[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 05:02:03 GMT > From: "Paul Ferguson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [funsec] TrendMicro goes... > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: [email protected] > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > - -- Nick FitzGerald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Has Trend ever tried to enforce this patent against (originally UK > company?) Integralis (or various of the other companies that have > subsequently owned that IP)?? > > See also: > > http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_1998_Jan_26/ai_20173448 > > - - ferg > > > p.s. Also, in response to [EMAIL PROTECTED] message on > historical AV programs in the late 1980's - early 1990's: > As Nick (and others) will attest, I was very active in that > community back then. :-) > > It bears repeating that this is not about prior art in AV > scanning, but rather, doing so on a gateway device (e.g. appliance) > which Trend Micro was the first to do -- hence the patent. > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: PGP Desktop 9.6.3 (Build 3017) > > wj8DBQFHoVZFq1pz9mNUZTMRAp9FAJ4rTZYQZTr+8+iqf2QpzfRglaKWBACeKM7t > 5GiF6k5L93kihKNSpKYPDQE= > =Q4d1
My apologies for questioning you Ferg, and I do not mean that facetiously, but wouldn't a device such as a computer running IPCop with ClamAV on it count as similar to TM's patent? And hence, prior "art"? Sincerely, Daniel H. Renner President Los Angeles Computerhelp A division of Computerhelp, Inc. 818-352-8700 http://losangelescomputerhelp.com _______________________________________________ Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
