Re: Ray Ozzie claims prior art in Lotus Notes

From my understading of Ray Ozzie's writing, Lotus did use some sort of
"tag" in the "hypertext" to embed the external content.  It certainly
doesn't matter whether or not the tag was *called* "embed"; patents are
about functionality and concepts, not nomenclature.

-Jake



D Goneit wrote:

> 
> 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 Sunday, 14 September 2003 23:08:25 UTC