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

RE: Ray Ozzie claims prior art in Lotus Notes

From: Richard M. Smith <rms@computerbytesman.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 08:06:22 -0400
To: "'Hector Santos'" <winserver.support@winserver.com>, "'Jerry Mead'" <jerrym@meadroid.com>, <public-web-plugins@w3.org>
Message-ID: <003f01c379ef$72eaf010$550ffea9@rms>

I just sent a quick email to Mike Doyle and his lawyer asking for
comments on Ray Ozzie's article.


-----Original Message-----
From: public-web-plugins-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-web-plugins-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Hector Santos
Sent: Saturday, September 13, 2003 4:22 AM
To: Jerry Mead; public-web-plugins@w3.org
Subject: Re: Ray Ozzie claims prior art in Lotus Notes


How could I forget Ozzie and Lotus notes!   It jolts even more early
art technology!

All in One - a 1980's complete Personal Information Manager, Group Ware
product used on VAX machines with VT100 graphical terminals.
Remote Client/Server based,  Embedded technology to draw charts, merged
Word processing,

Lotus Framework,  again the same thing.

Apple's QuickCard,  again the same thing.

Thanks for the post Jerry!  I particularly LOVED this statement:

        "I am quite embarassed to say that we frankly didn't "get" what
so innovative about this
        newfangled "Web" thing, given the capabilities of what had
been built."

Ray, don't be embarrassed, everyone felt the same way - it was
of remote client/server technology and the natural progression of the
evolving "smart terminals."

        "In 1993 or thereabouts, we saw the emergence of TCP/IP, HTML,
Mosaic and the Web.
        From our perspective, all of these were simplistic emulations of
tiny subset of what we'd been
        doing in Notes for years."

and even then I recall Lotus and company being a day late with the
technology!   Graphical/Text BBS groupware systems existed before Notes
made available.   And I really love his final statement:

    "Finally, claims 6-10 are identical to claims 1-5, with the
of "The computer program
    product" instead of "The method".  Well, yes, we did create an
product to do such a thing.
    We even shipped it about 18 months before his filing.  Lotus was a
public company and at the
    time one of the biggest forces in the personal computing industry,
surely the person or persons
    doing the patent filing must have or should have known about our
hypermedia innovations.  Given
    all the press coverage, he was likely also influenced by them in
envisioning his own distributed
    hypermedia enhancements to the then-nascent Web browser technology."
Which is what I've been saying all along.  The internet was the buzz
the WWW was the thing! It was beautiful, elegant and it was changing the
world so to the most ignorant fools nothing else matter.  BBS
technology didn't count.  You didn't count Ozzie!  It was a new era and
nothing else matter.

Nevertheless,   I'm sure Mr. Ozzie pull in the "who's who of PC
will be significant enough to change the course of patent claim.   I
whether Steve Job's is waiting in the wings to throw his prior art
as well - Quick Card and Next!!

Mr. Doyle,  allow me to send you case a Killian's Irish Red for an darn
effort!   You really didn't think you could get away with this?  Or did
ignorance of non-internet world get the best of you?  In any case,
your erroneous patent claim NULL and VOID!

PS: I'm still wondering why Microsoft with its unlimited resources and
grandiose team of lawyers couldn't put a valid prior art defense.


Hector Santos, CTO
Santronics Software, Inc.
305-431-2846 Cell
305-248-3204 Office

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jerry Mead" <jerrym@meadroid.com>
To: <public-web-plugins@w3.org>
Sent: Saturday, September 13, 2003 2:37 AM
Subject: Ray Ozzie claims prior art in Lotus Notes

> http://www.ozzie.net/blog/stories/2003/09/12/savingTheBrowser.html
> Jerry Mead
> http://www.meadroid.com/
Received on Saturday, 13 September 2003 08:06:39 UTC

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