decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
More on Sender ID - A Little Water Under That Bridge? and MS-EU Hearing Report
Friday, October 01 2004 @ 08:39 PM EDT

You don't want to miss this article by Roblimo on NewsForge on "Why Microsoft's Sender ID patent should not be granted," if only for the quotation by Dan Ravicher in response to all the worries about Microsoft applying for a patent on Sender ID. He says, "A patent application is like asking a girl out on a date. It's a long way from having a baby." The article reports there are two others who implemented the same idea before Microsoft applied for their patent. And it turns out one of them was invited last year to a chat with a Utah legal firm, Workman Nydegger, which was later listed on the Microsoft Sender ID patent application. At issue is the question: was all prior art listed on their patent application? The firm has an article on patent protection and a funny, to me, picture on its homepage. It might not strike you as funny, if you haven't been around as many lawyers as I have.

Law.com has an AP report on Thursday's events in Europe in the court procedure regarding MS's attempts to get a stay of compliance during its appeal of the EU Commission's antitrust ruling regarding Windows Media Player and sharing information with competitors. According to the account, Microsoft is arguing that they would be irreparably harmed by immediate enforcement. However, note what happened during the session, where Novell pops up:

"Much of the questioning involved such technical issues as whether the specifications demanded by the EU mean competitors would 'get to know more than they need to know,' as Microsoft asserts. . . . "He [the judge, Bo Vesterdorf] then raised a point mentioned earlier by a lawyer for Novell, Inc., which distributes the rival Linux operating system, who argued that Microsoft had offered to provide the same information during aborted settlement talks early this year. . . .

"Another high-ranking EU official, Cecilio Madero, told the judge that Microsoft had been 'ready to give more than what we were asking by our decision,' causing a flurry of activity on Microsoft's side of the courtroom.

"Microsoft's chief lawyer, Brad Smith, who had not planned to address the court, told the judge there were 'some aspects where we were prepared to go farther,' citing security of networks as an example. 'We were prepared to enter into an agreement even though at the top of the company we felt it would mean irreparable harm in a number of areas,' he said.

"A negotiated settlement would have meant avoiding a fine and years of litigation and uncertainty, he said. 'That doesn't mean the cost or the harm was taken lightly,' he added."

Finally, our archives would not be complete without the patent on "A method of styling hair to cover partial baldness using only the hair on a person's head. The hair styling requires dividing a person's hair into three sections and carefully folding one section over another." This nonobvious and altogether new invention not only was granted a patent, U.S. Patent #4,022,227, it has now won the Ig Nobel prize for 2004 in the Engineering category. Here's a picture of the event last year, and tomorrow, for those of you in the Boston area, there will be the Ig Informal Lectures at MIT . It's free and at 1 PM. The new winners "will attempt to explain what they did and why they did it" and there is a Q&A session. They promise the lectures will be brief, five minutes each. The keynote address at the Ig Nobel prize ceremony was given by 2003 Ig Nobel Literature Prize winner John Trinkaus, "author of more than 80 academic reports about things that annoyed him." The ceremony will also be presented, if you missed the live webcast, on the radio, on Friday, November 26 on National Public Radio's "Talk of the Nation/ Science Friday with Ira Flatow". I love the Ig Nobel awards, particularly the "operas" every year. Sadly, I missed the live webcast this year, because they did it a week earlier than usual.

Techweb's Mitch Wagner has a column in which he lists "The Best Technology Blogs", and Groklaw made the short list. He says if you are interested in the SCO story, Groklaw is a must read.

And Humorix mentions Groklaw too, in a funny piece about SCO's two remaining programmers writing a video game so players can step into their shoes for a mile:

"When asked for comment, one of the 952 members of SCO's PR department said, 'Groklaw won't give us equal time, so we have to resort to telling our story through this new video game. We can only hope that people will open their eyes to the truth and realize that IBM is the evildoer, not us. We're just trying to preserve our hard-earned intellectual property so we can feed our children.'"


  


More on Sender ID - A Little Water Under That Bridge? and MS-EU Hearing Report | 39 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
corrections here please
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, October 01 2004 @ 10:55 PM EDT

[ Reply to This | # ]

trolls here...troglodytes i'm not sure where they go...
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, October 01 2004 @ 10:56 PM EDT
mmm

[ Reply to This | # ]

OT and other links here
Authored by: NastyGuns on Friday, October 01 2004 @ 11:30 PM EDT

OT Links and comments here please, so PJ can find them easy.

Mine is... I hope Judge Kimball makes a ruling soon on the PSJ, from what I can tell he's received everything he asked for at the end of the hearing.

Yes yes I know, I'm impatient but I can't help but wonder. =/

---
NastyGuns,
"If I'm not here, I've gone out to find myself. If I return before I get back, please keep me here." Unknown.

[ Reply to This | # ]

So you can patent a hairdo - of all things.
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, October 01 2004 @ 11:45 PM EDT
That was funny if it wasn't so serious. Does the patent mean I can't do a
comb-over or risk getting sued? Or is a comb-over prior art. Doing a 3-
sided comb-over does not seem unobvious enough to deserve a patent.

