reason that it is believable is merely because it is based in as much direct testimony from Dutch people as I can gather. Admittedly, not all accounts agree with each other, but there is a common enough theme throughout. I hope that you will change your mind about the relevance of direct testimony from people who wish to remain anonymous, and will understand that it is not meant to offend anyone. Merely to educate people about a little-known aspect of Dutch culture. Sashanan 18:04, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

If what you're saying is true, then I'll gladly change my vote, offer my sincerest apologies for accusing you of trolling and even work to expand the article. I basing my decision on the "sockpuppet" votes and a complete lack of relevant Google hits. Please show me proof. That's all. I know Google isn't the beat-all-end-all of info. It's the best we have until someone comes up with something better. - Lucky 6.9 19:58, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

I can assure you that everything in my entry is true. I have a number of Dutch sources, who provided me with first-hand accounts, but some of them need translation. It is a pity that you are so suspicious about such myths, but understandable, since they are difficult to believe without evidence. I guess that it will be a while before any direct evidence will be available, or even exists, but this doesn't mean that such myths are "false" or whether any myth can be described in any other way? Or that it will ever be possible to prove or disprove a definition such as this. Hopefully, you will accept that the reports I have received are genuine? Sashanan

I want to believe you. I really do. You must admit, however that if you were looking at it from the point-of-view of other users, your claims seem kind of sketchy. I certainly can't prove the existence of the Loch Ness Monster or Bigfoot, but plenty of verifiable stories about them abound. I once rescued a story about a Filipino mythological creature called Nuno. It was written by a non-native speaker and was so convoluted that I started to tag it as vandalism. A quick Google search uncovered a wealth of information on the myth. None exists for yours. Can you point me toward an online source? - Lucky 6.9 06:14, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

Some myths never gain enough currency to get any online attention. I first heard about the myth directly from someone in Holland, and many of the stories have conflicting reports about how the creature appears and so on. There are enough similarities to warrant further research, and I have collected enough material (drawings, diary entries, first hand accounts and so on) to make an interesting chapter in my book about the field, already. Admittedly, it may look suspicious that a lesser-known myth is so little known, but hopefully the Sashanan will soon be as well-known as the other mythic figures you mention - and this will change online. I hope you will give me the benefit of any doubt which might exist? Sashanan 11:08, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

 * I've gone back and looked your article over yet again. "Fudge-packing?"  "Pedophilia?"  If this isn't an attack page, I don't know what is.  I refuse to fuel this any further.  OK?  You got us.  Joke's on us.  Ha, ha.  This "article" will be gone in a couple of days.  However, one more sockpuppet vote or one more plausible-sounding explanation that isn't more than a waste of time means that I will report this matter to the "vandalism in progress" page, likely leading to your user name and/or IP being blocked.  You're obviously an intelligent person.  Please consider doing some good here. - Lucky 6.9 20:54, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

I can assure you that everything you read is genuine. The myth has been extensively researched, even if you do not accept that (for instance) the original Red Riding Hood myth had its roots in such paedophilic ideas. If your existence here is to censor those whose only attempt is to illuminate, then that is a matter for your own conscience. I have had two accounts on Wikipedia, this one and another which is now deleted. You may report me for whatever offences you feel I have committed. Telling the truth, and trying to illuminate seem to have been at the forefront of this site's ideals, once. Sashanan 21:58, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

I've heard of the Sashanan. I used to work in Holland - 'Sash' was described to me as a bloated man sized baby that sexually defiled real children in their own homes. He was supposed to have big idiotic eyes and very small genitalia, so as to fit.

title: User talk:Sashanan


text:
Bunny Breckinridge

John Cabell "Bunny" Breckinridge (August 6, 1903 – November 5, 1996) was an American actor and drag queen, best known for his role as "The Ruler" in Ed Wood's film Plan 9 from Outer Space, his only film appearance.

