Re: Ray Ozzie claims prior art in Lotus Notes

There is no "embed text format" in Ray's example.

--- Hector Santos <winserver.support@winserver.com>
wrote:
> 
> Did this guy just graduate kinderlaw school or
> something?
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Hector Santos, CTO
> Santronics Software, Inc.
> http://www.santronics.com
> 305-431-2846 Cell
> 305-248-3204 Office
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Richard M. Smith" <rms@computerbytesman.com>
> To: "'Hector Santos'"
> <winserver.support@winserver.com>; "'Jerry Mead'"
> <jerrym@meadroid.com>; <public-web-plugins@w3.org>
> Sent: Saturday, September 13, 2003 8:06 AM
> Subject: RE: Ray Ozzie claims prior art in Lotus
> Notes
> 
> 
> >
> > I just sent a quick email to Mike Doyle and his
> lawyer asking for
> > comments on Ray Ozzie's article.
> >
> > Richard
> >
> > -----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
> >
> >
> >
> > Ha!
> >
> > How could I forget Ozzie and Lotus notes!   It
> jolts even more early
> > prior
> > art technology!
> >
> > All in One - a 1980's complete Personal
> Information Manager, Group Ware
> > product used on VAX machines with VT100 graphical
> terminals.
> > Networked,
> > Remote Client/Server based,  Embedded technology
> to draw charts, merged
> > with
> > 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
> > was
> > so innovative about this
> >         newfangled "Web" thing, given the
> capabilities of what had
> > already
> > been built."
> >
> > Ray, don't be embarrassed, everyone felt the same
> way - it was
> > obviousness
> > of remote client/server technology and the natural
> progression of the
> > ever
> > evolving "smart terminals."
> >
> >         "In 1993 or thereabouts, we saw the
> emergence of TCP/IP, HTML,
> > HTTP,
> > Mosaic and the Web.
> >         From our perspective, all of these were
> simplistic emulations of
> > a
> > 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
> > was
> > made available.   And I really love his final
> statement:
> >
> >     "Finally, claims 6-10 are identical to claims
> 1-5, with the
> > substitution
> > of "The computer program
> >     product" instead of "The method".  Well, yes,
> we did create an
> > actual
> > 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,
> > so
> > 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
> > word,
> > 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
> > computing"
> > will be significant enough to change the course of
> patent claim.   I
> > wonder
> > whether Steve Job's is waiting in the wings to
> throw his prior art
> > history
> > as well - Quick Card and Next!!
> >
> > Mr. Doyle,  allow me to send you case a Killian's
> Irish Red for an darn
> > good
> > effort!   You really didn't think you could get
> away with this?  Or did
> > your
> > ignorance of non-internet world get the best of
> you?  In any case,
> > consider
> > 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.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> >
> > Hector Santos, CTO
> > Santronics Software, Inc.
> > http://www.santronics.com
> > 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/
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com

Received on Saturday, 13 September 2003 13:38:38 UTC