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

Software Patents Prior Art: lack of due diligence by the LARGEST SOFTWARE COMPUTER IN THE WORLD

From: Hector Santos <winserver.support@winserver.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2003 11:09:20 -0400
Message-ID: <00ac01c37164$34b8a410$92dc9e44@FAMILY>
To: "web-plugins" <public-web-plugins@w3.org>

There is something terribly wrong with USPTO in regard to software patents.
I guess I am not saying anything new here.  The Eolas patent should of never
been issued.   I don't how Microsoft is having such a hard time proving
this, but I think I found out why:

Here is any another example of a patent that should of never been issued:

Microsoft was issued this patent

6,327,617
 December 4, 2001
Filing date: April 25, 2000

Method and system for identifying and obtaining computer software from a
remote computer

Abstract

Creators of computer software provide the most up-to-date versions of their
computer software on an update service. A user who has purchased computer
software calls the update service on a periodic basis. The update service
automatically inventories the user computer to determine what computer
software may be out-of-date, and/or need maintenance updates. If so desired
by the user, the update service computer automatically downloads and
installs computer software to the user computer. By making periodic calls to
the update service, the user always has the most up-to-date computer
software immediately available. The update service may also alert the user
to new products (i.e. including new help files, etc.), and new and enhanced
versions of existing products, which can be purchased electronically by a
user from the update service.

Now go to GOOGLE, switch to the groups and do a simple common sense words
such as:

"Auto Update"

and BEHOLD, you will find the following prior arts as far as 1996.  At least
57,000 hits!

Our product has been using an Auto Update Program system called the AUP
since 1996, and it is probably the only one in the industry that has a
successful fee based subscription system tied to it.   This is a level many
software developers would like to get to - the ability to charge monthly for
software updates!   The concept has been in place since 1996!   It works!
Thank you very much!

Microsoft has been in one way or another has been very aware of our
WINSERVER product line.    They know we exist.  They had us listed back in
1998 as a "Top 100 Windows Application.""  They told me that.  I didn't make
it up!  I guess a lot of people our customers call them for tech support!

Anyway, this is a prime example on how ridiculous the software patent
process has become.  This patent should had of never been issued.  It is
clearly not enforceable!

Sincerely,

Hector Santos, CTO
Santronics Software, Inc.
http://www.santronics.com
305-431-2846 Cell
305-248-3204 Office
Received on Tuesday, 2 September 2003 11:12:45 UTC

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