Submission Summary: 0 pending, 134 declined, 77 accepted (211 total, 36.49% accepted)
" . . . the Federal Circuit has failed to implement a workable standard—or, frankly, any standard at all—as to what computer- and Internet-implemented inventions are patentable. The resulting legal instability has driven up the already-ballooning costs of patent litigation . .
In my opinion, it appears that main patent simply added "on the computer" to an existing process, namely in an business transaction between two parties, there is a third party that ensures that payment is made and is facilitated. The computer made the transaction faster and more automated as noted by Judge Lourie in his opinion.
“simply appending generic computer functionality to lend speed or efficiency to the performance of an otherwise abstract concept does not meaningfully limit claim scope for purposes of patent eligibility.
"Microsoft is investigating a situation affecting a limited number of users updating their Windows RT devices to Windows RT 8.1. As a result, we have temporarily removed the Windows RT 8.1 update from the Windows Store. We are working to resolve the situation as quickly as possible and apologize for any inconvenience. We will provide updates as they become available"
While update problems are not new to software, could this be a consequence of MS not releasing 8.1 RTM to developers? Developers may have experienced problems earlier and alerted MS before it went live.
IBM not only responded that there were no claims left, they objected to the term "mooted" as IBM points out: "The claims are not moot; they are barred under principles of issue preclusion (or collateral estoppel)." From my understanding, "moot" means unsettled but unimportant which IBM points out that the claims were decided and SCO cannot re-litigate them again. IBM also points out in that Project Monterrey in VI was not a "joint venture" as SCO describes it.
An authority is a person who can tell you more about something than you really care to know.