Early life
Breckinridge was born in Paris, France, to Adelaide Murphy and John Cabell Breckinridge Sr., a wealthy Californian family. He was the great-great-great-grandchild of U.S. Attorney General John Breckinridge (and the great-grandchild of both U.S. Vice President and Confederate general John C. Breckinridge and Wells Fargo Bank founder Lloyd Tevis). He spent time at Eton College and Oxford University in England.

Plan 9 from Outer Space
In 1956, Breckinridge agreed to play the role of an alien leader in the film Graverobbers from Outer Space (later retitled Plan 9 from Outer Space), directed by his friend, Ed Wood. Wood and Breckinridge were introduced to one another by their mutual friend Paul Marco, who played Kelton the Cop in three Wood films. The film premiered March 15, 1957, at the Carlton Theatre in Hollywood.

Breckinridge and Marco were living together in the latter's modest home at the time, despite the fact that he was a struggling B-movie actor and Breckinridge was an independently wealthy socialite. David Demering, who played the airplane co-pilot in the film, also lived with them.

Breckinridge's previous stage experience convinced Wood to cast him as the alien ruler who oversees an attempt to take over the Earth using an army of reanimated corpses. Indeed, his background made him one of the few truly experienced actors in the entire cast. Dressed in a pajama-like outfit which is curiously less ornate than those worn by his underlings, he sports very visible mascara and lipstick, and constantly rolls his eyes and mugs for the camera.

Later years
Breckinridge continued his theatrical career throughout the 1950s, but in small local productions, such as playing the role of The Inquisitor in Richard Bailey's production of The Lark in Carmel.

By 1980, Plan 9 from Outer Space had amassed a cult following among B-movie buffs as the "worst film ever made", making Breckinridge's name known to a new generation. Meanwhile, he returned to stage acting, appearing mostly in local productions in San Francisco.

In 1994, Breckinridge was surprised to find himself portrayed as a character in a major motion picture, played by Bill Murray in Tim Burton's 1994 biopic Ed Wood. His advanced years and failing health, however, prevented him from participating in any of the publicity surrounding the film.

Personal life
In 1927, while working as a drag/burlesque entertainer in Paris, he married Roselle du Val de Dampierre (1903–1999), the daughter of Robert Henri du Val de Dampierre, a French Count, and Marie du Val de Dampierre (née Serailler). They divorced two years later, but had one daughter, Solange Prasad.

Breckinridge maintained homes on each coast – one in New Jersey and one in San Francisco.

He died on November 5, 1996, at age 93, in a nursing home in Monterey, California. He was quoted in his obituary as saying, "I was a little bit wild when I was young, darling, but I lived my life grandly."

Sexuality
Openly gay at a time when it was daring (and even dangerous) to be so, he was well known for his flamboyant lifestyle, his outrageous sense of humor, and his penchant for perfume and costume jewelry. He performed in Shakespearean plays in England before moving to San Francisco in the late 1920s. He also frequently performed in drag.

In 1955, he was arrested in a San Francisco waterfront bar and charged with vagrancy and jailed, though the charges were later dropped because of his family and wealth.

In 1959, shortly after Plan 9 From Outer Space's disappointing DCA release, Breckinridge was convicted on ten counts of sex perversion for taking two underage boys on an excursion to Las Vegas. He was committed to the Atascadero State Hospital for the criminally insane, and released the following year.

Upon his release, he returned to his San Francisco home, a Spanish-style bungalow adorned with gold framed photographs of the many celebrities he met and befriended, including Princess Margaret, Noël Coward, J. Edgar Hoover, Elvis Presley, and Ed Sullivan. Breckinridge frequently opened his home to members of the growing hippie movement, who were enthralled not only by his stories of his flamboyant youth, but also his favorable opinions on free love and his encyclopedic knowledge of both gay history and the lives of closeted Hollywood stars.

