On Saturday 14 August 2004 12:40 am, Martin Konold wrote:
Side note: Lets hope that no 1$107 gets the idea to patent such a mechanism
as it just happend recently to us KDE people. (A KDE person had a UI idea
and presented it on a KDE ml. KDE implemented this idea in the following
months but MS
Am Sunday 15 August 2004 15:21 schrieb Jeremy Kitchen:
Hi,
this is serious off topic so I will only make a very short comment.
following months but MS took the idea, added the obvious and patented it
:-(. MS even cites the KDE ml as the source of the initial idea.)
IANAL... but
On Sun, 2004-08-15 at 21:02, Martin Konold wrote:
IANAL... but wouldn't that count as 'prior art' ?
No, basically MS patented the obvious addition not mentioned in the publically
posted email.
Then can't it be appealed as patents are supposed to be for non-obvious
inventions? Maybe the
On Sun, Aug 15, 2004 at 10:09:27PM +0100, Kevin Spicer wrote:
No, basically MS patented the obvious addition not mentioned in the publically
posted email.
Then can't it be appealed as patents are supposed to be for non-obvious
inventions? Maybe the EFF or PubPat could help?
Sure
