<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_11_03_2023209</id>
	<title>Spring Design Sues Barnes &amp; Noble Over Nook IP</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1257237600000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>bth writes to let us know that <a href="http://www.macworld.com/article/143623/2009/11/nook\_sued.html?lsrc=rss\_main">Barnes &amp; Noble has been sued by a company called Spring Design</a>, which alleges that the recently announced <a href="//tech.slashdot.org/story/09/10/20/195247/The-Kindle-Killer-Arrives">Nook e-book reader</a> infringes its intellectual property. This isn't a patent troll kind of situation; rather, the claim is misappropriation of trade secrets. Spring Design claims that they have been developing a dual-screen, Android-based e-book reader since 2006, filing patents all the while; and that they showed pretty much everything to Barnes &amp; Noble in the expectation of working together with them to bring their reader to market.</htmltext>
<tokenext>bth writes to let us know that Barnes &amp; Noble has been sued by a company called Spring Design , which alleges that the recently announced Nook e-book reader infringes its intellectual property .
This is n't a patent troll kind of situation ; rather , the claim is misappropriation of trade secrets .
Spring Design claims that they have been developing a dual-screen , Android-based e-book reader since 2006 , filing patents all the while ; and that they showed pretty much everything to Barnes &amp; Noble in the expectation of working together with them to bring their reader to market .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>bth writes to let us know that Barnes &amp; Noble has been sued by a company called Spring Design, which alleges that the recently announced Nook e-book reader infringes its intellectual property.
This isn't a patent troll kind of situation; rather, the claim is misappropriation of trade secrets.
Spring Design claims that they have been developing a dual-screen, Android-based e-book reader since 2006, filing patents all the while; and that they showed pretty much everything to Barnes &amp; Noble in the expectation of working together with them to bring their reader to market.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29969124</id>
	<title>It's bogus. They don't even have a patent.</title>
	<author>tomhudson</author>
	<datestamp>1257246240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Following the links FTFA to the original story:<blockquote><div><p>As the first in the market to offer an e-book with full Internet browsing while reading</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
Nope. Any small laptop with an ebook reader got there first.
</p><blockquote><div><p>Spring Design pioneered its patent-pending dual screen design with Duet Navigator(TM) capability in 2006</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
There's a <b>huge</b> difference between "patent-pending" and "we actually have an enforceable patent."</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Following the links FTFA to the original story : As the first in the market to offer an e-book with full Internet browsing while reading Nope .
Any small laptop with an ebook reader got there first .
Spring Design pioneered its patent-pending dual screen design with Duet Navigator ( TM ) capability in 2006 There 's a huge difference between " patent-pending " and " we actually have an enforceable patent .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Following the links FTFA to the original story:As the first in the market to offer an e-book with full Internet browsing while reading

Nope.
Any small laptop with an ebook reader got there first.
Spring Design pioneered its patent-pending dual screen design with Duet Navigator(TM) capability in 2006

There's a huge difference between "patent-pending" and "we actually have an enforceable patent.
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29967902</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968202</id>
	<title>Ah</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257242820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>So the nook is the kindle killer, while Spring is the BN killer. Makes sense to me.
<br>
So what good is a hook to a nook, if the nook makes cannot read the future.<br>They can not do a cookbook on a nook, since they just got the hook. (apologies).</htmltext>
<tokenext>So the nook is the kindle killer , while Spring is the BN killer .
Makes sense to me .
So what good is a hook to a nook , if the nook makes can not read the future.They can not do a cookbook on a nook , since they just got the hook .
( apologies ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So the nook is the kindle killer, while Spring is the BN killer.
Makes sense to me.
So what good is a hook to a nook, if the nook makes cannot read the future.They can not do a cookbook on a nook, since they just got the hook.
(apologies).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29967974</id>
	<title>B&amp;N are completely innocent</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257241860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Spring Design device was going to be called a "Nok" so there was no way anyone could confuse the two products and any similarities in design are pure coincidence.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Spring Design device was going to be called a " Nok " so there was no way anyone could confuse the two products and any similarities in design are pure coincidence .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Spring Design device was going to be called a "Nok" so there was no way anyone could confuse the two products and any similarities in design are pure coincidence.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29992228</id>
	<title>Re:I read the court filing</title>
	<author>DFWLaw</author>
	<datestamp>1257413940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>FYI, that "series of numbers" doesn't trace  a copy of the document.

It's a docket number and file clerk stamp. It's just part of the filing method for cases.


And I actually pulled the filing off of PACER earlier since I was curious to see if the case had merit.

Few things you've overlooked:

As mentioned by mt1955, the B&amp;N NDA signed by Spring Design contained a clause stipulating that other outside or internal projects may already be under consideration or development that share similarities to the matter being discussed by the two parties.

Fairly standard boilerplate, but it does put the onus on Spring Design to show that B&amp;N did in fact use information provided under the NDA to develop the Nook.

Also of interest are additional clauses in the B&amp;N NDA stating that the presence of a NDA and discussions pursuant to it should not be construed as an intent to form a business relationship and neither party would be responsible for incurred costs should one party take actions anticipating a deal that never came through.

Furthermore, there was the standard choice of venue boilerplate clause in which Spring Designs explicitly consented that the NDA would be governed by New York law. Should B&amp;N wish, they shouldn't have much difficulty having the case moved from SD.

What I found of most interest, however, were the "exhibits" attached to the complaint. If those powerpoint slides are representative of Spring Design's case, they have a problem.</htmltext>
<tokenext>FYI , that " series of numbers " does n't trace a copy of the document .
It 's a docket number and file clerk stamp .
It 's just part of the filing method for cases .
And I actually pulled the filing off of PACER earlier since I was curious to see if the case had merit .
Few things you 've overlooked : As mentioned by mt1955 , the B&amp;N NDA signed by Spring Design contained a clause stipulating that other outside or internal projects may already be under consideration or development that share similarities to the matter being discussed by the two parties .
Fairly standard boilerplate , but it does put the onus on Spring Design to show that B&amp;N did in fact use information provided under the NDA to develop the Nook .
Also of interest are additional clauses in the B&amp;N NDA stating that the presence of a NDA and discussions pursuant to it should not be construed as an intent to form a business relationship and neither party would be responsible for incurred costs should one party take actions anticipating a deal that never came through .
Furthermore , there was the standard choice of venue boilerplate clause in which Spring Designs explicitly consented that the NDA would be governed by New York law .
Should B&amp;N wish , they should n't have much difficulty having the case moved from SD .
What I found of most interest , however , were the " exhibits " attached to the complaint .
If those powerpoint slides are representative of Spring Design 's case , they have a problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FYI, that "series of numbers" doesn't trace  a copy of the document.
It's a docket number and file clerk stamp.
It's just part of the filing method for cases.
And I actually pulled the filing off of PACER earlier since I was curious to see if the case had merit.
Few things you've overlooked:

