Re: [Fwd: PATNEWS: Patent abstracts, Eolas workaround, filewrapper estoppel]

Benjamin Franz wrote:

>Microsoft has claimed for years now that the browser is _AN INTEGRAL PART_
>of the OS. In fact, they have made that a center piece of some of their
>legal battles to date. They would probably get murdered in court if they
>tried to claim at this late date that the browser _wasn't_ part of the OS
>for the purpose of this patent. If they made a legal filing to that end,
>they would open themselves to a claim a perjury (because they would have
>legally under oath on the record claimed two positions that are clearly
>mutually incompatible) and/or to losing some of the other civil litigation
>in process against them.
>  
>

The browser is part of the OS; but an OS is not a browser.  That is the 
only claim they need to make.  Then all they need to show is that the 
part of the OS which "locates and identifies an external application" is 
useful to significant other parts of the OS and not just the browser.

Jeffrey Altman