__/ [ M ] on Wednesday 17 May 2006 18:16 \__
> Barry Margolin wrote:
>
>> In article <4658657.aGJ095cvNI@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
>> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> __/ [ theodp@xxxxxxxxx ] on Wednesday 17 May 2006 04:40 \__
>>>
>>> > http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/000395.php
>>> >
>>> > It Only Takes One Determined Individual to Bring Down a Patent
>>> >
>>> > A lone blogger may have succeeded in getting Amazon's 1-Click Patent
>>> > cut short. The '411 patent, assigned to Amazon, is known as the 1-Click
>>> > Patent for its claim on ordering items on the web by "clicking" just
>>> > once. Based on material submitted by New Zealander and Lord of the
>>> > Rings choreographer Peter Calveley, the USPTO ordered a reexamination
>>> > of Amazon's 1-Click Patent....
>>>
>>> What about the smileys?
>>>
>>> http://news.zdnet.co.uk/business/0,39020645,39210396,00.htm
>>>
>>> Microsoft frowned at for smiley patent
>>
>> Have they (or you) actually read the patent? They didn't patent
>> smileys. They patented a technique for users to create and transmit
>> their own custom emoticons. Existing systems that translate smileys
>> into graphical icons have a hard-coded list of smileys that they
>> recognize. Microsoft's patent allows the user to add their own, and
>> assign a character sequence that they type to represent it.
>>
>
> I haven't read the patent, but what you are describing here just sounds
> like a natural extention to me, rather like a user configuration file that
> thousands of applications use all the time to extend their functionality.
Moreover, this seems like a rather natural extension to me. You could
categorise this as 'tailoring' or 'customisation'.
> Our software allows you write a script, attach it to a button, (bitmap of
> your own design), which you can then put on a toolbar. Press the button and
> the script runs. Exactly the same sort of thing, and our software has been
> doing it for years. Hardly novel!
^^^^^
Pun could be intended.
>>> Or the swing...
>>>
>>> http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6368227.html
>>
>> Are you sure that one's real? I tried to find it on the PTO's web site,
>> but couldn't.
The following was published in Forbes yesterday:
http://www.forbes.com/home/businessinthebeltway/2006/05/15/ebay-scotus-patent-ruling-cx_jh_0516scotus.html
Supreme Court Buries Patent Trolls
,----[ Quote ]
| The U.S. Supreme Court has tipped the balance in patent disputes ever
| so slightly toward the users of patented technology and away from
| inventors, owners of intellectual property and the hated "patent
| trolls"--companies that make money by suing for infringement of
| patents they own but don't use.
`----
This seems to apply rather nicely to the example above, which by all means
was not fake.
Best wishes,
Roy
PS - <M>, note that KNode reduces followup to just one newsgroup (not ours)
--
Roy S. Schestowitz | Useless fact: 21978 x 4 = 21978 backwards
http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE GNU/Linux ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
6:45pm up 20 days 1:42, 9 users, load average: 0.33, 0.46, 0.54
http://iuron.com - help build a non-profit search engine
|
|