As mentioned by mt1955, the B&amp;N NDA signed by Spring Design contained a clause stipulating that other outside or internal projects may already be under consideration or development that share similarities to the matter being discussed by the two parties.
Fairly standard boilerplate, but it does put the onus on Spring Design to show that B&amp;N did in fact use information provided under the NDA to develop the Nook.
Also of interest are additional clauses in the B&amp;N NDA stating that the presence of a NDA and discussions pursuant to it should not be construed as an intent to form a business relationship and neither party would be responsible for incurred costs should one party take actions anticipating a deal that never came through.
Furthermore, there was the standard choice of venue boilerplate clause in which Spring Designs explicitly consented that the NDA would be governed by New York law.
Should B&amp;N wish, they shouldn't have much difficulty having the case moved from SD.
What I found of most interest, however, were the "exhibits" attached to the complaint.
If those powerpoint slides are representative of Spring Design's case, they have a problem.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29973330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968254</id>
	<title>Re:I'm shocked!</title>
	<author>ObsessiveMathsFreak</author>
	<datestamp>1257243060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Huge company with an armada of lawyers steals everything from a startup.</p></div></blockquote><p>What did they steal? Ideas? Give me a break. Does "An android based E-book reader" constitute a patent worthy idea? Actually, of course it does, and that's why I for one do not see the benefit in supporting such startups in cases like these.</p><p>This company is a patent troll. What did they invent? A button that makes text scroll smoothly? A pop up or context sensitive interface? Oh! They invented a two screen device where you control things by moving a stylus on the bottom screen! Perhaps supplemented by additional buttons! <a href="http://www.nintendo.com/ds" title="nintendo.com">How Original!!</a> [nintendo.com] Yes, indeed, all companies implementing any such mechanism on any e-book whatsoever should have to pay these brilliant engineers for their hard worn innovation.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/end scarcasm.</p><p>The only people who support this company are those who believe that being the first to develop something, or being the first to spew out any old brain fart, entitles you to exclusive ownership and control over all future implementations and revenues involving that thing. It the proverbial American Dream; Winning the lottery through one crazy scheme. Everybody has one in the back of their head, and so the system stands with popular support. I for one utterly reject this model as a basis for technological development and progression.</p><p>Patents need to die. Completely. If you can't stand on your own two feet like startups in every other industry, then you shouldn't be in business. Holding the world back until you get your protection money is a despicable practice, no matter how big or how small you are.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Huge company with an armada of lawyers steals everything from a startup.What did they steal ?
Ideas ? Give me a break .
Does " An android based E-book reader " constitute a patent worthy idea ?
Actually , of course it does , and that 's why I for one do not see the benefit in supporting such startups in cases like these.This company is a patent troll .
What did they invent ?
A button that makes text scroll smoothly ?
A pop up or context sensitive interface ?
Oh ! They invented a two screen device where you control things by moving a stylus on the bottom screen !
Perhaps supplemented by additional buttons !
How Original ! !
[ nintendo.com ] Yes , indeed , all companies implementing any such mechanism on any e-book whatsoever should have to pay these brilliant engineers for their hard worn innovation .
/end scarcasm.The only people who support this company are those who believe that being the first to develop something , or being the first to spew out any old brain fart , entitles you to exclusive ownership and control over all future implementations and revenues involving that thing .
It the proverbial American Dream ; Winning the lottery through one crazy scheme .
Everybody has one in the back of their head , and so the system stands with popular support .
I for one utterly reject this model as a basis for technological development and progression.Patents need to die .
Completely. If you ca n't stand on your own two feet like startups in every other industry , then you should n't be in business .
Holding the world back until you get your protection money is a despicable practice , no matter how big or how small you are .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Huge company with an armada of lawyers steals everything from a startup.What did they steal?
Ideas? Give me a break.
Does "An android based E-book reader" constitute a patent worthy idea?
Actually, of course it does, and that's why I for one do not see the benefit in supporting such startups in cases like these.This company is a patent troll.
What did they invent?
A button that makes text scroll smoothly?
A pop up or context sensitive interface?
Oh! They invented a two screen device where you control things by moving a stylus on the bottom screen!
Perhaps supplemented by additional buttons!
How Original!!
[nintendo.com] Yes, indeed, all companies implementing any such mechanism on any e-book whatsoever should have to pay these brilliant engineers for their hard worn innovation.
/end scarcasm.The only people who support this company are those who believe that being the first to develop something, or being the first to spew out any old brain fart, entitles you to exclusive ownership and control over all future implementations and revenues involving that thing.
It the proverbial American Dream; Winning the lottery through one crazy scheme.
Everybody has one in the back of their head, and so the system stands with popular support.
I for one utterly reject this model as a basis for technological development and progression.Patents need to die.
Completely. If you can't stand on your own two feet like startups in every other industry, then you shouldn't be in business.
Holding the world back until you get your protection money is a despicable practice, no matter how big or how small you are.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29967902</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29967918</id>
	<title>Huh...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257241620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is unbelievable.... how can a Company as reputable as Barnes and Noble do something this heinous...</p><p>What next, a fledgling songwriter will have his lyrics "borrowed" by the next great rap star....</p><p>When in Rome, carry a big stick or a rabid Lawyer!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is unbelievable.... how can a Company as reputable as Barnes and Noble do something this heinous...What next , a fledgling songwriter will have his lyrics " borrowed " by the next great rap star....When in Rome , carry a big stick or a rabid Lawyer !
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is unbelievable.... how can a Company as reputable as Barnes and Noble do something this heinous...What next, a fledgling songwriter will have his lyrics "borrowed" by the next great rap star....When in Rome, carry a big stick or a rabid Lawyer!
:)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29992076</id>
	<title>Re:The Alex (What B&amp;N ripped off)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257412020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This thing looks awesome. Good for Spring Design in protecting it's IP. One of my biggest complaints with the Kindle is Amazon's insistence that it be locked down and only do what Amazon wants it to do. The Alex uses Android and sounds like it's a sweet device that might be hackable and could be turned into a really really useful tool.</p><p>Here's hoping that Spring Design really are the good guys in this.</p></div><p>I'm not so sure.</p><p>What's extremely interesting if you've seen the filing and it's attached exhibits (which include some of the powerpoint slides shown to the Barnes &amp; Noble execs), is that it really looks like Spring Design have drastically changed course sometime between their midsummer presentation and October.</p><p>The Alex device as depicted now is nothing like what the B&amp;N team saw. Imagine a large Nintendo DS with the upper screen an e-ink display and the lower a touch screen. Complete with the hefty hinge connecting the two halves in a clamshell design. That's the "Alex" that was presented to the B&amp;N team.</p><p>I also think it's somewhat duplicitous that they claim they were operating under the belief that B&amp;N would license or buy their device when the NDA they signed (which turns out to be a standard B&amp;N template form, no Spring Design NDA) explicitly states that neither company should infer the NDA or any statements made in the sharing of information to constitute a partnership or potential business relationship.</p><p>There's also the small matter that Spring Design explicitly consented to venue in New York, but...That's typical.</p><p>It's also worth noting, the NDA signed by Spring Design had a clause explicitly stating that B&amp;N may be working on similar technologies and that the existence of an NDA  would not restrain B&amp;N from continuing such development provided that information supplied under the NDA was not used.</p><p>Bottom line, I suspect Spring Design had gotten excited by B&amp;N's interest and was starting to count on a hefty cash infusion when they were "licensed" or bought out. Given the titles of the executives they were meeting with, I further suspect B&amp;N was looking at a possible partnership in line with the arrangements with Irex or Plastic Logic's Que. It either didn't work out, or Spring Design didn't like it and here we are.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This thing looks awesome .
Good for Spring Design in protecting it 's IP .
One of my biggest complaints with the Kindle is Amazon 's insistence that it be locked down and only do what Amazon wants it to do .
The Alex uses Android and sounds like it 's a sweet device that might be hackable and could be turned into a really really useful tool.Here 's hoping that Spring Design really are the good guys in this.I 'm not so sure.What 's extremely interesting if you 've seen the filing and it 's attached exhibits ( which include some of the powerpoint slides shown to the Barnes &amp; Noble execs ) , is that it really looks like Spring Design have drastically changed course sometime between their midsummer presentation and October.The Alex device as depicted now is nothing like what the B&amp;N team saw .
Imagine a large Nintendo DS with the upper screen an e-ink display and the lower a touch screen .
Complete with the hefty hinge connecting the two halves in a clamshell design .
That 's the " Alex " that was presented to the B&amp;N team.I also think it 's somewhat duplicitous that they claim they were operating under the belief that B&amp;N would license or buy their device when the NDA they signed ( which turns out to be a standard B&amp;N template form , no Spring Design NDA ) explicitly states that neither company should infer the NDA or any statements made in the sharing of information to constitute a partnership or potential business relationship.There 's also the small matter that Spring Design explicitly consented to venue in New York , but...That 's typical.It 's also worth noting , the NDA signed by Spring Design had a clause explicitly stating that B&amp;N may be working on similar technologies and that the existence of an NDA would not restrain B&amp;N from continuing such development provided that information supplied under the NDA was not used.Bottom line , I suspect Spring Design had gotten excited by B&amp;N 's interest and was starting to count on a hefty cash infusion when they were " licensed " or bought out .
Given the titles of the executives they were meeting with , I further suspect B&amp;N was looking at a possible partnership in line with the arrangements with Irex or Plastic Logic 's Que .
It either did n't work out , or Spring Design did n't like it and here we are .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This thing looks awesome.
Good for Spring Design in protecting it's IP.
One of my biggest complaints with the Kindle is Amazon's insistence that it be locked down and only do what Amazon wants it to do.
The Alex uses Android and sounds like it's a sweet device that might be hackable and could be turned into a really really useful tool.Here's hoping that Spring Design really are the good guys in this.I'm not so sure.What's extremely interesting if you've seen the filing and it's attached exhibits (which include some of the powerpoint slides shown to the Barnes &amp; Noble execs), is that it really looks like Spring Design have drastically changed course sometime between their midsummer presentation and October.The Alex device as depicted now is nothing like what the B&amp;N team saw.
Imagine a large Nintendo DS with the upper screen an e-ink display and the lower a touch screen.
Complete with the hefty hinge connecting the two halves in a clamshell design.
That's the "Alex" that was presented to the B&amp;N team.I also think it's somewhat duplicitous that they claim they were operating under the belief that B&amp;N would license or buy their device when the NDA they signed (which turns out to be a standard B&amp;N template form, no Spring Design NDA) explicitly states that neither company should infer the NDA or any statements made in the sharing of information to constitute a partnership or potential business relationship.There's also the small matter that Spring Design explicitly consented to venue in New York, but...That's typical.It's also worth noting, the NDA signed by Spring Design had a clause explicitly stating that B&amp;N may be working on similar technologies and that the existence of an NDA  would not restrain B&amp;N from continuing such development provided that information supplied under the NDA was not used.Bottom line, I suspect Spring Design had gotten excited by B&amp;N's interest and was starting to count on a hefty cash infusion when they were "licensed" or bought out.
Given the titles of the executives they were meeting with, I further suspect B&amp;N was looking at a possible partnership in line with the arrangements with Irex or Plastic Logic's Que.
It either didn't work out, or Spring Design didn't like it and here we are.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29967952</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968168</id>
	<title>Could it be?</title>
	<author>mrdoogee</author>
	<datestamp>1257242640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Could this actually be the copyright law protecting the Inventors/Developers from a deep pocketed infringer? I'll reserve judgement, but if copyright law actually HELPS the people who put in the hard work.... wow.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Could this actually be the copyright law protecting the Inventors/Developers from a deep pocketed infringer ?
I 'll reserve judgement , but if copyright law actually HELPS the people who put in the hard work.... wow .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Could this actually be the copyright law protecting the Inventors/Developers from a deep pocketed infringer?
I'll reserve judgement, but if copyright law actually HELPS the people who put in the hard work.... wow.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968000</id>
	<title>Finally, a use for the patent system.</title>
	<author>TravisHein</author>
	<datestamp>1257241920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Usually the patent system is abused by those patent foundry companies turn out patents as their 'business model' to later troll up the real companies that do the innovation.

