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

Re: Pei Wei's ViolaWWW project: Was it prior art?

From: SerpentMage (Christian Gross) <mailing@devspace.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 16:00:08 +0200
Message-ID: <3F574568.4070600@devspace.com>
To: Steven Pemberton <Steven.Pemberton@cwi.nl>
Cc: "Richard M. Smith" <rms@computerbytesman.com>, W3C Public Web Plugins List <public-web-plugins@w3.org>

Steven Pemberton wrote:

>>Does anyone on the list know why the judge in the Eolas/Microsoft '906
>>patent trial refuse to allow the jury to hear about Pei Wei's ViolaWWW
>>work?  In particular, was it an issuing timing or was the Viola system
>>somehow different than Mike Doyle's work?
>If I understand it right, the judge decided that Pei Wei's system wasn't
>published in a suitable way to make it acceptable prior art.
>Prior art isn't just that you did it earlier, but that you also published it
>for all the world to see.
Ok, so let me get this straight...  Because the Internet was not as 
widely known back then, and there were bits and bobs hanging around it 
was not suitable?

Essentially the judge is saying, "Hey if you see a demo, you can rip it 
off because you were the one who *properly* documented it..."

Holy cow, no wonder Microsoft is flabbergasted.  Now wonder Microsoft is 
thinking of alternatives because this is absolutely lame!

Sometimes I wonder about the justice system...

I sure do hope this gets overturned by appeal.

Christian Gross
Received on Thursday, 4 September 2003 10:00:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:09:06 UTC