Gender identity
In the 1940s, male-to-female sex change operations were becoming more widely available in Europe, and Breckinridge expressed many times his desire to undergo the procedure. With the nationwide attention given to Christine Jorgensen's sex change in 1952, Breckinridge became more determined than ever to begin transitioning. In 1954, he announced plans to travel to Denmark and undergo the operation so he could marry his male secretary. Breckinridge was by this time a grandparent, and his granddaughter supported him in his efforts. Shortly thereafter, a San Francisco judge scuttled his Denmark trip by ordering him into court for failing to make good on an earlier agreement to pay $8,500 a year to support his elderly, blind mother in England. He then made arrangements with a sex-change surgeon in Mexico, but had a serious car accident while traveling there. He gave up his pursuit of the matter afterwards.

In the 1960s, Breckinridge gave permission to the author Gore Vidal to write what Breckinridge thought would be a biography. However, though partly inspired by some events in real life, the bestselling book that resulted was a work of fiction: Myra Breckinridge.

title: Bunny Breckinridge


text:
Hörzu

Hörzu is a German weekly television listings magazine published in Hamburg.

History and profile
Hörzu first appeared in 1946 and was published by Axel Springer as the first radio program magazine to be produced in what was then the British zone of occupation. Over the years Hörzu has shifted the emphasis of its coverage from radio to television programs. The magazine is based in Hamburg.

The first edition of the magazine appeared on 11 December 1946 as ''HÖR ZU! Die Rundfunkzeitung'' ("LISTEN! The radio newspaper") as it was originally entitled. There were three editions in the first year of publication, 48 in 1947, and since then the magazine has appeared 52 or 53 times annually.

The circulation of the magazine increased rapidly. 1949 saw the first appearance of Mecki, Hörzu's cartoon hedgehog mascot. Since 1965, the Hörzu has awarded the annual Golden Camera television prize.

In early 2010, the bimonthly magazine Hörzu Wissen ("Hörzu Knowledge") was launched, which covers science, history, health, and technology topics. The magazine launch was considered a major success by Springer AG, with the premiere issue selling 130,000 copies.

The magazine was sold to Funke Mediengruppe in 2013.

Record subsidiary
Beginning in 1963 Hörzu produced and released long playing records as a subsidiary of Electrola, Cologne. In 1968 it began a progressive and avantgarde music label, Hör Zu Black.

Circulation
During the third quarter of 1992 the circulation of Hörzu was 3,103,000 copies. The magazine had a circulation of 2,426,000 copies during the third quarter of 1995 and 2,367,000 copies during the third quarter of 1996. In 1999 the circulation of the magazine was 2,226,700 copies.

It was one of fifty best-selling television magazines worldwide with a circulation of 2,077,000 copies in 2001. The average circulation of Hörzu was 1,678,000 copies in 2003. In the fourth quarter of 2006 its circulation was 1,585,100 copies. The magazine had a circulation of 1,431,490 copies in 2010. In 2012 the circulation of the magazine was 1,275,600 copies. During the second quarter of 2016 it was 1,038,901 copies.

Editors-in-chief of Hörzu

 * Eduard Rhein (1946)
 * Hans Bluhm (1965)
 * Peter Bachér (1974)
 * Felix Schmidt (1985)
 * Helmut Reinke (1987)
 * Klaus Stampfuss (1989)
 * Andreas Petzold (1997)
 * Michael Lohmann (1999)
 * Jörg Walberer (2001)
 * Thomas Garms (2003)
 * Christian Hellmann (2009)

title: Hörzu


text:
Talk:8 Mile: Music from and Inspired by the Motion Picture

Problems
track listings are all wrong, have been messed with. some of these songs were not even out, their artists unheard of in 2002. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Unknown419 (talk • contribs) 16:10, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

Untitled
female from love me vocals,who is that?or what sample is this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.229.211.214 (talk) 06:04, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Music from and Inspired by the Motion Picture 8 Mile. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ifpi.gr/chart01.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 11:48, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Music from and Inspired by the Motion Picture 8 Mile. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ifpi.gr/chart01.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 08:09, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 21:53, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 8 Mile: Music from and Inspired by the Motion Picture. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140714231425/https://music.yahoo.com/blogs/chart-watch/chart-watch-ed-sheerans-transatlantic-1-202342797.html to https://music.yahoo.com/blogs/chart-watch/chart-watch-ed-sheerans-transatlantic-1-202342797.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 12:14, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 8 Mile: Music from and Inspired by the Motion Picture. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151001074349/http://www.rosenbergradio.com/2015/09/30/oc-drops-jewelz-get-it-on-juan-epstein/ to http://www.rosenbergradio.com/2015/09/30/oc-drops-jewelz-get-it-on-juan-epstein/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 06:32, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Move request 21 July 2019