It's good to finally see a story where a legitimate company that is trying to innovate a real product, might finally be able to use their patents to get a foot hold against what would otherwise be an impossible battle against a huge company.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Usually the patent system is abused by those patent foundry companies turn out patents as their 'business model ' to later troll up the real companies that do the innovation .
It 's good to finally see a story where a legitimate company that is trying to innovate a real product , might finally be able to use their patents to get a foot hold against what would otherwise be an impossible battle against a huge company .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Usually the patent system is abused by those patent foundry companies turn out patents as their 'business model' to later troll up the real companies that do the innovation.
It's good to finally see a story where a legitimate company that is trying to innovate a real product, might finally be able to use their patents to get a foot hold against what would otherwise be an impossible battle against a huge company.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29971512</id>
	<title>Re:The Alex (What B&amp;N ripped off)</title>
	<author>PitaBred</author>
	<datestamp>1257254880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You mean that you can just copy a PDF straight over to the Kindle? I call <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon\_Kindle#File\_formats" title="wikipedia.org">bullshit</a> [wikipedia.org]. The Kindle is very proprietary, and it requires a Windows application to convert files to Amazon's proprietary format. Screw that noise. It also doesn't support EPUB, which is very common in places like Project Gutenberg and so on. Stop pretending the Kindle is "open". It's as open as Windows is, which is to say, not very.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You mean that you can just copy a PDF straight over to the Kindle ?
I call bullshit [ wikipedia.org ] .
The Kindle is very proprietary , and it requires a Windows application to convert files to Amazon 's proprietary format .
Screw that noise .
It also does n't support EPUB , which is very common in places like Project Gutenberg and so on .
Stop pretending the Kindle is " open " .
It 's as open as Windows is , which is to say , not very .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You mean that you can just copy a PDF straight over to the Kindle?
I call bullshit [wikipedia.org].
The Kindle is very proprietary, and it requires a Windows application to convert files to Amazon's proprietary format.
Screw that noise.
It also doesn't support EPUB, which is very common in places like Project Gutenberg and so on.
Stop pretending the Kindle is "open".
It's as open as Windows is, which is to say, not very.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968336</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29973414</id>
	<title>Oh, slashdot</title>
	<author>dangitman</author>
	<datestamp>1257268920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can always rely on slashdot for commentary where something reasonable and somewhat intelligent-sounding:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>What did they steal? Ideas? Give me a break. Does "An android based E-book reader" constitute a patent worthy idea? Actually, of course it does, and that's why I for one do not see the benefit in supporting such startups in cases like these.</p></div><p>Quickly transforms into something straight from the mind of a drooling mental patient:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Patents need to die. Completely.</p> </div><p>Maybe progress could be made here, if every good idea was not countered with equal amounts of crazy extremism.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I can always rely on slashdot for commentary where something reasonable and somewhat intelligent-sounding : What did they steal ?
Ideas ? Give me a break .
Does " An android based E-book reader " constitute a patent worthy idea ?
Actually , of course it does , and that 's why I for one do not see the benefit in supporting such startups in cases like these.Quickly transforms into something straight from the mind of a drooling mental patient : Patents need to die .
Completely. Maybe progress could be made here , if every good idea was not countered with equal amounts of crazy extremism .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can always rely on slashdot for commentary where something reasonable and somewhat intelligent-sounding:What did they steal?
Ideas? Give me a break.
Does "An android based E-book reader" constitute a patent worthy idea?
Actually, of course it does, and that's why I for one do not see the benefit in supporting such startups in cases like these.Quickly transforms into something straight from the mind of a drooling mental patient:Patents need to die.
Completely. Maybe progress could be made here, if every good idea was not countered with equal amounts of crazy extremism.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968254</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29979386</id>
	<title>Re:I read the court filing</title>
	<author>smallfries</author>
	<datestamp>1257008520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wow. You got a PR rep to send you a publicly available document? I mean, you do realise that court filings are public, don't you? So, this PR rep, this women who is employed to facilitate Spring Design's communication with the public, sent you a copy of a publicly available document? Wow! Your social engineering is off the chart...</p><p>For those interested, that don't have 30 whole seconds to google for it themselves, <a href="http://www.scribd.com/doc/22082233/Spring-Design-Sues-Barnes-Noble-The-Filing" title="scribd.com">here it is.</a> [scribd.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow .
You got a PR rep to send you a publicly available document ?
I mean , you do realise that court filings are public , do n't you ?
So , this PR rep , this women who is employed to facilitate Spring Design 's communication with the public , sent you a copy of a publicly available document ?
Wow ! Your social engineering is off the chart...For those interested , that do n't have 30 whole seconds to google for it themselves , here it is .
[ scribd.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow.
You got a PR rep to send you a publicly available document?
I mean, you do realise that court filings are public, don't you?
So, this PR rep, this women who is employed to facilitate Spring Design's communication with the public, sent you a copy of a publicly available document?
Wow! Your social engineering is off the chart...For those interested, that don't have 30 whole seconds to google for it themselves, here it is.
[scribd.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29973330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29970434</id>
	<title>Wait and see</title>
	<author>JasonKChapman</author>
	<datestamp>1257250560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's telling that Spring's press release uses more space extolling the virtues of its product than describing the situation behind the suit. It's also curious that the primary features it hypes "full Internet browsing while reading" and "interactive multi-media open Internet access", while the nook won't even have a Web browser. B&amp;N basically says they might add one later, if the users want it. This is totally a wait and see situation, because right now it's not at all clear who the bad guy is.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's telling that Spring 's press release uses more space extolling the virtues of its product than describing the situation behind the suit .
It 's also curious that the primary features it hypes " full Internet browsing while reading " and " interactive multi-media open Internet access " , while the nook wo n't even have a Web browser .
B&amp;N basically says they might add one later , if the users want it .
This is totally a wait and see situation , because right now it 's not at all clear who the bad guy is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's telling that Spring's press release uses more space extolling the virtues of its product than describing the situation behind the suit.
It's also curious that the primary features it hypes "full Internet browsing while reading" and "interactive multi-media open Internet access", while the nook won't even have a Web browser.
B&amp;N basically says they might add one later, if the users want it.
This is totally a wait and see situation, because right now it's not at all clear who the bad guy is.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968022</id>
	<title>In good faith</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257242040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>TFA says the company showed them the work they had done "In good faith".... what a bunch of dumb shits.  Unless there are some binding contracts involved I think the folks making the Alex are scr3wed....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>TFA says the company showed them the work they had done " In good faith " .... what a bunch of dumb shits .
Unless there are some binding contracts involved I think the folks making the Alex are scr3wed... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>TFA says the company showed them the work they had done "In good faith".... what a bunch of dumb shits.
Unless there are some binding contracts involved I think the folks making the Alex are scr3wed....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968158</id>
	<title>Re:order of things...</title>
	<author>TaggartAleslayer</author>
	<datestamp>1257242640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's sometimes extremely hard to get a large corporation to look at your prototypes, much less sign an NDA before you walk through the door. Be it computer software, hardware, or the new mousetrap, being the little guy trying to find a mega-distributor sometimes comes with unanticipated risks.<br>
&nbsp; <br>You have to be careful not to fall into the trap of blaming the victim. Sometimes you make a showing on good faith, and by the time you realize the empty promises of a partnership are just that, you've already shown too much.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's sometimes extremely hard to get a large corporation to look at your prototypes , much less sign an NDA before you walk through the door .
Be it computer software , hardware , or the new mousetrap , being the little guy trying to find a mega-distributor sometimes comes with unanticipated risks .
  You have to be careful not to fall into the trap of blaming the victim .
Sometimes you make a showing on good faith , and by the time you realize the empty promises of a partnership are just that , you 've already shown too much .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's sometimes extremely hard to get a large corporation to look at your prototypes, much less sign an NDA before you walk through the door.
Be it computer software, hardware, or the new mousetrap, being the little guy trying to find a mega-distributor sometimes comes with unanticipated risks.
  You have to be careful not to fall into the trap of blaming the victim.
Sometimes you make a showing on good faith, and by the time you realize the empty promises of a partnership are just that, you've already shown too much.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968016</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968410</id>
	<title>What's patentable?</title>
	<author>slim</author>
	<datestamp>1257243600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>OK, we all want to support the underdog here. I know I do.</p><p>But seriously, what new, patentable ideas, do you need in an eBook? Make a computer (covered by existing patents), give it an e-paper screen (existing patents) an input device (touch screen, keyboard, rollerball, touchpad - all existing patents), storage (existing patents), OS (existing patents) and some applications (most notably, an eBook reader - existing patents).</p><p>I know people patent all kinds of obvious ideas, but I can't for the life of me see any novel ideas that need solving, cobbling together existing components into an eBook.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>OK , we all want to support the underdog here .
I know I do.But seriously , what new , patentable ideas , do you need in an eBook ?
Make a computer ( covered by existing patents ) , give it an e-paper screen ( existing patents ) an input device ( touch screen , keyboard , rollerball , touchpad - all existing patents ) , storage ( existing patents ) , OS ( existing patents ) and some applications ( most notably , an eBook reader - existing patents ) .I know people patent all kinds of obvious ideas , but I ca n't for the life of me see any novel ideas that need solving , cobbling together existing components into an eBook .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OK, we all want to support the underdog here.
I know I do.But seriously, what new, patentable ideas, do you need in an eBook?
Make a computer (covered by existing patents), give it an e-paper screen (existing patents) an input device (touch screen, keyboard, rollerball, touchpad - all existing patents), storage (existing patents), OS (existing patents) and some applications (most notably, an eBook reader - existing patents).I know people patent all kinds of obvious ideas, but I can't for the life of me see any novel ideas that need solving, cobbling together existing components into an eBook.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968290</id>
	<title>does anyone else think</title>
	<author>archangel9</author>
	<datestamp>1257243180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>that this is fishy?</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Spring Design claimed that the two companies had meetings and other communications, reaching all the way to the executive level, on the subject of the product and collaboration.</p></div><p>Why would a company take its ideas to a corporate giant, discuss and disclose their plans, then both companies release a similar product?  TFA says nothing about the two companies' plans falling apart and going their separate ways with Non-Disclosure agreements in hand.  What went wrong?  If Spring has a legal foot to stand on they'll rake them over the coals, legally.  If the NDAs can't be produced and approved meeting minutes detailing a failed offering aren't shown, B&amp;N could get away with this.</p><p>"Oh, they brought in this cool idea and said we could use it.  No, we didn't sign anything saying we wouldn't... here is the video surveillance tape of their developers handing out copies of the software... we thought it was open source"</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>that this is fishy ? Spring Design claimed that the two companies had meetings and other communications , reaching all the way to the executive level , on the subject of the product and collaboration.Why would a company take its ideas to a corporate giant , discuss and disclose their plans , then both companies release a similar product ?
TFA says nothing about the two companies ' plans falling apart and going their separate ways with Non-Disclosure agreements in hand .
What went wrong ?
If Spring has a legal foot to stand on they 'll rake them over the coals , legally .
If the NDAs ca n't be produced and approved meeting minutes detailing a failed offering are n't shown , B&amp;N could get away with this .
" Oh , they brought in this cool idea and said we could use it .
No , we did n't sign anything saying we would n't... here is the video surveillance tape of their developers handing out copies of the software... we thought it was open source "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>that this is fishy?Spring Design claimed that the two companies had meetings and other communications, reaching all the way to the executive level, on the subject of the product and collaboration.Why would a company take its ideas to a corporate giant, discuss and disclose their plans, then both companies release a similar product?
TFA says nothing about the two companies' plans falling apart and going their separate ways with Non-Disclosure agreements in hand.
What went wrong?
If Spring has a legal foot to stand on they'll rake them over the coals, legally.
If the NDAs can't be produced and approved meeting minutes detailing a failed offering aren't shown, B&amp;N could get away with this.
"Oh, they brought in this cool idea and said we could use it.
No, we didn't sign anything saying we wouldn't... here is the video surveillance tape of their developers handing out copies of the software... we thought it was open source"
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968814</id>
	<title>Re:does anyone else think</title>
	<author>SnarfQuest</author>
	<datestamp>1257245160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I guess that B&amp;N saw the Spring Design thing that looked a lot like the kindle, and that made them design something that looks a lot like the kindle. So, Spring Design has the copyright/patent on ebooks that looks like the kindle? Maybe Amazon should have patented "ebooks that look like the kindle".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess that B&amp;N saw the Spring Design thing that looked a lot like the kindle , and that made them design something that looks a lot like the kindle .
So , Spring Design has the copyright/patent on ebooks that looks like the kindle ?
Maybe Amazon should have patented " ebooks that look like the kindle " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess that B&amp;N saw the Spring Design thing that looked a lot like the kindle, and that made them design something that looks a lot like the kindle.
So, Spring Design has the copyright/patent on ebooks that looks like the kindle?
Maybe Amazon should have patented "ebooks that look like the kindle".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968290</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968336</id>
	<title>Re:The Alex (What B&amp;N ripped off)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257243360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>One of my biggest complaints with the Kindle is Amazon's insistence that it be locked down and only do what Amazon wants it to do.</i> </p><p>You mean the inability to load your own text, html, or several other file formats? Oh wait, it already does all that.</p><p>Or are you talking about loading your own operating system into it? I hope you put the same restrictions on your TV, Microwave oven, refrigerator, washing machine, etc.. It's built to be an appliance, not a laptop. The hardware is designed for long battery life, not the ability to be a PC. The selection of programs are designed to sleep most of the time, which gives it the necessary battery life. If you want a PC, buy a PC. Why must everything be designed to be a PC? Shouldn't you also insist that your vacuum cleaner be user programmable or you will refuse to buy it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One of my biggest complaints with the Kindle is Amazon 's insistence that it be locked down and only do what Amazon wants it to do .
You mean the inability to load your own text , html , or several other file formats ?
Oh wait , it already does all that.Or are you talking about loading your own operating system into it ?
I hope you put the same restrictions on your TV , Microwave oven , refrigerator , washing machine , etc.. It 's built to be an appliance , not a laptop .
The hardware is designed for long battery life , not the ability to be a PC .
The selection of programs are designed to sleep most of the time , which gives it the necessary battery life .
If you want a PC , buy a PC .
Why must everything be designed to be a PC ?
Should n't you also insist that your vacuum cleaner be user programmable or you will refuse to buy it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> One of my biggest complaints with the Kindle is Amazon's insistence that it be locked down and only do what Amazon wants it to do.
You mean the inability to load your own text, html, or several other file formats?
Oh wait, it already does all that.Or are you talking about loading your own operating system into it?
I hope you put the same restrictions on your TV, Microwave oven, refrigerator, washing machine, etc.. It's built to be an appliance, not a laptop.
The hardware is designed for long battery life, not the ability to be a PC.
The selection of programs are designed to sleep most of the time, which gives it the necessary battery life.
If you want a PC, buy a PC.
Why must everything be designed to be a PC?
Shouldn't you also insist that your vacuum cleaner be user programmable or you will refuse to buy it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29967952</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29970662</id>
	<title>Re:History repeats itself.. sort of</title>
	<author>gordguide</author>
	<datestamp>1257251340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>XEROX PARC gave Apple full reign to implement anything they saw, and Apple Engineers had open access to PARC, making several visits.<br>PARC was not charged by XEROX to bring products to market.<br>When Apple decided to implement ideas first seen at PARC, in particular GUI first seen in the Lisa and later, Macintosh, they gave XEROX stock as consideration for value received.<br>XEROX was okay with the deal 100\%.<br>XEROX did try to re-open the deal by suing Apple over GUI implementation, but only after Apple sued Microsoft for taking elements of System7 into Windows when a licensing agreement between Apple and Microsoft covered only the GUI elements in System6.<br>After Apple's suit against Microsoft went nowhere, XEROX dropped the suit against Apple, since the value of the GUI was already established by the courts as, essentially, not much.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>XEROX PARC gave Apple full reign to implement anything they saw , and Apple Engineers had open access to PARC , making several visits.PARC was not charged by XEROX to bring products to market.When Apple decided to implement ideas first seen at PARC , in particular GUI first seen in the Lisa and later , Macintosh , they gave XEROX stock as consideration for value received.XEROX was okay with the deal 100 \ % .XEROX did try to re-open the deal by suing Apple over GUI implementation , but only after Apple sued Microsoft for taking elements of System7 into Windows when a licensing agreement between Apple and Microsoft covered only the GUI elements in System6.After Apple 's suit against Microsoft went nowhere , XEROX dropped the suit against Apple , since the value of the GUI was already established by the courts as , essentially , not much .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>XEROX PARC gave Apple full reign to implement anything they saw, and Apple Engineers had open access to PARC, making several visits.PARC was not charged by XEROX to bring products to market.When Apple decided to implement ideas first seen at PARC, in particular GUI first seen in the Lisa and later, Macintosh, they gave XEROX stock as consideration for value received.XEROX was okay with the deal 100\%.XEROX did try to re-open the deal by suing Apple over GUI implementation, but only after Apple sued Microsoft for taking elements of System7 into Windows when a licensing agreement between Apple and Microsoft covered only the GUI elements in System6.After Apple's suit against Microsoft went nowhere, XEROX dropped the suit against Apple, since the value of the GUI was already established by the courts as, essentially, not much.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29969418</id>
	<title>Re:I'm shocked!</title>
	<author>Zordak</author>
	<datestamp>1257247380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And yet if this were a patent case instead of a trade secret case, this page would be swarming with comments decrying the corrupt and broken patent system, without so much as a cursory glance at the claims.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And yet if this were a patent case instead of a trade secret case , this page would be swarming with comments decrying the corrupt and broken patent system , without so much as a cursory glance at the claims .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And yet if this were a patent case instead of a trade secret case, this page would be swarming with comments decrying the corrupt and broken patent system, without so much as a cursory glance at the claims.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29967902</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29970876</id>
	<title>Re:History repeats itself.. sort of</title>
	<author>idobi</author>
	<datestamp>1257252060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Xerox was paid $17.6M in Apple stock for the visits. Just saying...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Xerox was paid $ 17.6M in Apple stock for the visits .
Just saying.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Xerox was paid $17.6M in Apple stock for the visits.
Just saying...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29967962</id>
	<title>Patents</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257241740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If they've been filling patents all this time, shouldn't that protect them?</p><p>Oh, right. This is in the U.S.A., where money equals justice.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If they 've been filling patents all this time , should n't that protect them ? Oh , right .
This is in the U.S.A. , where money equals justice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they've been filling patents all this time, shouldn't that protect them?Oh, right.
This is in the U.S.A., where money equals justice.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29969006</id>
	<title>Re:What's patentable?</title>
	<author>icebike</author>
	<datestamp>1257245820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My bet is they are claiming dual screens are a big deal. (Which is not true.  Lots of devices have two screens, and some of them (cell phone) can probably read ebooks).</p><p>They do not specifically suggest in their press release that any patents are being violated: <a href="http://egether.com/release/52/" title="egether.com">http://egether.com/release/52/</a> [egether.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My bet is they are claiming dual screens are a big deal .
( Which is not true .
