SBC will sue you as they now have a patent on linking

You just committed patent infringement

I am such a rebel

Those fucking fucks, well I guess I better find a real job now

Isn't this over the frame use in a web page??

This patent crap is starting to get a little stupid.

Patent Office

Can some one go to the Patent Office and kick them up the arse?

It seems thay are giving out patents if you fill in your name right on the form.

As an additional thought, since a lot of people use a WYSIWYG to build a site, I think it should be the resonsability of the company selling the products to license the technology. Same would go for the streaming issue.

Your forgetting the $$$, for that they would patent the Boneprone term, I fucked her.

Can someone explain to an simplton like me what this means??

And ask the Patent Officer if he understands it.

what's the SBC link?

This almost sounds like a web page, or computer screen to me. Frames don't even have to be considered with that snippet of language.

Time to see some changes in our pantent office and the court system. All this is getting way out of hand. Maybe Bush is on to something when he wanted to limit malpractice suits (not that I agree with Bush Girl).

Sick. just in Fucking America does this happens, then they want to shove it down our throats across the world./

Send the LINK inspectors!!!!


BTW, I just got a few seconds ago a new patent ( US Patent No 10,214,458,789,785,458,157):

"How to come in a girl's mouth"

I will be sending you the rates which depends on the amount of cum, where exactly it lands ( more expensive in the eyes), how many spurts there was ....

I am fucking rich now.....

The abstract is waaaay too vague. But from what I read they don't have a patent on links....they have a patent on a browser (at least the patent I viewed) in which case it would be people designing browsers who would be infringing, not the people writing HTML.

The problem with some of these patents, are that they're so generic and outdated that they really have little legal standing left. In most modern countries, it's not only proof that you need, but you also need precedence for your argument of infringement with an example of your "invention".

These patents are based wholly on the fact that the technology would eventually be created, like when the Jetsons used flying cars... Someone could have easily went to their local patent office and made up some diagrams and some bogus figures and patent the "idea" of that invention.

A lot of these cases eventually get thrown out because the complaining party are unable to prove they invented this technology, product or service. You can't copyright something like "linking" because by definition, it was invented even before electricity or telephones were invented.

You should not be allowed to copyright an idea, only a concept. Something that is real and true for that moment based on what you yourself has created. Something original. These people are nothing more than greedy white liberals with only themselves in mind.

According to Schumacher; Robert M. and Matthews; James E. patent, it was filed in "May 17, 1996". So that would mean that they pretty much placed a patent on something that was at least 5 years old. I read somewhere that a true "document link via icons" was created even before 1991.

No I think the Patent Office has got it spot on.

The fact that I live and work in the Czech Republic, which wants nothing to do with this idiocy and allows me to operate as I like has nothing to do with this of course.

If they have the Patent they are in their rights to enforce it.

I personally think this, SBC, Arcadia, the Devine issue (shopping cart payment processing) and the slew of others that are bring these "Patent" suits are only doing this as a way to increase $$ in their pockets and not to actually protect a product they have in place.

It's time to write some laws, and not allow some dip-ass grandfather clause that stops this shark attack lawyering and abuse of the justice system and patent office.

I agree that if someone has a patent and those ideas or methods are bieng used without compinsation then they deserve their $$. But these latest deals are just weak attempts to make money. Arcadia, and the shopping cart issue are people that didn't even write the request for the patent. They bought them with the sole purpose to collect money. Big difference.

This is so funny. I would have wiped my ass with that letter and sent it back to them. Probably the best thing that could ever happen to you would be to get sued over this by SBC. That way, when this bullshit "patent" is stricken (it will be) you'd be able to counter-sue and spend the rest of your life in the Bahamas.

SpaceAce

also did you see how much they wanted for a licensing fees lol. These people are so stupid, make it 50-100 a month for most its the cost of doing busniess and they would just pay it. Instead they go for the quick cash grab and everyone assumes fighting positions. If I had the video patent I would charge everyone $250 a year for the license regardless of the size of your company. The family of the man who invented asprin get a quarter of a penny royality on every bottle producted its not a quick buck but it adds up to lot of money each and every year.

"Wherein the plurality of selectors are not part of the document displayed in the display window of the browser and continue to be dsiplayed afer one of the plurality of selectors is selected."

At this point I stop reading.... take a large piece of pink construction paper with the words "STFU FAG" written on it and mail it to SBC.

SBC's patent has to do with a web page that is built using frames, and having a navigation system either at the top, bottom, or sides that is in a fixed position, and when you click on a nav/menu option, another frame's content gets changed.

This patent is from some software that I believe was developed for phone customer service/provisioning stuff (internal), that they now feel applies to web pages.

The "novelty" of this invention is that the navigation stays fixed while the content changes.

Easy way around this is to not use frames and have each page do a #include of the navbar so it is part of each web page.


Fight The Patent!