[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: XPointer and the '729 patent
- From: Ben Trafford <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: email@example.com
- Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 09:56:09 -0800
At 12:48 PM 2/16/2001 -0500, Eve L. Maler wrote:
>After reviewing and considering the comments that have been submitted
>since the time of the posting, we offer to do the following:
>1 Request a reexamination of the '729 Patent at our own expense.
> As part of the reexamination, we request that you provide us with
> any prior art of which you are aware so that Sun may submit any
> relevant prior art to the U.S. Patent Office.
>2 Consider specific requests for changes to the terms.
> In order to accommodate the concerns of the development community,
> we are willing to consider alternative terms. We have already
> received some comments along these lines, and additional comments
> are welcome.
>Information on BOTH prior art and suggested changes to the terms should
>be sent to Sun by 7 MARCH 2001 at mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org.
>We are hopeful that this explanation addresses the concerns voiced to
>date, and look forward to seeing your additional comments.
Hurray for Sun! This is the kind of reaction that vastly
encourages good relations among those of us developing standards work. And
a special thanks to Eve for seeing this matter through.
I think I'll be sleeping better this evening...and doubtlessly,
even better once we see the final resolution of this matter. I'm convinced
it'll be positive. I will certainly be submitting my own comments to the
email address provided by Sun.