Lots of devices have two screens , and some of them ( cell phone ) can probably read ebooks ) .They do not specifically suggest in their press release that any patents are being violated : http : //egether.com/release/52/ [ egether.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My bet is they are claiming dual screens are a big deal.
(Which is not true.
Lots of devices have two screens, and some of them (cell phone) can probably read ebooks).They do not specifically suggest in their press release that any patents are being violated: http://egether.com/release/52/ [egether.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968410</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968120</id>
	<title>This is why we can't have nice things.</title>
	<author>straponego</author>
	<datestamp>1257242520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><br>This case actually may be as legitimate as they come.  Seriously, if these guys had NDAs and B&amp;N pulled a Microsoft on them, they have my sympathy-- though this was the obvious way to make a new e-reader, these days.  Linux, and now Android linux, are the obvious choices for the OS on any consumer device these days.  You'd have to be morons not to have seen that (for Linux, ~6 years ago-- sorry Palm, too late; for Android, basically on announcement).<br><br>But in general, every new tech product or service that comes out in the US seems to be hit by lawsuits as soon as it appears it will be successful.  At the very least this reduces competition and increases prices.  It's also a huge boon to countries which don't give a rat's ass about IP (see China).  We're killing ourselves.  The US has become a terrible environment for innovation.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This case actually may be as legitimate as they come .
Seriously , if these guys had NDAs and B&amp;N pulled a Microsoft on them , they have my sympathy-- though this was the obvious way to make a new e-reader , these days .
Linux , and now Android linux , are the obvious choices for the OS on any consumer device these days .
You 'd have to be morons not to have seen that ( for Linux , ~ 6 years ago-- sorry Palm , too late ; for Android , basically on announcement ) .But in general , every new tech product or service that comes out in the US seems to be hit by lawsuits as soon as it appears it will be successful .
At the very least this reduces competition and increases prices .
It 's also a huge boon to countries which do n't give a rat 's ass about IP ( see China ) .
We 're killing ourselves .
The US has become a terrible environment for innovation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This case actually may be as legitimate as they come.
Seriously, if these guys had NDAs and B&amp;N pulled a Microsoft on them, they have my sympathy-- though this was the obvious way to make a new e-reader, these days.
Linux, and now Android linux, are the obvious choices for the OS on any consumer device these days.
You'd have to be morons not to have seen that (for Linux, ~6 years ago-- sorry Palm, too late; for Android, basically on announcement).But in general, every new tech product or service that comes out in the US seems to be hit by lawsuits as soon as it appears it will be successful.
At the very least this reduces competition and increases prices.
It's also a huge boon to countries which don't give a rat's ass about IP (see China).
We're killing ourselves.
The US has become a terrible environment for innovation.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29971972</id>
	<title>You think like a ReThuglican Jew</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257257400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You think like a ReThuglican Jew</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You think like a ReThuglican Jew</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You think like a ReThuglican Jew</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968064</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968340</id>
	<title>Yes, the summary is a bit misleading</title>
	<author>sean.peters</author>
	<datestamp>1257243360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>IANAL, but my understanding is that you have rights to an invention it it's either 1) patented, or 2) a trade secret. Not both - by definition, stuff that's patented isn't a secret anymore - you've published the design. The linked article doesn't say anything about trade secrets, just patents - it seems the mistake is in the summary.</htmltext>
<tokenext>IANAL , but my understanding is that you have rights to an invention it it 's either 1 ) patented , or 2 ) a trade secret .
Not both - by definition , stuff that 's patented is n't a secret anymore - you 've published the design .
The linked article does n't say anything about trade secrets , just patents - it seems the mistake is in the summary .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IANAL, but my understanding is that you have rights to an invention it it's either 1) patented, or 2) a trade secret.
Not both - by definition, stuff that's patented isn't a secret anymore - you've published the design.
The linked article doesn't say anything about trade secrets, just patents - it seems the mistake is in the summary.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968172</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29979532</id>
	<title>Re:I read the court filing</title>
	<author>e-scetic</author>
	<datestamp>1257009000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I say the safest route is to get the court filing via the court and post that, then for sure it wouldn't hurt SD's case.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I say the safest route is to get the court filing via the court and post that , then for sure it would n't hurt SD 's case .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I say the safest route is to get the court filing via the court and post that, then for sure it wouldn't hurt SD's case.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29973330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29973846</id>
	<title>Re:The Alex (What B&amp;N ripped off)</title>
	<author>cdrguru</author>
	<datestamp>1257271800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Kindle does not use a Windows application in any way.  It also does not display PDF files without conversion, but I am not aware of any Windows application that will convert most PDF files for use on a Kindle.  There are some tools that support conversion from various formats on Windows, Linux and OSX to the Mobipocket format.  I haven't used any of those.</p><p>PDF is a Page Description language.  If you want to display a PDF page, you need to either have a display surface that will accomodate the orginally described page or you are going to have to do a lot of scrolling around.  Maybe zooming as well.  On a computer this isn't that difficult but on a eBook reader it is not very user friendly.  The Kindle DX attempts to do this and as its screen is almost letter-size it is possible to display PDF pages - just not very well.</p><p>Mostly, if you want the display features of the Kindle, things like dynamic sizing of text, you aren't going to be able to display any of those things with a PDF.  A lot of PDFs out in the world are also just a collection of graphics (bitmaps) and no text at all.  There are services that will attempt to OCR the graphics and add a "hidden" text layer to the PDF document - and I expect them to work like most OCR does, maybe 98\% accuracy.  So in a short 100,000 word book there might only be 2,000 words wrong.  Not so great.</p><p>You want to display PDF documents on eBook reader?  Well, the one thing that will make this really good is to license the Adobe DRM stuff so protected PDF documents can be read.  Then as long as your eBook reader screen is laid out in a manner corresponding to the original page formatting, you will have a good experience.  Public libraries in my area are currently loaning out protected PDF ebooks for the readers that support them - not very many now.  Not being able to display protected Adobe PDF documents cuts out a lot of PDF support.  Not being able to display Google Books (mostly graphics) cuts out another huge part of potential PDFs that could be displayed.</p><p>Yes, the EPUB format would be nice to support, but the Kindle supports Mobipocket which is almost as prevalent as EPUB today.  Yes, I can download Gutenberg documents in Mobipocket format and they work fine with the Kindle.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Kindle does not use a Windows application in any way .
It also does not display PDF files without conversion , but I am not aware of any Windows application that will convert most PDF files for use on a Kindle .
There are some tools that support conversion from various formats on Windows , Linux and OSX to the Mobipocket format .
I have n't used any of those.PDF is a Page Description language .
If you want to display a PDF page , you need to either have a display surface that will accomodate the orginally described page or you are going to have to do a lot of scrolling around .
Maybe zooming as well .
On a computer this is n't that difficult but on a eBook reader it is not very user friendly .
The Kindle DX attempts to do this and as its screen is almost letter-size it is possible to display PDF pages - just not very well.Mostly , if you want the display features of the Kindle , things like dynamic sizing of text , you are n't going to be able to display any of those things with a PDF .
A lot of PDFs out in the world are also just a collection of graphics ( bitmaps ) and no text at all .
There are services that will attempt to OCR the graphics and add a " hidden " text layer to the PDF document - and I expect them to work like most OCR does , maybe 98 \ % accuracy .
So in a short 100,000 word book there might only be 2,000 words wrong .
Not so great.You want to display PDF documents on eBook reader ?
Well , the one thing that will make this really good is to license the Adobe DRM stuff so protected PDF documents can be read .
Then as long as your eBook reader screen is laid out in a manner corresponding to the original page formatting , you will have a good experience .
Public libraries in my area are currently loaning out protected PDF ebooks for the readers that support them - not very many now .
Not being able to display protected Adobe PDF documents cuts out a lot of PDF support .
Not being able to display Google Books ( mostly graphics ) cuts out another huge part of potential PDFs that could be displayed.Yes , the EPUB format would be nice to support , but the Kindle supports Mobipocket which is almost as prevalent as EPUB today .
Yes , I can download Gutenberg documents in Mobipocket format and they work fine with the Kindle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Kindle does not use a Windows application in any way.
It also does not display PDF files without conversion, but I am not aware of any Windows application that will convert most PDF files for use on a Kindle.
There are some tools that support conversion from various formats on Windows, Linux and OSX to the Mobipocket format.
I haven't used any of those.PDF is a Page Description language.
If you want to display a PDF page, you need to either have a display surface that will accomodate the orginally described page or you are going to have to do a lot of scrolling around.
Maybe zooming as well.
On a computer this isn't that difficult but on a eBook reader it is not very user friendly.
The Kindle DX attempts to do this and as its screen is almost letter-size it is possible to display PDF pages - just not very well.Mostly, if you want the display features of the Kindle, things like dynamic sizing of text, you aren't going to be able to display any of those things with a PDF.
A lot of PDFs out in the world are also just a collection of graphics (bitmaps) and no text at all.
There are services that will attempt to OCR the graphics and add a "hidden" text layer to the PDF document - and I expect them to work like most OCR does, maybe 98\% accuracy.
So in a short 100,000 word book there might only be 2,000 words wrong.
Not so great.You want to display PDF documents on eBook reader?
Well, the one thing that will make this really good is to license the Adobe DRM stuff so protected PDF documents can be read.
Then as long as your eBook reader screen is laid out in a manner corresponding to the original page formatting, you will have a good experience.
Public libraries in my area are currently loaning out protected PDF ebooks for the readers that support them - not very many now.
Not being able to display protected Adobe PDF documents cuts out a lot of PDF support.
Not being able to display Google Books (mostly graphics) cuts out another huge part of potential PDFs that could be displayed.Yes, the EPUB format would be nice to support, but the Kindle supports Mobipocket which is almost as prevalent as EPUB today.
Yes, I can download Gutenberg documents in Mobipocket format and they work fine with the Kindle.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29971512</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968670</id>
	<title>Re:Patents</title>
	<author>mea37</author>
	<datestamp>1257244680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If B&amp;N implemented any of those patents, and if they've raised patent claims (TFS is unclear on these points), then yes, it should protect them.</p><p>And maybe it will.  At this stage of the game, the headline for Spring trying to enforce its patents would read "Spring Design Sues Barnes &amp; Noble Over Nook IP"... and look at that, the headline says just such a thing.</p><p>So you're either asking why they aren't doing exactly what they're doing, or your prematurely assuming that it will not work when nothing in TFS or TFA would lead to that conclusion.</p><p>I guess the moderators thing "bashes the U.S. legal system" is the definition of Insightful today.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If B&amp;N implemented any of those patents , and if they 've raised patent claims ( TFS is unclear on these points ) , then yes , it should protect them.And maybe it will .
At this stage of the game , the headline for Spring trying to enforce its patents would read " Spring Design Sues Barnes &amp; Noble Over Nook IP " ... and look at that , the headline says just such a thing.So you 're either asking why they are n't doing exactly what they 're doing , or your prematurely assuming that it will not work when nothing in TFS or TFA would lead to that conclusion.I guess the moderators thing " bashes the U.S. legal system " is the definition of Insightful today .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If B&amp;N implemented any of those patents, and if they've raised patent claims (TFS is unclear on these points), then yes, it should protect them.And maybe it will.
At this stage of the game, the headline for Spring trying to enforce its patents would read "Spring Design Sues Barnes &amp; Noble Over Nook IP"... and look at that, the headline says just such a thing.So you're either asking why they aren't doing exactly what they're doing, or your prematurely assuming that it will not work when nothing in TFS or TFA would lead to that conclusion.I guess the moderators thing "bashes the U.S. legal system" is the definition of Insightful today.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29967962</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29967902</id>
	<title>I'm shocked!</title>
	<author>mpapet</author>
	<datestamp>1257241500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm shocked I tell you!  Huge company with an armada of lawyers steals everything from a startup.  Next thing you know the execs at B&amp;N will be rewarded for their cleverness.</p><p>It's never happened before.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm shocked I tell you !
Huge company with an armada of lawyers steals everything from a startup .
Next thing you know the execs at B&amp;N will be rewarded for their cleverness.It 's never happened before .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm shocked I tell you!
Huge company with an armada of lawyers steals everything from a startup.
Next thing you know the execs at B&amp;N will be rewarded for their cleverness.It's never happened before.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29970824</id>
	<title>moda up</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257251880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">own lube, beverage, irc.secsu4.org 0r so there are people One Here but now BSD machines</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>own lube , beverage , irc.secsu4.org 0r so there are people One Here but now BSD machines [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>own lube, beverage, irc.secsu4.org 0r so there are people One Here but now BSD machines [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29967984</id>
	<title>"Don't be evil" UALA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257241860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If they're using Android isn't, "Don't be evil" in the license agreement?</p><p>I'm so angry, I may never read another book (that's not displayed on a full size LCD monitor) again</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If they 're using Android is n't , " Do n't be evil " in the license agreement ? I 'm so angry , I may never read another book ( that 's not displayed on a full size LCD monitor ) again</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they're using Android isn't, "Don't be evil" in the license agreement?I'm so angry, I may never read another book (that's not displayed on a full size LCD monitor) again</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29969616</id>
	<title>There may be no bad guys in this...</title>
	<author>khb</author>
	<datestamp>1257248100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>B&amp;N may well have been careful to have "firewalled" off the team that evaluated each of the readers (no doubt there were many potential suppliers). In fact, it would be surprising if a large and experienced company didn't take reasonable precautions regarding NDAs.</p><p>The various potential suppliers may individually and/or collectively feel miffed that they weren't selected. If they have acquired (or are in the process of acquiring) various patents they may well get some of the action in any event.</p><p>Of course, perhaps the Spring guys are Trolls or the B&amp;N folks Evil Giants. This will only become known if the case goes all the way to Trial which is relatively rare.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>B&amp;N may well have been careful to have " firewalled " off the team that evaluated each of the readers ( no doubt there were many potential suppliers ) .
In fact , it would be surprising if a large and experienced company did n't take reasonable precautions regarding NDAs.The various potential suppliers may individually and/or collectively feel miffed that they were n't selected .
If they have acquired ( or are in the process of acquiring ) various patents they may well get some of the action in any event.Of course , perhaps the Spring guys are Trolls or the B&amp;N folks Evil Giants .
This will only become known if the case goes all the way to Trial which is relatively rare .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>B&amp;N may well have been careful to have "firewalled" off the team that evaluated each of the readers (no doubt there were many potential suppliers).
In fact, it would be surprising if a large and experienced company didn't take reasonable precautions regarding NDAs.The various potential suppliers may individually and/or collectively feel miffed that they weren't selected.
If they have acquired (or are in the process of acquiring) various patents they may well get some of the action in any event.Of course, perhaps the Spring guys are Trolls or the B&amp;N folks Evil Giants.
This will only become known if the case goes all the way to Trial which is relatively rare.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29967960</id>
	<title>Finally!</title>
	<author>Serenissima</author>
	<datestamp>1257241740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>A good use of the patent system!</htmltext>
<tokenext>A good use of the patent system !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A good use of the patent system!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29973330</id>
	<title>I read the court filing</title>
	<author>jackspenn</author>
	<datestamp>1257268080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>So I read about this on Google News, looked up the Spring Design Inc's site and read a section on their page that said:<p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>... has been working with major book stores, newspapers and publishers over the last 2 years, sharing the vision and the capabilities of the dual screen device.</p></div><p>
So I contact Spring Design rep and asked a simple question (this was about 1 hr before my T-Mobile G1 went bye bye for the evening).  I asked <i>"Did you have any contact with BN about your device prior to the release of the Nook?"</i>
<br> <br>
Woman explained she was not speaking on behalf of company, but when I pressed she said that the simple answer was "yes", but the best way to understand was to read to court filing.  I was then able to get her to e-mail the court filing to me.  Social engineering at it's finest.
<br> <br>
It blew my mind it documents how Spring Design was contacted by Phil Baker (A strategy and development consultant for BN) back in February of this year after the Kindle 2 was released.  Not hard to prove call or e-mail, it then includes NDA that was signed by BN prior to meeting with Spring Design, and that pretty much seals the deal, as it has non-compete and nondisclosure sections BN walked right over.  Then outlines various meetings, conf calls, e-mails, power points, etc. that continued while Spring Design was led to believe BN would be partnering to use their device.
<br> <br>
The really brazen part is it went as high as the CFO of BN and that as late aa 10/1/09 BN was meeting with Spring Design's CEO supposedly over partnering deal, but they still needed to know this and that about how ALEX device worked.
<br> <br>
Better still is on a press call given my Willaim J Lynch at BN, Mr. Lynch who was given various Spring Design's concepts and information, actually refers to product screen benefits exactly as outlined by Spring Design to him.  He says on the transcript of call that BN is releasing the first dual screen e-reader, yet e-mail sent by him and included as exhibit shows he was privy to Spring's Design product.
<br> <br>
Then there is the helpful advice BN gave Spring Design where BN staff recommended Spring Design not talk to Amazon, because (as BN says) Amazon is the kind of company that is likely to steal Spring Design's proprietary information rather then form a partnership as BN was planning.
<br> <br>
So my question to<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. is should I post the PDF briefing on wikileak.org?  There is nothing that says I cannot and it should be available via open records request to the court it was filed in (Northern District of California, San Jose Division).  Only thing is it is marked copy and has a series of numbers on it that could linked to the version e-mailed to me.  I do not want to hurt Spring Design's case, but I do want to get inform out there.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So I read about this on Google News , looked up the Spring Design Inc 's site and read a section on their page that said : ... has been working with major book stores , newspapers and publishers over the last 2 years , sharing the vision and the capabilities of the dual screen device .
So I contact Spring Design rep and asked a simple question ( this was about 1 hr before my T-Mobile G1 went bye bye for the evening ) .
I asked " Did you have any contact with BN about your device prior to the release of the Nook ?
" Woman explained she was not speaking on behalf of company , but when I pressed she said that the simple answer was " yes " , but the best way to understand was to read to court filing .
I was then able to get her to e-mail the court filing to me .
Social engineering at it 's finest .
It blew my mind it documents how Spring Design was contacted by Phil Baker ( A strategy and development consultant for BN ) back in February of this year after the Kindle 2 was released .
Not hard to prove call or e-mail , it then includes NDA that was signed by BN prior to meeting with Spring Design , and that pretty much seals the deal , as it has non-compete and nondisclosure sections BN walked right over .
Then outlines various meetings , conf calls , e-mails , power points , etc .
that continued while Spring Design was led to believe BN would be partnering to use their device .
The really brazen part is it went as high as the CFO of BN and that as late aa 10/1/09 BN was meeting with Spring Design 's CEO supposedly over partnering deal , but they still needed to know this and that about how ALEX device worked .
Better still is on a press call given my Willaim J Lynch at BN , Mr. Lynch who was given various Spring Design 's concepts and information , actually refers to product screen benefits exactly as outlined by Spring Design to him .
He says on the transcript of call that BN is releasing the first dual screen e-reader , yet e-mail sent by him and included as exhibit shows he was privy to Spring 's Design product .
Then there is the helpful advice BN gave Spring Design where BN staff recommended Spring Design not talk to Amazon , because ( as BN says ) Amazon is the kind of company that is likely to steal Spring Design 's proprietary information rather then form a partnership as BN was planning .
So my question to / .
is should I post the PDF briefing on wikileak.org ?
There is nothing that says I can not and it should be available via open records request to the court it was filed in ( Northern District of California , San Jose Division ) .
Only thing is it is marked copy and has a series of numbers on it that could linked to the version e-mailed to me .
I do not want to hurt Spring Design 's case , but I do want to get inform out there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So I read about this on Google News, looked up the Spring Design Inc's site and read a section on their page that said: ... has been working with major book stores, newspapers and publishers over the last 2 years, sharing the vision and the capabilities of the dual screen device.
So I contact Spring Design rep and asked a simple question (this was about 1 hr before my T-Mobile G1 went bye bye for the evening).
I asked "Did you have any contact with BN about your device prior to the release of the Nook?
"
 
