On 17/11/10 7:26 AM, David G. Koontz wrote:
On 17/11/10 9:01 AM, David G. Koontz wrote:
A. US6704870, granted on March 9, 2004 (Yes, published)
Sony asserted prior art against this patent in the 2007 case before
agreeing
Certicom's motion to end the lawsuit, which was granted without
prejudice.
On 2010-11-18 8:42 AM, Ian G wrote:
What does that mean?
It means that Sony pointed out that Certicom's claim is as full of shit
as we all know it to be, and that the court case ended without the
court, which found Certicom's claim and Sony's defense equally
incomprehensible, finding for or against anyone.
Which is pretty much the standard outcome of these cases, since neither
the courts, the lawyers, not the patent office, have the necessary
skills to comprehend these patents.
_______________________________________________
cryptography mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
