Marty Fouts wrote:
> Factoid: 90% of all patents are never challenged, while 80% of those that
> are are overturned.
In otherwords, 2% of patents are successfully defended, just enough to
keep the serfs in line.
>"Going into court is throwing the dice."
If I am going to throw dice I'd much
On Wed, Oct 04, 2000 at 05:02:36PM +0200, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> Here's a gem of a claim from the main WAFL patent:
>
> "20. The method of claim 8 further comprising the step of using one or
> more of said read-only copies of said file system to back-up said
> blocks comprising one or
On Wed, Oct 04, 2000 at 05:02:36PM +0200, Daniel Phillips wrote:
Here's a gem of a claim from the main WAFL patent:
"20. The method of claim 8 further comprising the step of using one or
more of said read-only copies of said file system to back-up said
blocks comprising one or more
Marty Fouts wrote:
Factoid: 90% of all patents are never challenged, while 80% of those that
are are overturned.
In otherwords, 2% of patents are successfully defended, just enough to
keep the serfs in line.
"Going into court is throwing the dice."
If I am going to throw dice I'd much
Eirik Fuller wrote:
> Is that really your email address?
No, but my email address can easily be contructed putting together my
last name and innominate.de.
> I work at Network Appliance. I hate patents. I can't find anything in
> your position on patents that I disagree with.
I tried to be
"Jeff V. Merkey" wrote:
>
> I've allocated $20,000 US for this, but i doubt you will use all of it.
> Linux IP issues affect all of us since we ship Linux, so I am happy to
> pick up the tab. Tux is hot stuff, and we plan to use it, along with
> all the other great Linux stuff. Consider it our
"Jeff V. Merkey" wrote:
I've allocated $20,000 US for this, but i doubt you will use all of it.
Linux IP issues affect all of us since we ship Linux, so I am happy to
pick up the tab. Tux is hot stuff, and we plan to use it, along with
all the other great Linux stuff. Consider it our part
Eirik Fuller wrote:
Is that really your email address?
No, but my email address can easily be contructed putting together my
last name and innominate.de.
I work at Network Appliance. I hate patents. I can't find anything in
your position on patents that I disagree with.
I tried to be as
I've allocated $20,000 US for this, but i doubt you will use all of it.
Linux IP issues affect all of us since we ship Linux, so I am happy to
pick up the tab. Tux is hot stuff, and we plan to use it, along with
all the other great Linux stuff. Consider it our part to help Linux.
The
Daniel,
Andrew is the candidate for Attorney General for the State of Utah, and
informs he has has television and radio interviews all day tommorrow,
but promised he would get on it late tommorrow afternoon and get back to
you.
:-)
Jeff
Daniel Phillips wrote:
>
> "Jeff V. Merkey" wrote:
> >
Daniel Phillips wrote:
> Can I ask a stupid question: Who's paying for this?
Err, like I said it was stupid. A better question is "why"? OK, you
don't have to answer. It's 4:20 am here, I should have been asleep long
ago, till tomorrow.
--
Daniel
"patents never sleep"
-
To unsubscribe from
"Jeff V. Merkey" wrote:
> I've forwarded everything to Andrew ([EMAIL PROTECTED]). He will
> contact Malinkrodt and assign a patent attorney to work with you on
> this. Andy's direct line is 801-222-9635. Since the Linux Community is
> basically a "client" now, your communications with him
Daniel,
Sorry, this was directed to you about the phone number (Thomas can call
as well if he has info).
:-)
Jeff
"Jeff V. Merkey" wrote:
>
> I've forwarded everything to Andrew ([EMAIL PROTECTED]). He will
> contact Malinkrodt and assign a patent attorney to work with you on
> this.
Daniel Phillips wrote:
>
> "Jeff V. Merkey" wrote:
> > I am having Andrew McCullough review these patents to determine if there
> > are any infringement issues that may affect us. Whomever is concerned
> > her, if it would not be too much trouble, please forward what
> > documentation and
"Jeff V. Merkey" wrote:
> I am having Andrew McCullough review these patents to determine if there
> are any infringement issues that may affect us. Whomever is concerned
> her, if it would not be too much trouble, please forward what
> documentation and patent no.'s to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and
I am having Andrew McCullough review these patents to determine if there
are any infringement issues that may affect us. Whomever is concerned
her, if it would not be too much trouble, please forward what
documentation and patent no.'s to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and copy me at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and
"J. Dow" wrote:
>
> From: "Daniel Phillips" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > Yes, I know the game, Unisys played it with gif. Wait until it's in
> > widespread use then appear out of the woodwork and demand licence fees.
> > It's called submarining. It's evil. People and corporations who do it
> >
From: "Daniel Phillips" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Yes, I know the game, Unisys played it with gif. Wait until it's in
> widespread use then appear out of the woodwork and demand licence fees.
> It's called submarining. It's evil. People and corporations who do it
> are little better than thugs.
Chris Good wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> >Thomas Graichen forwarded me some interesting information from the
> >freebsd-fsdevel list regarding 3 patents held by Network Appliance
>
> A couple of points:
> First their patents are very much tied into their
On Tue, Oct 03, 2000 at 09:42:04AM -0700, Thomas Davis wrote:
> Ion Badulescu wrote:
...
> > For another fine example of GPL technology covered by a parent, check out:
> >
> > http://www.patents.ibm.com/details?pn=US06049528__
> >
> > This a patent filed by Sun in June 1997 and awarded in April
On Tue, 3 Oct 2000, Thomas Davis wrote:
> > For another fine example of GPL technology covered by a parent, check out:
> >
> > http://www.patents.ibm.com/details?pn=US06049528__
> >
> > This a patent filed by Sun in June 1997 and awarded in April 2000 which
> > covers very well the ethernet
Ion Badulescu wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Daniel Phillips wrote:
>
> > It is important that all technology used in GPL software be free of
> > patent restrictions.
>
> Indeed.
>
> For another fine example of GPL technology covered by a parent, check out:
>
>
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Daniel Phillips wrote:
> It is important that all technology used in GPL software be free of
> patent restrictions.
Indeed.
For another fine example of GPL technology covered by a parent, check out:
http://www.patents.ibm.com/details?pn=US06049528__
This a
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Daniel Phillips wrote:
>Thomas Graichen forwarded me some interesting information from the
>freebsd-fsdevel list regarding 3 patents held by Network Appliance
A couple of points:
First their patents are very much tied into their implementation
of WAFL, your
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Daniel Phillips wrote:
Thomas Graichen forwarded me some interesting information from the
freebsd-fsdevel list regarding 3 patents held by Network Appliance
A couple of points:
First their patents are very much tied into their implementation
of WAFL, your
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] Daniel Phillips wrote:
It is important that all technology used in GPL software be free of
patent restrictions.
Indeed.
For another fine example of GPL technology covered by a parent, check out:
http://www.patents.ibm.com/details?pn=US06049528__
This a patent
On Tue, 3 Oct 2000, Thomas Davis wrote:
For another fine example of GPL technology covered by a parent, check out:
http://www.patents.ibm.com/details?pn=US06049528__
This a patent filed by Sun in June 1997 and awarded in April 2000 which
covers very well the ethernet bonding device
On Tue, Oct 03, 2000 at 09:42:04AM -0700, Thomas Davis wrote:
Ion Badulescu wrote:
...
For another fine example of GPL technology covered by a parent, check out:
http://www.patents.ibm.com/details?pn=US06049528__
This a patent filed by Sun in June 1997 and awarded in April 2000 which
Chris Good wrote:
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Daniel Phillips wrote:
Thomas Graichen forwarded me some interesting information from the
freebsd-fsdevel list regarding 3 patents held by Network Appliance
A couple of points:
First their patents are very much tied into their
From: "Daniel Phillips" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yes, I know the game, Unisys played it with gif. Wait until it's in
widespread use then appear out of the woodwork and demand licence fees.
It's called submarining. It's evil. People and corporations who do it
are little better than thugs.
This
"J. Dow" wrote:
From: "Daniel Phillips" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yes, I know the game, Unisys played it with gif. Wait until it's in
widespread use then appear out of the woodwork and demand licence fees.
It's called submarining. It's evil. People and corporations who do it
are little
I am having Andrew McCullough review these patents to determine if there
are any infringement issues that may affect us. Whomever is concerned
her, if it would not be too much trouble, please forward what
documentation and patent no.'s to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and copy me at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and
"Jeff V. Merkey" wrote:
I am having Andrew McCullough review these patents to determine if there
are any infringement issues that may affect us. Whomever is concerned
her, if it would not be too much trouble, please forward what
documentation and patent no.'s to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and copy me
Daniel Phillips wrote:
"Jeff V. Merkey" wrote:
I am having Andrew McCullough review these patents to determine if there
are any infringement issues that may affect us. Whomever is concerned
her, if it would not be too much trouble, please forward what
documentation and patent no.'s to
Daniel,
Sorry, this was directed to you about the phone number (Thomas can call
as well if he has info).
:-)
Jeff
"Jeff V. Merkey" wrote:
I've forwarded everything to Andrew ([EMAIL PROTECTED]). He will
contact Malinkrodt and assign a patent attorney to work with you on
this.
"Jeff V. Merkey" wrote:
I've forwarded everything to Andrew ([EMAIL PROTECTED]). He will
contact Malinkrodt and assign a patent attorney to work with you on
this. Andy's direct line is 801-222-9635. Since the Linux Community is
basically a "client" now, your communications with him will be
Daniel Phillips wrote:
Can I ask a stupid question: Who's paying for this?
Err, like I said it was stupid. A better question is "why"? OK, you
don't have to answer. It's 4:20 am here, I should have been asleep long
ago, till tomorrow.
--
Daniel
"patents never sleep"
-
To unsubscribe from
Daniel,
Andrew is the candidate for Attorney General for the State of Utah, and
informs he has has television and radio interviews all day tommorrow,
but promised he would get on it late tommorrow afternoon and get back to
you.
:-)
Jeff
Daniel Phillips wrote:
"Jeff V. Merkey" wrote:
I've allocated $20,000 US for this, but i doubt you will use all of it.
Linux IP issues affect all of us since we ship Linux, so I am happy to
pick up the tab. Tux is hot stuff, and we plan to use it, along with
all the other great Linux stuff. Consider it our part to help Linux.
The
IANAL
That said, I would refer anyone interested in 'prior art' in patents to
http://www.ipmall.fplc.edu/ipcorner/bp98/welch.htm
especially the brief discussion on what 'prior art' is to the patent office.
Also, for those who believe that similar concepts will void patents, I would
suggest a
Alan Cox wrote:
> Its also very unlikely Network Appliance would both responding to you. Its
> not in their legal interest to admit lack of validity.
Yes, I know the game, Unisys played it with gif. Wait until it's in
widespread use then appear out of the woodwork and demand licence fees.
> patent restrictions. Unfortunately for Network Appliances, I developed
> all the essential concepts they describe in 1989 (the RAID optimization
> excepted, see below for what I think about that) and implemented them in
> a production system. In other words, I've got prior art; their patents
Thomas Graichen forwarded me some interesting information from the
freebsd-fsdevel list regarding 3 patents held by Network Appliance,
Inc., Santa Clara, CA that seem to describe much of the mechanism that
underlies Tux2. I haven't heard anything from any representative of
Network Appliance,
Thomas Graichen forwarded me some interesting information from the
freebsd-fsdevel list regarding 3 patents held by Network Appliance,
Inc., Santa Clara, CA that seem to describe much of the mechanism that
underlies Tux2. I haven't heard anything from any representative of
Network Appliance,
patent restrictions. Unfortunately for Network Appliances, I developed
all the essential concepts they describe in 1989 (the RAID optimization
excepted, see below for what I think about that) and implemented them in
a production system. In other words, I've got prior art; their patents
are
Alan Cox wrote:
Its also very unlikely Network Appliance would both responding to you. Its
not in their legal interest to admit lack of validity.
Yes, I know the game, Unisys played it with gif. Wait until it's in
widespread use then appear out of the woodwork and demand licence fees.
It's
46 matches
Mail list logo