Woman explained she was not speaking on behalf of company, but when I pressed she said that the simple answer was "yes", but the best way to understand was to read to court filing.
I was then able to get her to e-mail the court filing to me.
Social engineering at it's finest.
It blew my mind it documents how Spring Design was contacted by Phil Baker (A strategy and development consultant for BN) back in February of this year after the Kindle 2 was released.
Not hard to prove call or e-mail, it then includes NDA that was signed by BN prior to meeting with Spring Design, and that pretty much seals the deal, as it has non-compete and nondisclosure sections BN walked right over.
Then outlines various meetings, conf calls, e-mails, power points, etc.
that continued while Spring Design was led to believe BN would be partnering to use their device.
The really brazen part is it went as high as the CFO of BN and that as late aa 10/1/09 BN was meeting with Spring Design's CEO supposedly over partnering deal, but they still needed to know this and that about how ALEX device worked.
Better still is on a press call given my Willaim J Lynch at BN, Mr. Lynch who was given various Spring Design's concepts and information, actually refers to product screen benefits exactly as outlined by Spring Design to him.
He says on the transcript of call that BN is releasing the first dual screen e-reader, yet e-mail sent by him and included as exhibit shows he was privy to Spring's Design product.
Then there is the helpful advice BN gave Spring Design where BN staff recommended Spring Design not talk to Amazon, because (as BN says) Amazon is the kind of company that is likely to steal Spring Design's proprietary information rather then form a partnership as BN was planning.
So my question to /.
is should I post the PDF briefing on wikileak.org?
There is nothing that says I cannot and it should be available via open records request to the court it was filed in (Northern District of California, San Jose Division).
Only thing is it is marked copy and has a series of numbers on it that could linked to the version e-mailed to me.
I do not want to hurt Spring Design's case, but I do want to get inform out there.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968640</id>
	<title>Re:Ah</title>
	<author>selven</author>
	<datestamp>1257244560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wow, all those rhymes just over some crooks fighting over a book.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow , all those rhymes just over some crooks fighting over a book .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow, all those rhymes just over some crooks fighting over a book.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968202</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968718</id>
	<title>Re:Dual Screens for an e-reader?</title>
	<author>Idbar</author>
	<datestamp>1257244860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Isn't that always the case? Any invention is obvious as soon as someone else invented it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't that always the case ?
Any invention is obvious as soon as someone else invented it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't that always the case?
Any invention is obvious as soon as someone else invented it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968196</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29972038</id>
	<title>Re:This is why we can't have nice things.</title>
	<author>Eil</author>
	<datestamp>1257257880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't know which company is in the right on this, but I feel the need to point out that adding a color touchscreen to an otherwise ordinary ebook reader is not really that novel a concept.</p><p>In fact, when I first read about the Nook, I thought it was a ridiculous idea... why not just live with monochrome and make the whole display a touch-screen like the Sony reader? But I guess it's a reasonable stop-gap for web, video, and games until e-Ink technology can be made to work in color and with a decent refresh rate.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know which company is in the right on this , but I feel the need to point out that adding a color touchscreen to an otherwise ordinary ebook reader is not really that novel a concept.In fact , when I first read about the Nook , I thought it was a ridiculous idea... why not just live with monochrome and make the whole display a touch-screen like the Sony reader ?
But I guess it 's a reasonable stop-gap for web , video , and games until e-Ink technology can be made to work in color and with a decent refresh rate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know which company is in the right on this, but I feel the need to point out that adding a color touchscreen to an otherwise ordinary ebook reader is not really that novel a concept.In fact, when I first read about the Nook, I thought it was a ridiculous idea... why not just live with monochrome and make the whole display a touch-screen like the Sony reader?
But I guess it's a reasonable stop-gap for web, video, and games until e-Ink technology can be made to work in color and with a decent refresh rate.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968120</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968080</id>
	<title>Re:I'm shocked!</title>
	<author>avilliers</author>
	<datestamp>1257242280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'm shocked I tell you!  Huge company with an armada of lawyers steals everything from a startup.  Next thing you know the execs at B&amp;N will be rewarded for their cleverness.</p><p>It's never happened before.</p></div><p>Indeed.</p><p>Also, never before in the history of corporate America, has a small company make a predictable copy of product and then sued a bigger competitor for it's equally predictable product.  This is all thoroughly uncharted territory.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;) </p><p>Absent a lot more information, there's really no way to figure if B&amp;N is remotely guilty of anything at all. Talks about licensing do *not* prevent you from working on a similar product yourself; the practice is routine.  If your internal project fails or is delayed, you want a backup--that doesn't commit you to buying or licensing before you've signed a deal.  And Slashdot, of all places, should be sceptical of claims that a company "deserves" some space in the IP world just for itself because they thought about something similar.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm shocked I tell you !
Huge company with an armada of lawyers steals everything from a startup .
Next thing you know the execs at B&amp;N will be rewarded for their cleverness.It 's never happened before.Indeed.Also , never before in the history of corporate America , has a small company make a predictable copy of product and then sued a bigger competitor for it 's equally predictable product .
This is all thoroughly uncharted territory .
; ) Absent a lot more information , there 's really no way to figure if B&amp;N is remotely guilty of anything at all .
Talks about licensing do * not * prevent you from working on a similar product yourself ; the practice is routine .
If your internal project fails or is delayed , you want a backup--that does n't commit you to buying or licensing before you 've signed a deal .
And Slashdot , of all places , should be sceptical of claims that a company " deserves " some space in the IP world just for itself because they thought about something similar .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm shocked I tell you!
Huge company with an armada of lawyers steals everything from a startup.
Next thing you know the execs at B&amp;N will be rewarded for their cleverness.It's never happened before.Indeed.Also, never before in the history of corporate America, has a small company make a predictable copy of product and then sued a bigger competitor for it's equally predictable product.
This is all thoroughly uncharted territory.
;) Absent a lot more information, there's really no way to figure if B&amp;N is remotely guilty of anything at all.
Talks about licensing do *not* prevent you from working on a similar product yourself; the practice is routine.
If your internal project fails or is delayed, you want a backup--that doesn't commit you to buying or licensing before you've signed a deal.
And Slashdot, of all places, should be sceptical of claims that a company "deserves" some space in the IP world just for itself because they thought about something similar.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29967902</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29969174</id>
	<title>Re:does anyone else think</title>
	<author>jjohnson</author>
	<datestamp>1257246420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A very rational calculation that a large corporation like B&amp;N might make is that a company like Spring Design doesn't have the financial wherewithal to sue them for outright stealing the design.  When the spreadsheet is done, it might show that it's cheaper to tie up Spring Design in court for a couple years, exhausting their venture capital until they give up, than it would be to license the design.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A very rational calculation that a large corporation like B&amp;N might make is that a company like Spring Design does n't have the financial wherewithal to sue them for outright stealing the design .
When the spreadsheet is done , it might show that it 's cheaper to tie up Spring Design in court for a couple years , exhausting their venture capital until they give up , than it would be to license the design .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A very rational calculation that a large corporation like B&amp;N might make is that a company like Spring Design doesn't have the financial wherewithal to sue them for outright stealing the design.
When the spreadsheet is done, it might show that it's cheaper to tie up Spring Design in court for a couple years, exhausting their venture capital until they give up, than it would be to license the design.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968290</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29974412</id>
	<title>Re:The Alex (What B&amp;N ripped off)</title>
	<author>garynuman</author>
	<datestamp>1257276240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'm talking about how Amazon can force it to delete whatever they want from YOUR kindle. It means that you are not the absolute overlord of your own hardware, Amazon is, a fact that I find unacceptable.</p></div><p>yeah plus why would people understand your original post its not like we're in an OPEN SOURCE forum or anything... and its not like Linux users try to install a build of Linux on everything and anything more powerful than a toaster oven, yeah, good thing that's not the case...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm talking about how Amazon can force it to delete whatever they want from YOUR kindle .
It means that you are not the absolute overlord of your own hardware , Amazon is , a fact that I find unacceptable.yeah plus why would people understand your original post its not like we 're in an OPEN SOURCE forum or anything... and its not like Linux users try to install a build of Linux on everything and anything more powerful than a toaster oven , yeah , good thing that 's not the case.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm talking about how Amazon can force it to delete whatever they want from YOUR kindle.
It means that you are not the absolute overlord of your own hardware, Amazon is, a fact that I find unacceptable.yeah plus why would people understand your original post its not like we're in an OPEN SOURCE forum or anything... and its not like Linux users try to install a build of Linux on everything and anything more powerful than a toaster oven, yeah, good thing that's not the case...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968604</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968016</id>
	<title>order of things...</title>
	<author>uncanny</author>
	<datestamp>1257242040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>they have been developing a dual-screen, Android-based e-book reader since 2006, filing patents all the while; and that they showed pretty much everything to Barnes &amp; Noble in the expectation of working together with them</p> </div><p>Perhaps you should have gotten a deal, then shown them all your secrets!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>they have been developing a dual-screen , Android-based e-book reader since 2006 , filing patents all the while ; and that they showed pretty much everything to Barnes &amp; Noble in the expectation of working together with them Perhaps you should have gotten a deal , then shown them all your secrets !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>they have been developing a dual-screen, Android-based e-book reader since 2006, filing patents all the while; and that they showed pretty much everything to Barnes &amp; Noble in the expectation of working together with them Perhaps you should have gotten a deal, then shown them all your secrets!
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29969696</id>
	<title>Re:The Alex (What B&amp;N ripped off)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257248280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Shouldn't you also insist that your vacuum cleaner be user programmable or you will refuse to buy it?</p></div><p> <a href="http://store.irobot.com/home/" title="irobot.com" rel="nofollow">Maybe s/he does</a> [irobot.com]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Should n't you also insist that your vacuum cleaner be user programmable or you will refuse to buy it ?
Maybe s/he does [ irobot.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Shouldn't you also insist that your vacuum cleaner be user programmable or you will refuse to buy it?
Maybe s/he does [irobot.com]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968336</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29980910</id>
	<title>Re:I read the court filing</title>
	<author>mt1955</author>
	<datestamp>1257013200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>It looks like there are copies of it here:

