Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 10th Feb 2009 12:44 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 348197
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Ah, your right. it was a co develop with MS but IBM did infact file teh patent.
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/5973663.html
I am not usually wrong, I tip my hat to you sir.
Problem is Microsoft don't have any valid patent , that don't have prior art or another older patent invention covering Microsoft *innovation*. Scroll bar is IBM patented ... Also similar technology don't mean we infringe on Microsoft patent either ... It's innocent until proven guilty , if Microsoft as a problem , bring the point forward with details or sue , it's pathetic invalid insinuation don't impress anyone anymore.
Potentially a bigger problem for Microsoft as a software-only company is that recent decisions in court case(s) have tended to support the position (similar to the official EU policy) that software alone is not patentable.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bilski
Software is mathematics, after all, and mathematics is not patentable. Copyright, yes (you should do your own work) ... patents, no (you cannot own an abstract idea, only your particular expression of it in something substantial).






Member since:
2005-07-06
Problem is Microsoft don't have any valid patent , that don't have prior art or another older patent invention covering Microsoft *innovation*.
Scroll bar is IBM patented ...
Also similar technology don't mean we infringe on Microsoft patent either ...
It's innocent until proven guilty , if Microsoft as a problem , bring the point forward with details or sue , it's pathetic invalid insinuation don't impress anyone anymore.