[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Hi Bob Wyman,
thanks for the contribution, however, I'd state that you or, on a more
globally view,
we all would have to consider the inclination of rejections of the
claims of the patent in
question.
First, I am, for one very relieved to see that this patent is overdue
and it is prior-art.
But, as being a still observer for a long time being, seeing many of my
so-called prior art inventions
being finally implemented by some or the other, mostly by Microsoft et
al, with all of them being just internal
thinking of what could be done or the other, but that is the way it goes
I think, as there are more brilliant brains than
mine abroad. However, I do not believe in the U.S. patent offices for
being the authority to grant such patents, or
even the EU or more local patent offices, such as the German patents office.
Therefore, I have the strong believe that the U.S. patents office is as
the whole of the U.S. authorities
or legislation, they listen to what economy and finally lobbyists tell
them, sorry if I am mislead and am lead to such believe
by current and past observations. As such, I believe that many patents
held by Microsoft or other big players residing in the
U.S., even IBM, are due to prior-art and need to be revealed as such.
Hell, I wonder why they, Microsoft, ever could be granted a patent on
Cookies, as that is clearly an invention by Netscape and that they
, the Cookies, were clearly meant to store such things as IDs and other
informations that could easily be referred and identified by any
server-side application, and storage of server-side ids that identifies
a user by her id and a database stored tuple with a primary key or
whatsoever, complementing this id stored in the Cookie?
Is there really no prior art to that prior to late 1995, which they
claim to be rightfully theirs and their invention? I do not think so,
as Microsoft, beyond bashing Microsof that is, was always the last one
to achieve and grasp such, let's call it
public knowledge or best-practise, or whatsoever.
As such, what is the IT-American public to do against such patents filed
by Microsoft and other big players that build upon
public knowledge or at least common practise?
This is my one true question, what are you going to do against Microsoft
and the others, or are you just going to sit still and
just wait, and see you're publicly accessible inventions just go to hell
while they are filing patent after patent based on your
inventions, without any real ownership or personal inclination or
craftsmanship?
Best regards,
Carsten
PS: I'm residing in the EU (Germany that is) and we still have to fight
software patents down, as they still
are not quite settled in these realms for now. And, personally I fear
that lobbyists of the American held software companies
will still find a way to fight these software patents into the EU
legislations. However, I hope that they will not succeed,
and f*ck god, I hope that they will not succeed.
Bob Wyman wrote:
>Dennis Sosnoski wrote:
>
>>I think dramatic change is needed, and a victory
>>by Eolas looks to me to be the event most likely
>>to bring about such change. The amount of money
>>involved is pocket change for Microsoft in any case.
>>
> So, you're saying we should sit back and "sacrifice" several
>hundred million dollars of Microsoft's money and mess up their product
>plans in order to teach folk that the problem of bad patents is real?
> Sorry, I'm just not quite that cold. Neither Microsoft nor
>anyone else, no matter how small or large, deserves to be "sacrificed"
>in such a manner. In this country (the United States) we generally
>work on the idea that everyone has a right to justice and equal
>treatment in our courts. These rights aren't properly suspended when
>it becomes convenient to create an "example" -- even if, as you
>suggest, the money wouldn't be a big loss for Microsoft. In the
>country where this case is being pursued, the goal is to provide
>justice to *all* -- independent of their means.
> But, it's hard to tell where people are from in mailing
>lists... Perhaps you're not an American? Or, maybe if you are, perhaps
>you just slept through that bit about the Constitution when you were
>in school...
>
> bob wyman
>
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
>initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
>
>The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
>
>To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
>manager: <http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/index.php>
>
|