<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2009/11/03/spring-design-vs-barnes-and-noble-all-the-nooks-and-crannies/" title="engadget.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.engadget.com/2009/11/03/spring-design-vs-barnes-and-noble-all-the-nooks-and-crannies/</a> [engadget.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>It looks like there are copies of it here : http : //www.engadget.com/2009/11/03/spring-design-vs-barnes-and-noble-all-the-nooks-and-crannies/ [ engadget.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It looks like there are copies of it here:

http://www.engadget.com/2009/11/03/spring-design-vs-barnes-and-noble-all-the-nooks-and-crannies/ [engadget.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29973330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968848</id>
	<title>Re:The Alex (What B&amp;N ripped off)</title>
	<author>FlyingBishop</author>
	<datestamp>1257245280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For the past couple years, I have put the same restrictions on my TV.</p><p>The thing is, I don't want a PC. I want something with long battery life that can run console Emacs, so I can take it out to a cabin with no electricity and write for weeks at a time. (Text not code.) There's no reason this device shouldn't satisfy that, the hardware has all the capabilities.</p><p>It does however make sense that it's something I would have to roll myself. I need that freedom if I'm putting money into this sort of thing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For the past couple years , I have put the same restrictions on my TV.The thing is , I do n't want a PC .
I want something with long battery life that can run console Emacs , so I can take it out to a cabin with no electricity and write for weeks at a time .
( Text not code .
) There 's no reason this device should n't satisfy that , the hardware has all the capabilities.It does however make sense that it 's something I would have to roll myself .
I need that freedom if I 'm putting money into this sort of thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For the past couple years, I have put the same restrictions on my TV.The thing is, I don't want a PC.
I want something with long battery life that can run console Emacs, so I can take it out to a cabin with no electricity and write for weeks at a time.
(Text not code.
) There's no reason this device shouldn't satisfy that, the hardware has all the capabilities.It does however make sense that it's something I would have to roll myself.
I need that freedom if I'm putting money into this sort of thing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968336</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968604</id>
	<title>Re:The Alex (What B&amp;N ripped off)</title>
	<author>selven</author>
	<datestamp>1257244440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm talking about how Amazon can force it to delete whatever they want from YOUR kindle. It means that you are not the absolute overlord of your own hardware, Amazon is, a fact that I find unacceptable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm talking about how Amazon can force it to delete whatever they want from YOUR kindle .
It means that you are not the absolute overlord of your own hardware , Amazon is , a fact that I find unacceptable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm talking about how Amazon can force it to delete whatever they want from YOUR kindle.
It means that you are not the absolute overlord of your own hardware, Amazon is, a fact that I find unacceptable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968336</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968686</id>
	<title>Re:trade secrets</title>
	<author>Hognoxious</author>
	<datestamp>1257244740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Somebody brought out a double (or was it even triple) screen laptop a few years back.   I doubt it sold many because it weighed about 8 million pounds but the basic idea of multiple screens is nothing special at all.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Somebody brought out a double ( or was it even triple ) screen laptop a few years back .
I doubt it sold many because it weighed about 8 million pounds but the basic idea of multiple screens is nothing special at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Somebody brought out a double (or was it even triple) screen laptop a few years back.
I doubt it sold many because it weighed about 8 million pounds but the basic idea of multiple screens is nothing special at all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968172</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29973464</id>
	<title>Re:This is why we can't have nice things.</title>
	<author>dangitman</author>
	<datestamp>1257269460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>though this was the obvious way to make a new e-reader, these days.</p></div><p>Eh, what? The obvious way to make an eBook reader these days is to waste space by putting a power-consuming, small color LCD underneath the e-Ink screen, that performs ancillary functions, rather than having a larger e-Ink screen? I'm not sure what kind of designer that is obvious to.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>though this was the obvious way to make a new e-reader , these days.Eh , what ?
The obvious way to make an eBook reader these days is to waste space by putting a power-consuming , small color LCD underneath the e-Ink screen , that performs ancillary functions , rather than having a larger e-Ink screen ?
I 'm not sure what kind of designer that is obvious to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>though this was the obvious way to make a new e-reader, these days.Eh, what?
The obvious way to make an eBook reader these days is to waste space by putting a power-consuming, small color LCD underneath the e-Ink screen, that performs ancillary functions, rather than having a larger e-Ink screen?
I'm not sure what kind of designer that is obvious to.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968120</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29972814</id>
	<title>Re:It's bogus. They don't even have a patent.</title>
	<author>lena\_10326</author>
	<datestamp>1257263700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>There's a huge difference between "patent-pending" and "we actually have an enforceable patent."</p></div></blockquote><p>