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved (non-admin closure) ___CAPTAIN MEDUSA talk   23:53, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

8 Mile: Music from and Inspired by the Motion Picture → Music from and Inspired by the Motion Picture 8 Mile – It's the exact name of the album displayed on the cover. jack chango  talk  21:58, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

 * Oppose, seems like an overly literal reading of the title and would clearly make a less useful search term. Inclined to think that 8 Mile (soundtrack) would be a better, more concise title. PC78 (talk) 01:36, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Also per WP:OFFICIALNAMES. PC78 (talk) 14:18, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Is there any source for the current title? —BarrelProof (talk) 05:22, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.


text:
United States patent law

The United States is considered to have the most favorable legal regime for inventors and patent owners in the world. Under United States law, a patent is a right granted to the inventor of a (1) process, machine, article of manufacture, or composition of matter, (2) that is new, useful, and non-obvious. A patent is the right to exclude others, for a limited time (usually, 20 years) from profiting from a patented technology without the consent of the patent holder. Specifically, it is the right to exclude others from: making, using, selling, offering for sale, importing, inducing others to infringe, applying for an FDA approval, and/or offering a product specially adapted for practice of the patent.

United States patent law is codified in Title 35 of the United States Code, and authorized by the U.S. Constitution, in Article One, section 8, clause 8, which states:

"The Congress shall have power ... To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;"

Although this statement is superficially similar to intellectual property clauses in the constitutions of other countries, the US patent system has several peculiarities.

Firstly, this clause is interpreted as giving the primary IP rights only to individuals (i.e. "inventors") rather than to organizations (see Stanford University v. Roche Molecular Systems, Inc.),

Secondly, until 16 March 2013 the US gave priority to first inventors to invent, although the US adopted first inventor to file system since (see First to file and first to invent).

Thirdly, the US has provisional patent applications, which can be filed one year before filing regular patent application, thus delaying the start on the nominal 20 year patent term by one year.

Fourthly, unlike most other countries, the US allows extension of patent monopoly beyond 20 years from the filing date via patent term adjustment due to the patent prosecution delays by the USPTO or due to product approval delays by Food and Drug Administration.

Fifthly, the US does not have utility models.

Sixthly, there is no criminal liability for patent infringement in the US, only civil liability.

Seventhly, although lawsuits for declaratory judgement are prohibited in the USA in general, they are allowed in cases of potential patent infringement.

Eighthly, research exemption and fair use is allowed for using patented product or process for research and educational purposes, albeit their scopes have seen reductions in recent years.

Ninthly, the large size of the US economy, the strong pro-patentee legal regime and over 200 years of case law make US patents more valuable and more litigated, than patents of any other country.

The ninth advantage gave rise to the system abuse by patent trolls, which are largely absent in other countries.

Substantive law
The issues of patent validity and patent infringement fall under exclusive jurisdiction of the Federal government. On the other hand, questions of patent ownership (like other questions of private property) are contested in state courts, although federal courts can make decisions about patent ownership by applying the relevant state law, when appropriate.

Most of the US patent law is codified in Title 35 of the United States Code. The "patentability" of inventions (defining the types things that qualify for patent protection) is defined under Sections 100–105. Most notably, section 101 sets out "subject matter" that can be patented; section 102 defines "novelty" and "statutory bars" to patent protection; section 103 requires that an invention to be "non-obvious".

