Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:1994 (Score 2) 131

Odd that the article doesn't mention the patents at hand are continuations from 5,752,011 dating from in fact 1994.

I do also note the very long list of prior art on each patent. They were found to be novel or inventive over all that prior art. One would have to read the entire file wrapper on PAIR to understand why they were granted over that. Not a fun/easy/quick job.

Comment Re:Ah, Apple... (Score 1) 268

Apple hasn't "got away with" anything yet. This is just an application and shockingly the summary got this bit right for once. Oh yes, I know what your reply to this is going to be "yeah but the PTO let all sorts through" or you'll mention something about 1-click and how that got patented or how someone patented a cat toy or a wheel or some such other bullshit. How about just waiting to see, maybe the examiner knows how to do his job more than you know.

Comment Stop with the prior art comments! (Score 1, Insightful) 243

Can we please stop the comments about prior art.

Suppose you have "great open source software" everyone loves it and has been using it since v 1.0 (wow, I know it got out of beta!) came out on April 1st 2000. Now today Microsoft says "haha, no-one has patented this great piece of software let's steal it, lolz".

First to invent - lolz we totally have notarized log books that show we actually did this way back in February 2000, see you in court"

First to file - v 1.0 is prior art, end of story, Microsoft's patent application isn't novel, you can all carry on using the software without any problem

Slashdot Top Deals

"Gotcha, you snot-necked weenies!" -- Post Bros. Comics

Working...