Just curious. What leads a person like you to spread inaccurate information with such fervor?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's a huge difference between " patent-pending " and " we actually have an enforceable patent .
" Just curious .
What leads a person like you to spread inaccurate information with such fervor ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's a huge difference between "patent-pending" and "we actually have an enforceable patent.
"

Just curious.
What leads a person like you to spread inaccurate information with such fervor?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29969124</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968052</id>
	<title>Are you sure this isn't a troll?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257242160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Spring Design claims that they have been developing a dual-screen, Android-based e-book reader since 2006, filing patents all the while</p></div><p>This doesn't seem possible, as Android was first officially released in late 2007, and Spring Design does not appear to be a member of the Open Handset Alliance, indicating that they weren't privy to Android during it's original inception.</p><p>Setting aside Android, the Nook itself is an eBook reader, a type of device that's been developed by numerous companies for ages, so there's a lot of prior art.</p><p>Does Nook incorporate specific (unknown?) features that are otherwise unique to the Alex e-Book reader developed by Spring?  If not, then they would appear not to have a case.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Spring Design claims that they have been developing a dual-screen , Android-based e-book reader since 2006 , filing patents all the whileThis does n't seem possible , as Android was first officially released in late 2007 , and Spring Design does not appear to be a member of the Open Handset Alliance , indicating that they were n't privy to Android during it 's original inception.Setting aside Android , the Nook itself is an eBook reader , a type of device that 's been developed by numerous companies for ages , so there 's a lot of prior art.Does Nook incorporate specific ( unknown ?
) features that are otherwise unique to the Alex e-Book reader developed by Spring ?
If not , then they would appear not to have a case .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Spring Design claims that they have been developing a dual-screen, Android-based e-book reader since 2006, filing patents all the whileThis doesn't seem possible, as Android was first officially released in late 2007, and Spring Design does not appear to be a member of the Open Handset Alliance, indicating that they weren't privy to Android during it's original inception.Setting aside Android, the Nook itself is an eBook reader, a type of device that's been developed by numerous companies for ages, so there's a lot of prior art.Does Nook incorporate specific (unknown?
) features that are otherwise unique to the Alex e-Book reader developed by Spring?
If not, then they would appear not to have a case.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968406</id>
	<title>Sigh</title>
	<author>Hognoxious</author>
	<datestamp>1257243600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The word patent means open or visible.  Honours in England are granted by "letters patent" which are sealed in an open, i.e. readable, form.  The meaning carries through into law; something can be a trade secret or patented but not both.</p><p>So how their patents, which they shared with a) B&amp;N and b) every literate person in the world, can be a <i>secret</i> is a mystery to me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The word patent means open or visible .
Honours in England are granted by " letters patent " which are sealed in an open , i.e .
readable , form .
The meaning carries through into law ; something can be a trade secret or patented but not both.So how their patents , which they shared with a ) B&amp;N and b ) every literate person in the world , can be a secret is a mystery to me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The word patent means open or visible.
Honours in England are granted by "letters patent" which are sealed in an open, i.e.
readable, form.
The meaning carries through into law; something can be a trade secret or patented but not both.So how their patents, which they shared with a) B&amp;N and b) every literate person in the world, can be a secret is a mystery to me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29970106</id>
	<title>Re:Patents</title>
	<author>Jeian</author>
	<datestamp>1257249480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Having laws against this sort of thing doesn't mean that it won't ever happen, it means that the victims have legal recourse if it does. Working as intended, unless they somehow lose the court battle.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Having laws against this sort of thing does n't mean that it wo n't ever happen , it means that the victims have legal recourse if it does .
Working as intended , unless they somehow lose the court battle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Having laws against this sort of thing doesn't mean that it won't ever happen, it means that the victims have legal recourse if it does.
Working as intended, unless they somehow lose the court battle.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29967962</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29971580</id>
	<title>Re:It's bogus. They don't even have a patent.</title>
	<author>icebike</author>
	<datestamp>1257255180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dual screen design is patentable?</p><p>You mean like my Razr?</p><p>You can not take an idea available in the market on one device, bolt it to another, and claim patent-ability.  Not when such an application would be obvious to anyone skilled in the craft.<br>I can't believe they are going to try to hang their hat on that.  Will they have the moxie to take on Microsoft to court over Microsoft's Courier?  <a href="http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2009/09/23/microsoft\_courier/" title="reghardware.co.uk">http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2009/09/23/microsoft\_courier/</a> [reghardware.co.uk]</p><p>I don't think this is a patent fight as much as a NDA violation fight.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dual screen design is patentable ? You mean like my Razr ? You can not take an idea available in the market on one device , bolt it to another , and claim patent-ability .
Not when such an application would be obvious to anyone skilled in the craft.I ca n't believe they are going to try to hang their hat on that .
Will they have the moxie to take on Microsoft to court over Microsoft 's Courier ?
http : //www.reghardware.co.uk/2009/09/23/microsoft \ _courier/ [ reghardware.co.uk ] I do n't think this is a patent fight as much as a NDA violation fight .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dual screen design is patentable?You mean like my Razr?You can not take an idea available in the market on one device, bolt it to another, and claim patent-ability.
Not when such an application would be obvious to anyone skilled in the craft.I can't believe they are going to try to hang their hat on that.
Will they have the moxie to take on Microsoft to court over Microsoft's Courier?
http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2009/09/23/microsoft\_courier/ [reghardware.co.uk]I don't think this is a patent fight as much as a NDA violation fight.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29969124</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968196</id>
	<title>Dual Screens for an e-reader?</title>
	<author>2obvious4u</author>
	<datestamp>1257242820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How does this not fall under the obvious clause?  There are millions of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book" title="wikipedia.org">these</a> [wikipedia.org] on shelves everywhere already.</htmltext>
<tokenext>How does this not fall under the obvious clause ?
There are millions of these [ wikipedia.org ] on shelves everywhere already .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How does this not fall under the obvious clause?
There are millions of these [wikipedia.org] on shelves everywhere already.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968172</id>
	<title>trade secrets</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257242640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Once they are patented, they aren't secret anymore.    It looks like B&amp;N might have been using those secrets to develop something, but I don't think the idea of a dual screen is all that revolutionary.. only slightly different format than some handheld games.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Once they are patented , they are n't secret anymore .
It looks like B&amp;N might have been using those secrets to develop something , but I do n't think the idea of a dual screen is all that revolutionary.. only slightly different format than some handheld games .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Once they are patented, they aren't secret anymore.
It looks like B&amp;N might have been using those secrets to develop something, but I don't think the idea of a dual screen is all that revolutionary.. only slightly different format than some handheld games.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968238</id>
	<title>Re:I'm shocked!</title>
	<author>CannonballHead</author>
	<datestamp>1257243000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Apparently they're already guilty, in your mind?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Apparently they 're already guilty , in your mind ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apparently they're already guilty, in your mind?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29967902</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968396</id>
	<title>Re:Finally, a use for the patent system.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257243540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I tend to agree but then I have not seen the patents yet. Hardware patents I feel are fine for the most part. It is stupid software patents that get to me.<br>The question is what did they patent. I mean is a two screen device going to be patentable? Couldn't you claim the Nintendo DS as prior art since people have used it as a book reader?<br>As I said I have not read the patents so I am not sure where I stand on this but yes it could be a good use for patent law.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I tend to agree but then I have not seen the patents yet .
Hardware patents I feel are fine for the most part .
It is stupid software patents that get to me.The question is what did they patent .
I mean is a two screen device going to be patentable ?
Could n't you claim the Nintendo DS as prior art since people have used it as a book reader ? As I said I have not read the patents so I am not sure where I stand on this but yes it could be a good use for patent law .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I tend to agree but then I have not seen the patents yet.
Hardware patents I feel are fine for the most part.
It is stupid software patents that get to me.The question is what did they patent.
I mean is a two screen device going to be patentable?
Couldn't you claim the Nintendo DS as prior art since people have used it as a book reader?As I said I have not read the patents so I am not sure where I stand on this but yes it could be a good use for patent law.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968000</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29971958</id>
	<title>I love IP law</title>
	<author>countertrolling</author>
	<datestamp>1257257280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's so abusive it's actually sexy.</p><p><i>Das ist gut! C'est fantastique!<br>Hit me! hit me! hit me!</i></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's so abusive it 's actually sexy.Das ist gut !
C'est fantastique ! Hit me !
hit me !
hit me !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's so abusive it's actually sexy.Das ist gut!
C'est fantastique!Hit me!
hit me!
hit me!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968064</id>
	<title>Re:I'm shocked!</title>
	<author>DiamondGeezer</author>
	<datestamp>1257242220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wait for the inevitable horde to tell us that its patents that are evil and that they only encourage stealing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wait for the inevitable horde to tell us that its patents that are evil and that they only encourage stealing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wait for the inevitable horde to tell us that its patents that are evil and that they only encourage stealing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29967902</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29967854</id>
	<title>First</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257241260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>First Post!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First Post !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First Post!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29972138</id>
	<title>Re:The Alex (What B&amp;N ripped off)</title>
	<author>cynyr</author>
	<datestamp>1257258600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>did you buy the ebook? or did you really rent it until they say otherwise for a one time fee? i'm pretty sure it is the latter. What you are looking for isn't the hardware, it's the software/formats.</htmltext>
<tokenext>did you buy the ebook ?
or did you really rent it until they say otherwise for a one time fee ?
i 'm pretty sure it is the latter .
What you are looking for is n't the hardware , it 's the software/formats .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>did you buy the ebook?
or did you really rent it until they say otherwise for a one time fee?
i'm pretty sure it is the latter.
What you are looking for isn't the hardware, it's the software/formats.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968604</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968262</id>
	<title>My eyes must be going.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257243060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Man, I think I need to get glasses.  I looked at the headline, saw that Spring Design was suing Barnes and Noble over Nookie, and thought that maybe I was in the wrong business.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Man , I think I need to get glasses .
I looked at the headline , saw that Spring Design was suing Barnes and Noble over Nookie , and thought that maybe I was in the wrong business .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Man, I think I need to get glasses.
I looked at the headline, saw that Spring Design was suing Barnes and Noble over Nookie, and thought that maybe I was in the wrong business.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29967952</id>
	<title>The Alex (What B&amp;N ripped off)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257241740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Alex, with its unique Duet Navigator, provides the capability for interaction and navigation techniques of the two screens and furthermore utilizes the capabilities of Android to enhance the reader's experience by supporting interactive access to the Internet for references and links. As the first in the market to offer an e-book with full Internet browsing while reading and with easy navigational control via its touch screen, Alex is well-positioned to offer the most dynamic and powerful reading device in the market.</p></div><p>This thing looks awesome. Good for Spring Design in protecting it's IP. One of my biggest complaints with the Kindle is Amazon's insistence that it be locked down and only do what Amazon wants it to do. The Alex uses Android and sounds like it's a sweet device that might be hackable and could be turned into a really really useful tool. <br> <br>
Here's hoping that Spring Design really are the good guys in this.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Alex , with its unique Duet Navigator , provides the capability for interaction and navigation techniques of the two screens and furthermore utilizes the capabilities of Android to enhance the reader 's experience by supporting interactive access to the Internet for references and links .
As the first in the market to offer an e-book with full Internet browsing while reading and with easy navigational control via its touch screen , Alex is well-positioned to offer the most dynamic and powerful reading device in the market.This thing looks awesome .
Good for Spring Design in protecting it 's IP .
One of my biggest complaints with the Kindle is Amazon 's insistence that it be locked down and only do what Amazon wants it to do .
The Alex uses Android and sounds like it 's a sweet device that might be hackable and could be turned into a really really useful tool .
Here 's hoping that Spring Design really are the good guys in this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Alex, with its unique Duet Navigator, provides the capability for interaction and navigation techniques of the two screens and furthermore utilizes the capabilities of Android to enhance the reader's experience by supporting interactive access to the Internet for references and links.
As the first in the market to offer an e-book with full Internet browsing while reading and with easy navigational control via its touch screen, Alex is well-positioned to offer the most dynamic and powerful reading device in the market.This thing looks awesome.
Good for Spring Design in protecting it's IP.
One of my biggest complaints with the Kindle is Amazon's insistence that it be locked down and only do what Amazon wants it to do.
The Alex uses Android and sounds like it's a sweet device that might be hackable and could be turned into a really really useful tool.
Here's hoping that Spring Design really are the good guys in this.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968772</id>
	<title>Re:What's patentable?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257244980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Been there been done  that..its how the world works... bigger fish will always come in and eat where the smaller fish had good grazing.</p><p>Small fish need to stop being lazy and showing the big fish where to eat thinking that the big fish will give them money for it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Been there been done that..its how the world works... bigger fish will always come in and eat where the smaller fish had good grazing.Small fish need to stop being lazy and showing the big fish where to eat thinking that the big fish will give them money for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Been there been done  that..its how the world works... bigger fish will always come in and eat where the smaller fish had good grazing.Small fish need to stop being lazy and showing the big fish where to eat thinking that the big fish will give them money for it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968410</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968256</id>
	<title>History repeats itself.. sort of</title>
	<author>mrdoogee</author>
	<datestamp>1257243060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Xerox PARC: So we invented this really handy user input device, want to see?</p><p>Apple: Sure!</p><p>Xerox: Promise you'll license it from us?</p><p>Apple: Of course!</p></div><p>Always always always get the NDA's and License Agreements signed before you show the goods off.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Xerox PARC : So we invented this really handy user input device , want to see ? Apple : Sure ! Xerox : Promise you 'll license it from us ? Apple : Of course ! Always always always get the NDA 's and License Agreements signed before you show the goods off .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Xerox PARC: So we invented this really handy user input device, want to see?Apple: Sure!Xerox: Promise you'll license it from us?Apple: Of course!Always always always get the NDA's and License Agreements signed before you show the goods off.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968016</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29974362</id>
	<title>Re:Dual Screens for an e-reader?</title>
	<author>Renraku</author>
	<datestamp>1257275640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The book part is obvious, but then, so are wheels on cars.

