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

Re: PTO orders re-examination of Eolas patent

From: Hector Santos <winserver.support@winserver.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 09:21:16 -0500
Message-ID: <005001c3a928$3e6bbd20$0de02243@FAMILY>
To: <public-web-plugins@w3.org>

Thanks for the link.

In my opinion,  Microsoft needs to fix the recent IE compatibility problems
or risk making the efforts of W3C of challenging the patent worthless.  But
then again, it isn't in their strategic interest to keep a status quo with
world wide compatibility as recent IE updates have proven to show.

Microsoft may be shooting itself in the foot, or maybe it is all done on
purpose, but  recent Microsoft IE security updates have caused a havoc on
the internet, in some cases making obsolete legacy web servers and forcing
changes in 3rd party non-IIS web servers.   Just google the internet for all
the IE problems being reported,  "Page cannot be found,"   "Blank Pages,"
"Authentication problems,"  etc.   If you go to Internet Explore support


You will see something like 20 message in the past 5 hours complaining about
IE compatibility problems with Web sites, including my own messages.

We had to make a design change to our Wildcat! Interactive Net  Web Server,
engineered since 1996 without a browser compatibility problem, to support
"TCP Half Close" operations because of recent strange IE browser behaviors
not exhibited by other browsers.   Now with the recent November 11 IE
Security Updates, they have made the IE browser behave so strange there is
no pattern behind it.

In my opinion, if Mr. Doyle plays his cards right, he can probably use this
as argument against the W3C claim the patent will force changes in IE not
beneficial to the internet community.

It might be too late!  It was already done and I have strong "sneaky"
suspicion Microsoft is doing this intentionally to force updates giving
Microsoft an opportunity to sneak in .NET functionality.

Hector Santos
WINSERVER "Wildcat! Interactive Net Server"
support: http://www.winserver.com
sales: http://www.santronics.com

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bob Monsour" <bob@bobmonsour.com>
To: <public-web-plugins@w3.org>
Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2003 8:56 PM
Subject: PTO orders re-examination of Eolas patent


See the following story from oreillynet.com


-Bob Monsour

P.S. Here's the relevant snippet from the story.

Apparently, the PTO responded to this request, saying "a substantial
outcry from a widespread segment of the affected industry has
essentially raised a question of patentability." This order, issued on
October 30, reviewed the claims and declared that the prior art
introduced by Berners-Lee and Raggett raised "a substantial new
question of patentabity." The order, signed by Steve Kunin, Deputy
Commissioner of the US PTO, called for a reexamination of all claims
relating to the '906 patent.

A patent lawyer that I spoke to said that the quick response by the PTO
was unusual, and he thought it was a good sign. He said that the order
seemed to give a clear indication of support for the claims against the
patent. We'll now have to wait for a patent examiner to examine the
evidence in more detail and rule on the patent.

If you want to follow the adminstrative procedures, go to
http://pair.uspto.gov/cgi-bin/final/home.pl and the type in the
application number: 90/006,831.
Received on Wednesday, 12 November 2003 09:21:40 UTC

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