<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_15_001212</id>
	<title>Eolas Sues World + Dog For AJAX Patent</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1260882120000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>helfrich9000 writes <i>"<a href="http://imvivo.com/DetailsView/tabid/104/IndexID/1779944/Default.aspx">Eolas has filed suit against 23 companies</a> (guess where), including Adobe, Amazon.com, Apple, eBay, Google, Yahoo!, JPMorgan, and Playboy. At issue are a pair of patents (<a href="http://www.boliven.com/patent/US7599985">US 7,599,985</a> and US <a href="http://www.boliven.com/patent/US5838906">5,838,906</a>), one of which (the '906) was successfully used in litigation against Microsoft Corp for a $565 million judgement. Says Dr. Michael D. Doyle, chairman of Eolas, 'We developed these technologies over 15 years ago and demonstrated them widely, years before the marketplace had heard of interactive applications embedded in Web pages tapping into powerful remote resources. Profiting from someone else's innovation without payment is fundamentally unfair. All we want is what's fair.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>helfrich9000 writes " Eolas has filed suit against 23 companies ( guess where ) , including Adobe , Amazon.com , Apple , eBay , Google , Yahoo ! , JPMorgan , and Playboy .
At issue are a pair of patents ( US 7,599,985 and US 5,838,906 ) , one of which ( the '906 ) was successfully used in litigation against Microsoft Corp for a $ 565 million judgement .
Says Dr. Michael D. Doyle , chairman of Eolas , 'We developed these technologies over 15 years ago and demonstrated them widely , years before the marketplace had heard of interactive applications embedded in Web pages tapping into powerful remote resources .
Profiting from someone else 's innovation without payment is fundamentally unfair .
All we want is what 's fair .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>helfrich9000 writes "Eolas has filed suit against 23 companies (guess where), including Adobe, Amazon.com, Apple, eBay, