Microsoft Patents Sudo?!!
Nov 11, 2009, 21:03 (10 Talkback[s])
(Other stories by Pamela Jones)
"And how do you like the final wording of the patent?:
""Although the invention has been described in language specific
to structural features and/or methodological steps, it is to be
understood that the invention defined in the appended claims is not
necessarily limited to the specific features or steps described.
Rather, the specific features and steps are disclosed as preferred
forms of implementing the claimed invention."
"Please don't ever again write to me that software patents are
good for us because they include full disclosure, so others can
build on the "invention".
"And to the USPTO, whose representative just argued in oral
argument in Bilski that software should be patentable and that
software can make a regular computer a special use computer, and
all that drivel, please put those thoughts together with this
patent, and consider the market implications of giving anyone that
kind of monopoly, and especially the implications of giving it to a
monopoly named Microsoft. It's like giving a serial killer his very
own machine gun, stronger than any gun his intended victims are
allowed to purchase. You have to ask, what were you thinking?"
- Microsoft violates GPL(Nov 11, 2009)
- SFLC tech director finds one new GPL violator every day(Nov 10, 2009)
- Analysis: The �Lorenzo Jones� case emerges (Bilski)(Nov 10, 2009)
- Microsoft Lawyers Will be Busy in the Next Few Months(Oct 30, 2009)
- Mono and Samba: smell the difference, says Allison(Oct 17, 2009)
- Final Bilski Briefs Filed - Microsoft, Google, FFII, ABA, etc.(Oct 15, 2009)