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
Why? | 381 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
No, not merely a list of missed calls. Read the claim again slowly.
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 24 2013 @ 01:13 PM EDT
"The claim is very specific. There is a missed call number AND a link to
other
or all contact information associated with the person of the missed call
number.
When you click that second link, something very specific happens."

Yes, and that was "specifically" a part of many cell phones long
before 2007. I have a Treo that was sold in 2005 that does that. I have Nokia
from around 1999 that does that. Apple needs to stop "patenting"
other people's inventions.

Apple loses again on "prior art".

When Palm came out with the Pre, Apple made some squeaky noises about suing
them. Palm reminded Apple of all the patents they had that Apple was
violating.

Apple's squeaky noises stopped.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Why?
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 24 2013 @ 02:06 PM EDT
"This is very easy to work around. "

Why should they have to work around something so obvious?

Kind of like saying "They've patented putting one foot in front of the
other as a means of propulsion, but its easy to work around by just walking
sideways."

Just nullify the patent already. Better yet, nullify USPTO's "everything
is new if it uses a computer" mentality already.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

No, not merely a list of missed calls. Read the claim again slowly.
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 24 2013 @ 03:56 PM EDT
Somebody "wanting" to use something isn't what makes it
patent-able - nor is it necessarily the specificity of what
the feature does.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

No, not merely a list of missed calls. Read the claim again slowly.
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 24 2013 @ 07:06 PM EDT
> There is a missed call number AND a link to other
or all contact information associated with the person of the missed
call number. When you click that second link, something very
specific happens.

I was using a desktop in the mid-eighties that did all of that.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

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 )