Lee Howard wrote:
Brian West wrote:
No it is really about faxing. As someone that has first hand
knowledge of the case outlined on Groklaw, it is in fact about faxing.
Go read the two patents very carefully! If you email it you break
638, if you store it you break 021.
How, then, do these patents themselves not violate Brooktrout's own
portfolio of earlier fax-specific patents covering virtually the same
things?
You could similarly ask how Brooktrout got patents on doing things
common at the time. Or why people are still wary of using GIF, even
though the Unisys patent on LZW has expired.... but IBMs identical
patent has not.
Regards,
Steve
_______________________________________________
Asterisk-Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