The US also has an extensive body of case law comprising federal court precedents that have accumulated over more than 200 years. US Federal District courts have primary jurisdiction in patent infringement cases. Patent validity can be challenged in the same US Federal District courts, as a declarative judgement or counter-claim of non-infringement. Alternatively, patent validity (or examiners' refusals to grant patents) can be challenged at Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) reviews the decisions of the Federal District Courts and of the PTAB. The rulings of the CAFC can be reviewed by the SCOTUS, but only on a discretionary basis (i.e. there is no right to appeal the CAFC's decisions).

Patentable subject matter (§101)
One author of the US Patent Act of 1952 stated that patentable subject matter should encompass "anything under the sun that is made by man." At that time, the USPTO and US courts interpreted both "anything" and "made by man" quite broadly. However, the meaning of these terms has been narrowed substantially over the years.

There are four types of "anything" (i.e. of statutory categories of inventions): a process, a machine (usually implies moving parts), (an article of) manufacture (usually implies no moving parts, e.g. textile fabric or a chair), a composition of matter (chemicals, materials), as well as improvements thereof. Not every object falls into a statutory category: for example, electromagnetic waves, rules for playing games are not patentable (but a new and non-obvious type of dice for playing games may be patentable as a "manufacture"). The most significant restrictions occurred over time with respect to patentability of "processes" (methods). For example, patenting of business methods in US (in contrast to other countries) was quite common between c. 1990 and 2014, but courts gradually curtailed patentability of business methods to the point of almost complete exclusion in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International (2014).

Also, US courts have been struggling with the meaning of "made by man". Since at least 1948 in Funk Bros. Seed Co. v. Kalo Inoculant Co. the SCOTUS made clear, that trivial implementations of a newly discovered natural phenomenon or natural product are not eligible for a patent. However, in 1991 in Amgen v. Chugai Pharmaceutical the CAFC concluded that genes isolated from their natural environment were patentable. This practice came to an end in 2013 when the SCOTUS decided in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. (2013), that "mere isolation of genes does not qualify for patent protection". At the same time the Court allowed patenting of complementary DNA without introns, since "it does not exist" in nature. Similarly, inventions based on routine applications of discoveries (such as that different people metabolize the same drug at different rates as in Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc., or that pregnant woman's blood contains DNA of fetus' father as in Ariosa v. Sequenom) is not patent-ineligible in the US, since the new elements in such inventions are not "made" but rather "discovered" by man. Although the presence of such "discoveries" helps patentees to meet the non-obviousness requirement, an additional man-made contribution (called "inventive concepts" in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International) is required to limit this discovery to a patentable invention.

Patent subject matter eligibility is discussed in the details in section 2106 of Manual of Patent Examining Procedure. Additional examples can be found here.

Novelty (§102)
Section 102 of the patent act defines the "novelty" requirement. The novelty requirement prohibits patenting a technology that is already available to the public. Specifically, 35 U.S.C. 102 states: "(a) NOVELTY; PRIOR ART.—A person shall be entitled to a patent unless— (1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention ..."

For a technology to be "anticipated" (and therefore patent-ineligible) under 35 U.S.C. 102, the prior art reference must teach every aspect of the claimed invention either explicitly or impliedly. "A claim is anticipated only if each and every element as set forth in the claim is found, either expressly or inherently described, in a single prior art reference." Verdegaal Bros. v. Union Oil Co. of California, 814 F.2d 628, 631 (Fed. Cir. 1987).

The issue of novelty is often arises during patent examination, because of inadvertent and/or partial disclosures by inventors themselves prior to filing a patent application. Unlike the laws of most countries, the US patent law provides for a one-year grace period in cases of inventor's own prior disclosure. Another unique feature of the US patent practice is a provisional patent application, which allows an inventor to establish a priority and gives them a year to improve on their invention before filing a complete (i.e. non-provisional) patent application.

Obviousness (§103)
To be patentable, a technology must not only be "new" but also "non-obvious." The US requirement for non-obviousness corresponds to the inventive step requirement in other countries. An "invention" is obvious (and therefore ineligible for a patent), if a person of "ordinary skill" in the relevant field of technology would have thought the technology was obvious, on the filing date of the patent application. Legislatively the requirement for non-obviousness was established in the Patent Act of 1952.Specifically, 35 U.S.C. 103 states:

"35 U.S.C. 103 Conditions for patentability; non-obvious subject matter. A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains."

