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

Re: CNN circumvents the Eolas Patent?

From: Jerry Mead <jerrym@meadroid.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 21:56:32 +0100
Message-ID: <001d01c378a7$32f47920$020a0ac0@zorro>
To: <public-web-plugins@w3.org>

Better yet, a description of what Microsoft and the other 'big' players
believe to be the scope of the patent in terms of objects, applets, HTCs,
any on-document tags beyond the original pre-Eolas HTML set, etc., etc.,
etc.

What is missing here right now is a clear and concise statement of that
scope and its implications for (D)HTML/XML-hosting client applications.

This list was formed to garner (presumably helpful) input and -- as Richard
Smith says -- it's very frustrating trying to provide that without knowing
what the Microsofts/Macromedias/Apples/Reals of this world understand as the
'safe' foundation for any 'remedial' recoding.

Mike Wallent (if you're monitoring this list) when you say this:

"There are technologies that are already used today (that aren't covered by
the verdict) and all we are saying is, given the choice, use the
technologies that are already available to you."

please be specific. Precisely what are are the current technologies that
you/Microsoft consider are not covered by this verdict?

Jerry Mead
http://www.meadroid.com



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Richard M. Smith" <rms@computerbytesman.com>
To: <public-web-plugins@w3.org>
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2003 9:23 PM
Subject: RE: CNN circumvents the Eolas Patent?


>
> Thanks for pointing out this article.  The article was both very
> interesting and very frustrating.  It would be nice if Mr. Wallent would
> put together an email for this list describing some of the technical
> measures that Microsoft is considering to avoid the Eolas '906 patent.
> Our collective mind readers are broken.......
>
> Richard
>
Received on Thursday, 11 September 2003 17:00:01 UTC

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