• Welcome to OS2World OLD-STATIC-BACKUP Forum.
 

News:

This is an old OS2World backup forum for reference only. IT IS READ ONLY!!!

If you need help with OS/2 - eComStation visit http://www.os2world.com/forum

Main Menu

Barnes & Noble Files 43 Pages of Prior Art to Microsoft Patents

Started by miturbide, 2011.11.19, 18:20:59

Previous topic - Next topic

miturbide

Just checking this news at OSNews.com.

B&N filed a "Prior Art" document (PDF) to court, which means that a lot of MS patents are not original and are based in other work.

Guess which OS is listed there? ;)
Martín Itúrbide
OS2World.com NewsMaster
Open Source Advocate

Skype - martiniturbide
Google Talk - martiniturbide@gmail.com

ivan

For anyone that wants more details on B&N v Microsoft, go to Groklaw  http://www.groklaw.net/ and check the various topics by pj.

ivan

Ben


MicroSoft has, (and still does), stunned the legal and business community, (at least those at the bottom), with its blatant and open practices of distilled corruption.

What people fail to understand is "how".

The answer is singular and obvious; MS is a corrupt organisation working with other more powerful and equally corrupt, organisations, (the two relevant in this case need not be written). The left hand always works with the right hand and never against it, while appearing to work as opposites. It's an old practice that is once again, reaching a peak.

In short and once again, nothing will happen to MS, while the "appearance" of justice-being-done, will be maintained.

MS is above the law.

Anyone that cannot see that by now, does not have eyes.

Look into the common past with Steve Jobs and Bill Gates, and into their auspicious early relations with IBM and connect the dots from then to now. The rest is obvious.

Little MicroLimp could never defeat the, (then), biggest company on earth, (WRT OS/2), without internal cooperation... not only within IBM, but within the legal system as well. Anyone that has been following the court documents involving MS over the years, already know this. Reading summaries will lead to the same conclusion.

And while it's good to know about another attempt at "justice", (or Just "Us" meaning not you or I), it is a show put on to distract the public, the left hand smacking the right while passing the loot behind the back as people watch the show in awed admiration... like little children watching Punch and Judy of old, all the while missing the allegorical meaning of it, in an open mockery of themselves, by the puppeteers.

In these two cases the audiences are the same; the non-participants. Us.

In summary, this "show" of the "Clash of the Titans" is a distraction and a mockery of those who think it is real.



PS
Does the reader know the difference between Mankind and Humankind? For contrary to popular belief, they are not synonymous and totally relevant.
Hint: Think allegorically.


miturbide


Another article:

"Operating system provided tabs. Another head-scratcher here, Microsoft is saying that it has the rights to "tabs that work like dividers in a notebook" that are OS-generated. What's interesting is IBM already proved this patent as invalid back in 1992 during the OS/2 days. Tabs are something that are present in all platforms on the market. Why wait until now to drag this dead horse back out?"
Martín Itúrbide
OS2World.com NewsMaster
Open Source Advocate

Skype - martiniturbide
Google Talk - martiniturbide@gmail.com

melf

Such patent claims are really ridiculous. Consider that tabs has been around in paper card indexes long way before computers even existed. Making virtual things look like real things is not much of innovation. Soon someone, maybe Apple (?) will claim that they have patent on the idea of a desktop...
/Mikael

Ben


A good point, Melf, however, the preexistence of something does not preclude a patent, nor negate the application for one.

And whomever applies for the patent first gets control of it, (assuming eventual acceptance... *patent pending*), regardless of who originally made the subject of the patent application, for how long it has been around, or how well dispersed it is.

For example, wheat and other plants, have been around forever and was not created by any person. However, Monsantos, (and other such companies), is patenting the DNA of all plant life, (preexisting or recently modified/engineered, not being differentiated), at a phenomenal rate. At one point it was not possible to apply for a patent for DNA of anything preexisting and living... that has changed in the passed ten years or so. (Do you understand the future implications of that... as directly impacting upon you?)

But like I said, it's all a farce anyway... to... keep... you... calm... and under the illusion of a warm, protective blanket... zzzZZZzzzZZZzzz...

Heheheh...

Personally, I'd like to see MS hammered for their violations and OS/2 resuscitated... but neither will ever happen...

It makes for conversation though... as long as there's no weight given to the process.  8)  For to live in the illusion of a decent and lawful world, prevents one from taking the necessary actions to making this one decent and lawful. The first step is always the hardest and that's acceptance of Truth... the opposite of TV, (as representative of all media/propaganda).

Here on this forum, in this thread, we are talking about the illusions/reality of the patenting process and a fair and impartial system of laws and justice, (just us, meaning the high born exclusively).

Of course, I'm just summarizing and packaging that which is there... slowly simmering... already known in the back of everyone's mind. Doing so for the sake of simplicity and clarity.

And therein lies the value that justifies the effort.


melf

In fact Ben, I think an invention to be patented has to be new and inventive, meaning not known and used by others in the world before. You can't apply for a patent on anything not earlier patented. So with regard to tabs "working like dividers in a notebook", ..well I doubt that this could be regarded as "not known" or "inventive".

About grain and maybe animals..well that's another and much more unpleasant story where profit meet ethics.

/Mikael

abwillis

Quote from: melf on 2011.11.22, 16:04:35
In fact Ben, I think an invention to be patented has to be new and inventive, meaning not known and used by others in the world before. You can't apply for a patent on anything not earlier patented. So with regard to tabs "working like dividers in a notebook", ..well I doubt that this could be regarded as "not known" or "inventive".
A patent search is supposed to be performed prior to issuing a patent, however, it searches patents.   My Grandpa had several patents but one he applied for was rejected based on an existing patent of something entirely different but the principle was applied even so.  BN is bringing up "prior art",  if it can be shown that a patent was not new and inventive then it can be thrown out but but it has to be proven (even if it seems patently obvious).  The silly thing is having patents on software anyhow... it is copyrightable should not be patentable (i.e. a desktop, a folder, a tab, etc. which have existed in real world for years).

RobertM

What's really retarded is that Microsoft KNEW (without a doubt) of the prior art when they filed the tabbed patent and various of the internet related patents. They had the technology cross licensing agreement for OS/2 that gave them access to everything, and they'd been following and trying to kill Netscape for years.


|
|
Kirk's 5 Year Mission Continues at:
Star Trek New Voyages
|
|


Ben


That's not unusual, Robert; It's typical. Just about every lawsuit that you check into regarding MS, yields similar results; Premeditation; Above-law status.

Just look up the interview with the head of Netware from a few years back, and listen to what he had to say about MS and their predatory, law-defying, practices, with respect to some of the "information sharing" they took part in.

That epitomizes and encapsulates things for those that don't like to do research.

For those that have an ability to see deeper into the well-chosen words of the news feeds, many things will become clear.

For those that take the nightly news intravenously, pull out the needle first; Allow time for the dope to clear your system.

And...

For those that don't mind looking into the seedier nature, down the backdoor-tunnel where the elite dwell, look into B. Gates' practices after he became a charity. There you will clearly see what the term "charity" really means, (as opposed to the word), and how come B.G. had to wait years to get that rite... did I say "rite"... surely I meant "right".

Hmm...

Which do you think is more appropriate? Do you know the differences between the two words?
And is there any?

Not as much as the average man might think.