The non-obviousness requirement does not demand that the prior art be identical to the claimed invention. It is enough that the prior art can somehow be modified (or combined) in order to teach the claimed technology. So long as the modification of the prior art (or combination of several prior art references) would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) at the time the application was filed, the applied-for technology will be considered obvious and therefore patent-ineligible under 35 U.S.C. §103.

As the practice of the USPTO and US Federal Courts showed later, the PHOSITA criterion turned out to be too ambiguous in practice. The practical approach was developed later by the US Supreme Court in Graham v. John Deere Co. in 1966 and in KSR v Teleflex in 2006.

Patent application procedure

Patent applications can be filed at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). Prior to June 7, 1995, the duration of a US utility patent was 17 years from patent issuance. Since that date, the duration of the US utility patent is 20 years from the earliest effective filing date. However, patent term adjustment or extension are possible if the USPTO fails to issue a patent within 3 years after filling the full application, subject to various conditions on the applicant. The rules for drafting and filing a patent application are set out in the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP).

Pre-grant publication (PG Pub)
Since the American Inventors Protection Act, the USPTO publishes patent applications 18 months after the earliest priority application (which often is a provisional application) is filed. This time limit can be extended under certain circumstances, for an additional fee. The applications may be published before a patent has been granted on them if the patent is not granted within the 18-month time frame. Applicants can opt out of publication if the applications will not be prosecuted internationally.

Patent infringement, enforcement and litigation
A table, summarizing post-grant proceedings available in the USA, can be found here:

U.S. Federal District Courts (FDCs)
Litigation in the Federal District Courts remains the main remedy for patent infringement. 5000-6000 patent cases are filed each year in the United States. The two most popular districts for patent cases are E.D. Texas and D. Delaware.

U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC)
In cases involving importation of a patented product into the US, the patent holder may wish to pursue a cause of action in the United States International Trade Commission (ITC) instead of, or in addition to, the court system. The ITC is an agency of the U.S. federal government empowered to enforce patent holders' rights under Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930. In contrast to courts, which have a wide range of remedies at their disposal, including monetary damages, the ITC can grant only two forms of remedy: exclusion orders barring infringing products from being imported into the United States, and cease-and-desist orders preventing the defendants (known as respondents) in the ITC action from importing infringing products into the United States. In addition, the ITC can grant temporary relief, similar to a preliminary injunction in U.S. federal court, which prevents importation of allegedly infringing products for the duration of the ITC proceeding. In some cases, this may provide a quicker resolution to a patent owner's problems.

Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC)
The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit hears appeals from US Federal District Courts and from the International Trade Commission. The decisions of the CAFC can be appealed to the US Supreme Court, but only on discretionary basis via a petition for a writ of certiorari.

Utilization and importance
A survey of 12 industries from 1981 to 1983 shows that patent utilization is strong across all industries in the United States, with 50 percent or more patentable inventions being patented.

However, this is not to say that all industries believe their inventions have relied on the patent system or believe it is a necessity to introduce and develop inventions. Another survey for the same time period show that, of those 12 same industries, only two—pharmaceuticals and chemicals—believe thirty percent or more of their patentable inventions would not have been introduced or developed without having patent protection. All others—petroleum, machinery, fabricated metal products, primary metals, electrical equipment, instruments, office equipment, motor vehicles, rubber, and textiles—have a percentage of twenty-five or lower, with the last four of those industries believing none of their inventions relied on the patent system to be introduced or developed.

History
1623 England adopts Statute of Monopolies, which has been acknowledged as a legal predecessor of the US patent law.

1789. U.S. Constitution in Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 authorizes Congress “to promote the Progress of. . . useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to. . . Inventors the exclusive Right to their. . . Discoveries." it is believed, that unlike most parts of the US Constitution, which were derived from the British legal tradition, the IP clause was based on the French practice.

