[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: Prior Art For Microsoft's XUL Patent Wanted

• To: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Subject: Re: Prior Art For Microsoft's XUL Patent Wanted
• From: Seth Johnson <seth.johnson@R...>
• Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 14:35:39 -0500
• Cc: "'gtn@r...'" <gtn@r...>, xml-dev@l..., phm@a...
• Organization: Real Measures
• References: <15725CF6AFE2F34DB8A5B4770B7334EE03F9F094@h...>

Run, don't walk, to ffii.org and support their work.  They recently stalled
the EU Commission's attempt to reverse the written law for Europe (which
says software "as such" cannot be patented) -- don't you know those lawyers
have been using those two words "as such" to reverse the meaning entirely. 
At the behest of the pro-software patent establishment, the European Patent
Office has been granting software patents in direct contravention of the
law, based on the rationale that since software is "just another field of
technology," like hardware (think FPGAs), it should be patentable.

When they recently introduced a "Directive on Computer-Implemented
Inventions" in the EU Parliament pretending to "clarify" the matter, but
really attempting to codify their existing practice, it was ffii that got
the Members of Parliament to amend the law so thoroughly -- peppering it
with clauses that made it clear that inventions that made use of software
(the example commonly presented is mobile phones) might be patentable, but
not the software within them -- that they dropped the matter.

Help them and EuroLinux, and everybody else, to identify as many members of
the public, representatives of public interest groups, industries,
constituencies of all sorts as possible, and get them to stand up against
the attempt to gut the one definitive piece of legal code on the planet that
states clearly that software is different and cannot be patented.

Seth Johnson

"Bullard, Claude L (Len)" wrote:
> 
> As I looked into it, I came to the same conclusion.
> A bit of a red herring ... XAML and XUL won't be
> patented if the USPTO stays alert and the patent
> seekers do due diligence diligently. (ouch..).  I
> was surprised as I looked into inductive interfaces
> to see MS mystified that they had not originated
> the idea given any mil tech writer's experience
> with the LSAR records for repair procedures and
> that background informed MID design.  This stuff
> just isn't rocket science.
> 
> The EOLAS patent is generating defensive patenting
> elsewhere.  For now, it is a brush war, but we
> need some sort of forward looking strategy if we
> are to stay focused on global software (software
> developed in the open by individuals and groups
> with a focus on global use and distribution).
> Standards aren't enough and best of breed leads
> to reduced functionality on delivery.
> 
> len
> 
> From: Gavin Thomas Nicol [mailto:gtn@r...]
> 
> On Friday 12 December 2003 01:57 pm, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
> > Do a web Search on US Navy MID and ISO ISMID.
> 
> I also have some prior art in using XML or XML+XSL for generating UI's at
> runtime, but I think this patent is specifically about the .HTA files... the
> 
> patent is all about HTML, so it's possible that something as simple as using
> 
> XHTML would fall outside the scope of the patent.
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
> initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
> 
> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>

-- 

DRM is Theft!  We are the Stakeholders!

New Yorkers for Fair Use
http://www.nyfairuse.org

[CC] Counter-copyright: http://realmeasures.dyndns.org/cc

I reserve no rights restricting copying, modification or distribution of
this incidentally recorded communication.  Original authorship should be
attributed reasonably, but only so far as such an expectation might hold for
usual practice in ordinary social discourse to which one holds no claim of
exclusive rights.

• References:
  • RE: Prior Art For Microsoft's XUL Patent Wanted
    • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>

• Prev by Date: RE: patterns and restrictions
• Next by Date: Re: Prior Art For Microsoft's XUL Patent Wanted
• Previous by thread: RE: Prior Art For Microsoft's XUL Patent Wanted
• Next by thread: Re: Prior Art For Microsoft's XUL Patent Wanted
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread