Am 2009-08-12 15:11:42, schrieb Gene Heskett:
> Distribution is probably the key word.  I don't know how they think in a 
> legal 
> world, but what the judge meant was to stop the patent violation.
> 
> IMO this patent will not, cannot stand.  There is much prior art, some of it 
> has to be prior to the patent application.  I can recall back in RH9 days 
> getting exasperated and freezing my own libxml version because every update 
> brought new problems, breaking seemingly unrelated apps just because the tool 
> they parsed their nameofprogram.rc file with was broken yet again.

Do you know that the patent with the number 5,787,449 is date 1994-06-02
and I am not realy sure, you will find much prior art...  However, it is
very questionable, why l4i fille the lawsuit now and not for some years.

Thanks, Greetings and nice Day/Evening
    Michelle Konzack
    Systemadministrator
    Tamay Dogan Network
    Debian GNU/Linux Consultant

-- 
Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/
##################### Debian GNU/Linux Consultant #####################
<http://www.tamay-dogan.net/>                 Michelle Konzack
<http://www.can4linux.org/>                   Apt. 917
<http://www.flexray4linux.org/>               50, rue de Soultz
Jabber [email protected]           67100 Strabourg/France
IRC    #Debian (irc.icq.com)                  Tel. DE: +49 177 9351947
ICQ    #328449886                             Tel. FR: +33  6  61925193

Attachment: signature.pgp
Description: Digital signature

Reply via email to