1790. First Patent Act empowered the Secretary of State, the Secretary for the Department of War, and the Attorney General to examine patents for inventions deemed “sufficiently useful and important.”

1793. Second Patent Act eliminated examination of patent applications, emphasized enablement requirement. This Act did not have a requirement for claims, but it mandated a distinction "from...other things...and from other inventions" in the description: description shall "distinguish the same from all other things before known," and in "the case of any machine" shall, explain the "principle... by which it may be distinguished from other inventions."

1836. Third Patent Act re-introduced examination, recommended the use of patent claims. Subsequent case law developed rudimentary requirements for non-obviousness (Hotchkiss v. Greenwood), subject matter eligibility (Le Roy v. Tatham), written description (O’Reilly v. Morse) and the doctrine of equivalents (Winans v. Denmead).

1854. In Winans v. Denmead the US Supreme Court decided, that the interpretation of patent claims is a question of law, decided by a judge, while the finding of infringement is a question of fact, decided by a jury. This remains a binding precedent currently.

1870. Fourth Patent Act required the use of patent claims in the nearly exact language used today: “particularly point out and distinctly claim the part, improvement, or combination which he claims as his invention or discovery.”  The practice of dependent claims emerged afterwards.

1890. Sherman Antitrust Act introduced some remedies to limit abuses of patent monopoly. The SCOTUS under William O. Douglas developed case law on non-obviousness (see flash of genius ) and subject matter eligibility to limit proliferation of weak patents.

1952. Fifth Patent Act codified US patent law into Title 35 of the U.S. Code including previous case law on non-obviousness.

1980. US Congress established an ex parte reexamination to allow the USPTO to review validity of issued patents at the request of patent owners and third parties. However, the process was slow and usually favored patent owners in result.

1982. Establishment of U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, with exclusive jurisdiction over all patent appeals from the USPTO and federal district courts.

1984. Hatch-Waxman Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act encouraged generic pharmaceutical manufacturers to challenge the validity of wrongfully issued pharmaceutical patents.

1999. US Congress established an inter partes reexamination to allow the USPTO to review validity of issued patents with participation of third party challengers. However, just like the ex parte reexamination introduced earlier, this process failed to gain popularity, in part due to being slow and to barring subsequent civil litigation.

2006. In eBay v. MercExchange the SCOTUS ended the Federal Circuit’s practice of liberally granting injunctions in cases of alleged patent infringement. Instead the same traditional four-factor test of equity used outside of patent law is mandated.

2007. The SCOTUS created uncertainty in the non-obviousness determination by mixing it up with predictability in KSR v Teleflex, thus overruling "a clear, bright-line test in § 103 obviousness inquiries such as teaching-suggestion-motivation". Nevertheless, many legal commentators praised the ruling as the need for raising the non-obviousness bar was widely recognized.

2008. In Quanta v. LG Electronics the Supreme Court reversed the Federal Circuit’s ruling and strengthened patent exhaustion doctrine.

2011. Sixth Patent Act (America Invents Act) switched from first-to-invent to first-to-file.

2012-2013. In Mayo and Myriad the SCOTUS limited patentability of inventions based on newly-discovered natural phenomena, requiring a further "inventive concept" instead of routine applications.

2014. The US Supreme Court limited patentability of business methods, software patents and other abstract ideas in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International albeit stopped short of banning such patents completely.

2014. In a move widely regarded as directed against patent trolls, the SCOTUS's decision in Octane Fitness, LLC v. ICON Health & Fitness, Inc. made it easier to recover attorney fees from plaintiffs, who initiate and lose in "frivolous" patent lawsuits.

