W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-web-plugins@w3.org > August 2003

RE: Prior Art

From: Richard M. Smith <rms@computerbytesman.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2003 15:29:12 -0400
To: <public-web-plugins@w3.org>
Message-ID: <00f101c36f2c$fe1c2f50$550ffea9@rms>

Hi Hector,

Lots of good information in your post.  BBS software looks like a good
place to look for prior art.  X-Windows and Apollo applications are

The thing to keep in mind is that we need to find a product which
matches point-by-point the claims made in the '906 patent.

Presumably Microsoft has already done an extensive prior art search.  I
wonder what their results have been......


-----Original Message-----
From: public-web-plugins-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-web-plugins-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Hector Santos
Sent: Saturday, August 30, 2003 2:23 PM
To: public-web-plugins@w3.org
Subject: Prior Art

I'm from the old school when Patents were REAL patents.   I've been
complacent over the years, the laws have changed in recent years and I'm
just catching up with it now.   It seems to me that software patents are
just rehashed ideas from existing systems.  Nonetheless, please help
and tell me how wrong I am, whether there is sufficient prior art or I'm

In regards with this particular patent 5,838,906, "Distributed
method for automatically invoking external application providing
and display of embedded objects within a hypermedia document", I want to
how much this patent encapsulates other similar ideas already in place.
This patent was filed on October 17, 1994 and issued on November 17,

I've been in the BBS and telecommunication market since 1982,  so many
of remote client/server computing have come across my plate one way or

Received on Saturday, 30 August 2003 15:29:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:56:03 UTC