[ Reply to This | # ]

How to defeat anti-spam standards
Authored by: Walter Dnes on Saturday, October 02 2004 @ 03:14 AM EDT
Everybody got their tinfoil hats on nice and tight? OK, here goes. Assume
that you're in charge of a mythical corporation that has an almost total
monopoly on OS and apps for the desktop. You can't expand your market share
beyond 100%, so you need to expand into other areas. One of your marketeers
suggests setting up a monopoly ISP, funnelling ads to the customers, and
charging advertisers for access to your customers.

Great idea, so you invest tons of money in a "Monstrous Super
Network"... but "the internet" becomes fad-du-jour, and there are
all these *INDEPENDANT ISPs* (bleagh) with *ANTI-SPAM* policies and
technologies. While you control the desktops, email flows through the servers
of those *INDEPENDANT* ISP's so you can't set up a toll-booth to charge
advertisers for access to everybody's desktop.

Now if only you could render the internet unusable, people might have no
choice but to use your "Monstrous Super Network" with its walled
garden. Start by making an OS that's full of security holes, which allows
spammers to crank millions of spams out of compromised machines. But there's
still the problem of the independant ISPs and their anti-spam technology. Spam
is so hated that even your 60-billion-in-the-bank can't buy enough votes to
outlaw internet spam-blocking. You don't dare come out and demand the end of
all spam-blocking; you need a more subtle approach.

You hire a patent attorney, and join an anti-spam standards working group. US
patent law allows filings on inventions up to one year after they are first
published. After 5 or 6 months of work, the anti-spam standards working group
developes a "System to Prevent Forgery" of sender domains.

Your patent attorney goes and files a patent on the fruits of the committee's
work. Now one of two things happens.

1) the proposed anti-spam standard is not adopted (because of your patent),
and the internet continues to decay, forcing more users to your "Monstrous
Super Network".

2) the proposed standard is adopted, and you can eventually "monetize
your IP" down the road when everybody is using it. This generates a
revenue stream to make up for the revenue you lose by not being able to charge
advertisers for access to billions of potential customers. Darl would be so
proud.

Repeat for any future committees working on anti-spam standards.

[ Reply to This | # ]

I wish courts would learn how to really deal with Micro$haft
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, October 02 2004 @ 07:41 AM EDT
Ever since the US monopoly trial slap on the wrist, and probably even before,
I've come to realize that we'll never get any meaningful change from MS unless
we give them a punishment that they'll actually feel. So I say forget allowing
them to negotiate a "balanced" settlement; with their wealth and
ability to turn things to their benefit, they've hardly felt any of the past
penalties, and have even profited from them in the long run (Lets let them
donate to schools...yeah, that'll teach 'em!).

What Microsoft really needs is a good whomping. A
take-off-the-belt-and-tan-their-backside-real-good punishment that they'll
remember for a long time. They need to be brought to task for their past and
present anti-competitive practices. Only then might we really see them begin to
shape up and play fair. It would be for their own good as well as ours. The
way things are going now, they'll have managed to tick off everybody in the
world by the end of the decade.

So come on, EU, take off the kid gloves and give Microsoft what's coming to
them. Don't listen to their whining about "being irreparably harmed"
by the current penalties. Harm is what they need. Throw the book at them.
Please.

---
m(_ _)m

[ Reply to This | # ]

Splendid stuff PJ....
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, October 02 2004 @ 05:02 PM EDT
.... now please have a nice, quiet time of rest and relaxation. It is the weekend, after all.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Prior Art!!!
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, October 02 2004 @ 06:39 PM EDT
This hairy patent has been granted in 1977, but I clearly do remember from my
late childhood days (early 70s!), that here in good ol' Germany a way to
describe a man with very few hairs was: "three hairs in eight rows"...

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • Mr Bar-code - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, October 04 2004 @ 09:17 AM EDT
Useful quote
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, October 02 2004 @ 07:04 PM EDT
"It is true that some lawyers are dishonest, arrogant, greedy, venal,
amoral, ruthless buckets of slime. On the other hand, it is unfair to judge the
entire profession by a few hundred-thousand bad apples."

--Washington Post

--

MadScientist

[ Reply to This | # ]

From the Igs
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, October 02 2004 @ 07:07 PM EDT
The Effect of Country Music on Suicide
Just remember you read it here first.

__________


STEVEN STACK, Wayne State University JIM GUNDLACH, Auburn University

"We contend that the themes found in country music foster a suicidal mood
among people already at risk of suicide and that it is thereby associated with a
high suicide rate."

"Our model explains 51% of the variance in urban white suicide
rates."

--

MadScientist

[ Reply to This | # ]

Like a first date ? Right....
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, October 03 2004 @ 04:06 AM EDT
And where does Dan Ravicher think unwanted babies and teenage mums come from
???? duh.

Martin

[ Reply to This | # ]

U.S. Patent #4,022,227
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, October 04 2004 @ 09:21 PM EDT
Perhaps the patent holders should now sue Mr. Trump for lots of dollars. Kills two birds with one stone then:

  • Show corporate America a bit of it's own medicine
  • Sue another painful "reality TV" programme out of existence
  • m

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
    All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
    Comments are owned by the individual posters.

    PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )