Hi Folks, I know it's way off topic (off practically any topic, though perhaps soon to becone topical). But I cannot resist sharing this unusually vivid description: http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6881120-claims.html Best wishes to all, Ted. -------------------------------------------------------------------- E-Mail: (Ted Harding) <Ted.Harding@manchester.ac.uk> Fax-to-email: +44 (0)870 094 0861 Date: 15-Oct-07 Time: 18:15:24 ------------------------------ XFMail ------------------------------
(Ted Harding) wrote:
Hi Folks, I know it's way off topic (off practically any topic, though perhaps soon to becone topical). But I cannot resist sharing this unusually vivid description:
Haha! To bring it slightly back round to topic, that's very similar sort of wording and use of description that Microsoft used in their patent of the emoticon. "A method, comprising: selecting pixels to be used as an emoticon; assigning a character sequence to the pixels; and transmitting the character sequence to a destination to allow for reconstruction of the pixels at the destination." Another one they patented was the "<other user> is typing a message" which appears on MSN Messenger as the other person is typing. As a result, Pidgin (aka. Gaim) has to use a little icon of a hand over a keyboard because those words in that combination have been patented. You can patent anything these days.. Very interesting stuff. My housemate is studying IP law this year, so I'll be telling him whenever I read anything on Groklaw about Microsoft being their usual silly selves with patenting things. --Simon
On Mon, 2007-10-15 at 18:28 +0100, Simon Elliott wrote:
You can patent anything these days.. Very interesting stuff. My housemate is studying IP law this year, so I'll be telling him whenever I read anything on Groklaw about Microsoft being their usual silly selves with patenting things.
"Wayne is typing a message" The problem with patents is that you play the silly game or you become a victim of the silly game. Patents are viral in their very nature because even if you never intend to enforce ownership of some so called intellectual property you need a portfolio of patents to defend yourself with. "Prior art" is broken as there have been numerous instances where there has been clear prior art yet the patent has been filed anyway. IMO a new system of peer review and careful moderation is the only way to save the situation. The system is broken and the quicker it collapses under it's own weight the better. :-)
** Simon Elliott <alug@sionide.net> [2007-10-15 18:31]:
(Ted Harding) wrote:
Hi Folks, I know it's way off topic (off practically any topic, though perhaps soon to becone topical). But I cannot resist sharing this unusually vivid description:
Haha! To bring it slightly back round to topic, that's very similar sort of wording and use of description that Microsoft used in their patent of the emoticon.
"A method, comprising: selecting pixels to be used as an emoticon; assigning a character sequence to the pixels; and transmitting the character sequence to a destination to allow for reconstruction of the pixels at the destination."
Another one they patented was the "<other user> is typing a message" which appears on MSN Messenger as the other person is typing. As a result, Pidgin (aka. Gaim) has to use a little icon of a hand over a keyboard because those words in that combination have been patented.
You can patent anything these days.. Very interesting stuff. My housemate is studying IP law this year, so I'll be telling him whenever I read anything on Groklaw about Microsoft being their usual silly selves with patenting things. ** end quote [Simon Elliott]
...and to bring it even closer back on topic... http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20071011205044141 ...a patent infringment filed against Red Hat and Novell, and the first involving Linux. Patent No. 5,072,412 for a User Interface with Multiple Workspaces for Sharing Display System Objects issued Dec. 10, 1991. It will be interesting to follow, and also interesting that a few Microsoft execs have transferred to the parent company of the of those holding the patent. -- Paul Tansom | Aptanet Ltd. | http://www.aptanet.com/ | 023 9238 0001 ====================================================================== Registered in England | Company No: 4905028 | Registered Office: Crawford House, Hambledon Road, Denmead, Waterlooville, Hants, PO7 6NU
participants (4)
-
Paul Tansom -
Simon Elliott -
ted.harding＠nessie.mcc.ac.uk -
Wayne Stallwood