Concepts

 * All elements test
 * Assignor estoppel
 * Continuing patent application
 * Design patent
 * Doctrine of inherency
 * Doctrine of repair and reconstruction
 * Duty of candor
 * Duty of disclosure
 * Exhausted combination doctrine
 * First-sale doctrine
 * Flash of genius
 * Incredible utility
 * Inequitable conduct
 * Information disclosure statement (IDS)
 * Inter partes review
 * Interference proceeding
 * Large entity status
 * Markman hearing

 * Micro entity status
 * Non-provisional patent application
 * On-sale bar
 * Petition to make special
 * Printed matter (patent law)
 * Prosecution disclaimer
 * Prosecution history estoppel
 * Provisional application
 * Reduction to practice
 * Reissue application
 * Small entity status
 * Statutory Invention Registration
 * Submarine patent
 * Transitional phrase
 * United States Defensive Publication
 * Utility
 * X-Patent

Legislation

 * 28 USC 1498. This statute allows the US government to override patent protection (or contract another entity to do so) for public-use purposes. The patent owner can sue for limited compensation.
 * Invention Secrecy Act (1951)
 * Patent Act of 1790, First Patent Act - April 7, 1790
 * Patent Act of 1836
 * Patent Act of 1870
 * Patent Act of 1952
 * Patent Reform Act of 2005
 * Patent Reform Act of 2007
 * Patent Reform Act of 2009
 * Plant Patent Act (1930)

Other

 * American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA)
 * Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (BPAI)
 * Confederate Patent Office
 * Copyright law of the United States
 * United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC)
 * United States Court of Customs and Patent Appeals (CCPA)
 * United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
 * United States Patents Quarterly (USPQ)
 * United States trademark law
 * List of United States Supreme Court patent case law

title: United States patent law


text: User talk:130.15.129.18

title: User talk:130.15.129.18


text: Portal:Malaysia/Intro

authors: ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ

title: Portal:Malaysia/Intro


text:
User talk:JohnFitzpatrick

Welcome to the Wikipedia!
Welcome to the Wikipedia, JohnFitzpatrick! And thanks for your adding a link to the Participatory economics article...

Here are some perfunctory tips to speed your indoctrination into the Wikipedia experience:

 * Take a look at the Wikipedia Tutorial.
 * When it strikes your fancy, try to grasp some of the nuances at Manual of Style, Assume good faith and Policies and Guidelines.  But keep in mind the unique style you brought to the Wiki!
 * Don't worry about keeping up with the Jones' learning curve on NPOV, but be respectful of others' POV and use a neutral point of view; your unique perspective on the meaning of neutrality is invaluable!
 * If you need any help, post your question at the Help Desk.
 * Explore, be bold in editing, and, above all else, have fun!

And some odds and ends:

 * Policy Library
 * Utilities
 * Cite your sources
 * Verifiability
 * Wikiquette
 * Civility
 * Conflict resolution
 * Brilliant prose
 * Pages needing attention
 * Peer review
 * Bad jokes and other deleted nonsense
 * Village pump
 * Boilerplate text

You can sign your name on any page by typing 4 tildes: ~~~~.

Best of luck, JohnFitzpatrick, and have fun! Ombudsman 16:55, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

Appreciate your answers in Talk:Participatory economics
I asked most of those questions many months ago. But I'm too lazy/apathetic/shy to contact the parecon people directly.

Anyway, as a curious skeptic, I look forward to more of your answers. Hopefully, some of the answers can be fleshed out and moved to the main article -- especially if we can cite some sources.

Also, I'd like to flesh out some of the concern I have about parecon. I am open to the idea that many people might benefit from parecon but I oppose the idea that everyone should be coerced into adopting parecon. While reading part of Moving Forward: Program for a Participatory Economy, I was disappointed when Michael Albert stated his goal of wiping out the marketplace. Personally, I can imagine a world where parecon and the marketplace can complement each other.

I dislike capitalism's frequent erosion of cooperative commons but, on the other hand, I reject the notion that markets must be entired wiped out. I grew up on a farm and we sold our produce on a farmer's market; Albert's utter rejection of the market makes me think of the coercive collectivization of Soviet agriculture under Stalin.

WpZurp 02:28, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Have you added Talk:Participatory economics to your watchlist? If not, I have added some comments to parecon and made additional requests for feedback at . WpZurp 05:49, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:JohnFitzpatrick


text: Talk:Home at the Golden Light

title: Talk:Home at the Golden Light