Members wades_keys Posted December 23, 2009 Members Share Posted December 23, 2009 Buy a copy for me to use (you gotta get it before Jan. 11!) and I'll let you know what I think. You're an attorney.You're supposed to be using WordPerfect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members wades_keys Posted December 23, 2009 Members Share Posted December 23, 2009 I hate MSFT, but that patent is bull{censored}. "metacodes", with a document map that maps the metacodes back into the document itself? GTFO. There's even a design pattern for that, known as "Flyweight". {censored} software patents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members wades_keys Posted December 23, 2009 Members Share Posted December 23, 2009 I don't know any of the details of the "willfull infringement", but it is exceedingly common to do things like this with XML:Basic documentThe "Type" in the section node is what is known as an attribute - it is part of the XML specification.It seems that MSFT committed the cardinal sin of allowing the user of the product to define their own attributes for their document XML; a very obvious use of an existing standard technology.This submarine patent disgusts me - I'd better stop using XSL transforms and XSD's as well, since the "metacodes" and the actual document information are stored separately.I wonder if Altova has paid this company? They make an XML editor that can be seen as violating this patent - as do many other companies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted December 23, 2009 Author Moderators Share Posted December 23, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members oldivor Posted December 23, 2009 Members Share Posted December 23, 2009 +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members wades_keys Posted December 23, 2009 Members Share Posted December 23, 2009 http://yro.slashdot.org/story/09/12/22/1936214/Microsoft-Ordered-To-Pay-290M-Stop-Selling-Word But, what's astounding to me, is in 1995 I was using SGML as a method of separating the document content from its layout. The layout wasn't kept in a separate file, but there were mechanisms to apply publishing layout to SGML based on rules. That was the whole point of SGML and its predecessor GML. Heck, in 1995 Arbor Text had an SGML editor which could apply formatting to SGML documents for the purposes of publishing, and the company I worked for was helping people to install SGML editing and layout systems. In 1995 I designed and built (most of) the software for the following CD-ROM: "Berg, J. van den, Duijfjes-Vellekoop, G.G.J., Kunenborg, R. & Tenback, R. (1995). Marburger Index Datenbank, ein Wegweiser zur Kunst in Deutschland (CD-ROM). Munchen: K.G. Saur Verlag. " (*) It included several internal parsers, including one for a HTML-like language that separated the content of the database from the on-screen expression. Basically, my own miniature implementation of Mozilla. It was sold in musea throughout Germany. I guess that should count as prior art. I'm pretty sure we could dig up the sourcecode if asked nicely. I despise Microsoft, and wish they'd been broken up and Gates and Ballmer put behind bars for what they've done, but this patent is still absurd. The concepts have been around for forty years. The patent office is full of inept halfwits, and Microsoft's big failing here is that it's too cowardly to finally put its money into wiping out software patents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members wades_keys Posted December 23, 2009 Members Share Posted December 23, 2009 +1 I'll take a facepalm from a patent attorney, but you? GTFO. What are your I.T. credentials? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted December 23, 2009 Author Moderators Share Posted December 23, 2009 More quotes that do nothing to advance your point - assuming you have one this time. Awesome. Keep it up! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members oldivor Posted December 23, 2009 Members Share Posted December 23, 2009 I'll take a facepalm from a patent attorney, but you?GTFO.What are your I.T. credentials? My I.T. credentials? I read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted December 23, 2009 Author Moderators Share Posted December 23, 2009 My I.T. credentials? I read. Quality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members wades_keys Posted December 23, 2009 Members Share Posted December 23, 2009 More quotes that do nothing to advance your point - assuming you have one this time. Awesome. Keep it up! Quotes from other working I.T. professionals.I expected more from a patent attorney like yourself.You also didn't mention that the venue is Tyler Texas - the home of patent trolls.But that's okay - you goofballs don't have the brains to discuss this case with any degree of passion or intelligence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members t3ch Posted December 23, 2009 Members Share Posted December 23, 2009 I hate MSFT, but that patent is bull{censored}. "metacodes", with a document map that maps the metacodes back into the document itself? GTFO. There's even a design pattern for that, known as "Flyweight". {censored} software patents. I don't know any of the details of the "willfull infringement", but it is exceedingly common to do things like this with XML:Basic documentI actually said the same thing the last time this topic came up, when the lawsuit was first being filed. But eh, what can you do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted December 23, 2009 Author Moderators Share Posted December 23, 2009 But that's okay - you goofballs don't have the brains to discuss this case with any degree of passion or intelligence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Deep Bass Posted December 23, 2009 Members Share Posted December 23, 2009 I can see the benefit of using a standard format so everyone can read and modify. Too bad Word is the current standard. PDF is gaining ground, and hopefully will take over eventually. That way you won't be tied to one piece of software. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted December 23, 2009 Author Moderators Share Posted December 23, 2009 I actually said the same thing the last time this topic came up, when the lawsuit was first being filed. But eh, what can you do. Read the links? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members wades_keys Posted December 23, 2009 Members Share Posted December 23, 2009 I actually said the same thing the last time this topic came up, when the lawsuit was first being filed. But eh, what can you do. It's frustrating trying to explain how obvious this patent is to anyone not versed in comp-sci.I don't give a {censored} how technicaly inclined you are, unless and until you have studied and applied comp sci., you can't really see the absurdity of this patent claim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted December 23, 2009 Author Moderators Share Posted December 23, 2009 It's frustrating trying to explain how obvious this patent is to anyone not versed in comp-sci. I don't give a {censored} how technicaly inclined you are, unless and until you have studied and applied comp sci., you can't really see the absurdity of this patent claim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members GreaserMatt Posted December 23, 2009 Members Share Posted December 23, 2009 Their punishment should be to fix vista on everyone's computer for free... that would not be considered play money... oh, & I should get to kick Bill Gates in the nuts... twice... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members t3ch Posted December 23, 2009 Members Share Posted December 23, 2009 It's frustrating trying to explain how obvious this patent is to anyone not versed in comp-sci. I don't give a {censored} how technicaly inclined you are, unless and until you have studied and applied comp sci., you can't really see the absurdity of this patent claim. Which is why I stopped arguing over it. I obviously don't know anything about patents or law in general, but I do know that the contents of the patent are ridiculous. I came in, said my peace, and backed out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members wades_keys Posted December 23, 2009 Members Share Posted December 23, 2009 Log on to slashdot and explain your point of view to the many engineers there who feel as I do.I'm not sure where you get off looking down your nose at me the way you do - I've got more I.T. experience than you have patent law experience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members collinwho Posted December 23, 2009 Members Share Posted December 23, 2009 I've got more I.T. experience than you have patent law experience.This phrase just made me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted December 23, 2009 Author Moderators Share Posted December 23, 2009 I'm not sure where you get off looking down your nose at me the way you do - I've got more I.T. experience than you have patent law experience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted December 23, 2009 Author Moderators Share Posted December 23, 2009 but I do know that the contents of the patent are ridiculous.But you already know that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members t3ch Posted December 23, 2009 Members Share Posted December 23, 2009 which is why this next statement is funny: But you already know that. From everything I've read, it basically looks to be as if a firm patented using paper as a medium to display ideas to other lawyers. Using XML to bind documents together shouldn't really be a patentable technology. But I'm funny like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members King Kashue Posted December 23, 2009 Members Share Posted December 23, 2009 I obviously don't know anything about patents or law in general, but I do know that the contents of the patent are ridiculous.And I don't know much, but I know I love you...r comments in this thread... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.