The unique and unpredictable part is the design.  The Kindle is a single screen PDA type system, and Spring's design is a two screen system.  Consumers will choose whichever one they like the best, and the patent is to prevent the Kindle 2 from copying Spring's design when Spring wins the competition.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The book part is obvious , but then , so are wheels on cars .
The unique and unpredictable part is the design .
The Kindle is a single screen PDA type system , and Spring 's design is a two screen system .
Consumers will choose whichever one they like the best , and the patent is to prevent the Kindle 2 from copying Spring 's design when Spring wins the competition .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The book part is obvious, but then, so are wheels on cars.
The unique and unpredictable part is the design.
The Kindle is a single screen PDA type system, and Spring's design is a two screen system.
Consumers will choose whichever one they like the best, and the patent is to prevent the Kindle 2 from copying Spring's design when Spring wins the competition.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968196</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29973038</id>
	<title>Nook e-book reader?</title>
	<author>PPH</author>
	<datestamp>1257265740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What was B&amp;N thinking when they named a product the "nooky book reader"?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What was B&amp;N thinking when they named a product the " nooky book reader " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What was B&amp;N thinking when they named a product the "nooky book reader"?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29971966</id>
	<title>Re:The Alex (What B&amp;N ripped off)</title>
	<author>Chyeld</author>
	<datestamp>1257257340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, in essense you don't know wtf you are talking about and just don't like the Kindle. The only things Amazon can 'delete' off your system are books that you've licensed access for through the Amazon bookstore. Anything you've uploaded to it on your own, is untouchable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , in essense you do n't know wtf you are talking about and just do n't like the Kindle .
The only things Amazon can 'delete ' off your system are books that you 've licensed access for through the Amazon bookstore .
Anything you 've uploaded to it on your own , is untouchable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, in essense you don't know wtf you are talking about and just don't like the Kindle.
The only things Amazon can 'delete' off your system are books that you've licensed access for through the Amazon bookstore.
Anything you've uploaded to it on your own, is untouchable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968604</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29971276</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257253800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The summary is a bit off.  The Android preview SDK was first released in Nov. 2007.  It would be hard for Spring to be working on an Android device for at least a year before the SDK was released.  I didn't see anything about Android in the article.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The summary is a bit off .
The Android preview SDK was first released in Nov. 2007. It would be hard for Spring to be working on an Android device for at least a year before the SDK was released .
I did n't see anything about Android in the article .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The summary is a bit off.
The Android preview SDK was first released in Nov. 2007.  It would be hard for Spring to be working on an Android device for at least a year before the SDK was released.
I didn't see anything about Android in the article.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29973674</id>
	<title>Re:The Alex (What B&amp;N ripped off)</title>
	<author>Fizzol</author>
	<datestamp>1257270720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>&gt;The Kindle is very proprietary
<br>
No, it really isn't.
<br> <br>
"it requires a Windows application to convert files to Amazon's proprietary format"
<br>
No, it doesn't.
<br> <br>
"It also doesn't support EPUB, which is very common in places like Project Gutenberg"
<br>
Plain text files are even more common and the Kindle supports those as a native format, also EPUBs convert to mobipocket pretty much flawlessly.
<br> <br>
There's very little I can't read on my Kindle if I care to. There are a couple formats that it doesn't support directly, but in a year and a half that hasn't been a problem.</htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; The Kindle is very proprietary No , it really is n't .
" it requires a Windows application to convert files to Amazon 's proprietary format " No , it does n't .
" It also does n't support EPUB , which is very common in places like Project Gutenberg " Plain text files are even more common and the Kindle supports those as a native format , also EPUBs convert to mobipocket pretty much flawlessly .
There 's very little I ca n't read on my Kindle if I care to .
There are a couple formats that it does n't support directly , but in a year and a half that has n't been a problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;The Kindle is very proprietary

No, it really isn't.
"it requires a Windows application to convert files to Amazon's proprietary format"

No, it doesn't.
"It also doesn't support EPUB, which is very common in places like Project Gutenberg"

Plain text files are even more common and the Kindle supports those as a native format, also EPUBs convert to mobipocket pretty much flawlessly.
There's very little I can't read on my Kindle if I care to.
There are a couple formats that it doesn't support directly, but in a year and a half that hasn't been a problem.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29971512</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29969336</id>
	<title>Adsense</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257247020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I love that the ad I got for this article on slashdot was for the B&amp;N nook.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I love that the ad I got for this article on slashdot was for the B&amp;N nook .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I love that the ad I got for this article on slashdot was for the B&amp;N nook.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968104</id>
	<title>Buy him out, boys...</title>
	<author>frank\_adrian314159</author>
	<datestamp>1257242400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm shocked... simply shocked that a large company would ever screw over a small player like this.  God knows I can't think of anything like this happening before.  Well, not for the last few minutes, at least.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm shocked... simply shocked that a large company would ever screw over a small player like this .
God knows I ca n't think of anything like this happening before .
Well , not for the last few minutes , at least .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm shocked... simply shocked that a large company would ever screw over a small player like this.
God knows I can't think of anything like this happening before.
Well, not for the last few minutes, at least.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29975538</id>
	<title>Re:Oh, slashdot</title>
	<author>Kattspya</author>
	<datestamp>1256984820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You seem to have misplaced your argument. Have you tried looking under the table for it?</htmltext>
<tokenext>You seem to have misplaced your argument .
Have you tried looking under the table for it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You seem to have misplaced your argument.
Have you tried looking under the table for it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29973414</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_2023209_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29992076
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29967952
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_2023209_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29971966
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968604
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968336
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29967952
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_2023209_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29979532
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29973330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_2023209_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968238
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29967902
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_2023209_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29969006
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968410
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_2023209_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29974362
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968196
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_2023209_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968336
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29967952
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_2023209_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29972814
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29969124
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29967902
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_2023209_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968686
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968172
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_2023209_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29971580
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29969124
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29967902
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_2023209_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29970876
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968016
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_2023209_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29973846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29971512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968336
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29967952
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_2023209_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968158
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968016
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_2023209_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29970106
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29967962
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_2023209_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29974412
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968604
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968336
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29967952
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_2023209_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968000
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_2023209_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29979386
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29973330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_2023209_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29975538
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29973414
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29967902
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_2023209_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968718
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968196
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_2023209_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968814
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968290
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_2023209_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29971972
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968064
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29967902
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_2023209_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29969418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29967902
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_2023209_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968172
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_2023209_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29972038
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968120
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_2023209_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968772
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968410
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_2023209_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29969696
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968336
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29967952
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_2023209_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29980910
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29973330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_2023209_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968640
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968202
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_2023209_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29972138
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968604
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968336
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29967952
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_2023209_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29969174
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968290
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_2023209_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29973674
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29971512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968336
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29967952
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_2023209_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29973464
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968120
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_2023209_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968670
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29967962
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_2023209_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968080
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29967902
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_2023209_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29970662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968016
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_03_2023209_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29992228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29973330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_03_2023209.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968196
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29974362
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968718
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_03_2023209.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29967952
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968336
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968604
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29971966
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29972138
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29974412
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29971512
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29973846
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29973674
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968848
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29969696
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29992076
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_03_2023209.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29973330
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29979532
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29979386
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29980910
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29992228
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_03_2023209.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968016
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968158
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968256
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29970876
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29970662
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_03_2023209.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968168
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_03_2023209.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968000
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968396
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_03_2023209.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968410
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29969006
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968772
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_03_2023209.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29967854
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_03_2023209.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968022
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_03_2023209.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968290
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29969174
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968814
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_03_2023209.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968120
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29972038
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29973464
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_03_2023209.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968172
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968686
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968340
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_03_2023209.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29967918
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_03_2023209.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968262
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_03_2023209.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968052
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_03_2023209.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968202
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968640
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_03_2023209.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29967962
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29970106
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968670
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_03_2023209.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29967902
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968080
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29969418
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29969124
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29971580
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29972814
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968238
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968064
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29971972
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29968254
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29973414
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_03_2023209.29975538
</commentlist>
</conversation>
