xml-dev - RE: British Telecom owns Hyperlink?

["Dan Mabbutt" <Seigfried@msn.com>]

OK ... Thinking Dilbert, I can imagine one reason why BT did this that
doesn't put them in a pathetic light.  (If my idea has any truth to it, all
of us are in a pathetic light for allowing it to happen.)

My experience is that lawyers will sue for any cause that might yield fees
for themselves. If a lawyer can convince a court to entertain a suit against
management for not protecting an "asset" of the company (the hyperlink
patent rights), fees can be generated.  What if BT management is simply
protecting themselves from frivolous lawsuits by filing frivolous patent
applications?


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-xml-dev@xml.org [mailto:owner-xml-dev@xml.org]On Behalf Of Bob
Kline
Sent: Monday, June 26, 2000 10:42 AM
To: Steve Poirot
Cc: XML Developers List
Subject: Re: British Telecom owns Hyperlink?

On Mon, 26 Jun 2000, Steve Poirot wrote:

> From the Financial Times:
>
> see www.financialtimes.com..
>
> AFX (UK): BT TO SEEK TO EXERCISE HYPERLINK PATENT IN U.S. THROUGH
> SCIPHER

The only explanation I can think of which doesn't put BT in a pathetic
light is that they're pulling our collective leg, trying to demonstrate
with an obvious hoax the absurdity of some of the most recent
aberrations in the U.S. Patent Office.  Think Dilbert.  :->}

Bob Kline



***************************************************************************
This is xml-dev, the mailing list for XML developers.
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@xml.org&BODY=unsubscribe%20xml-dev
List archives are available at http://xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
***************************************************************************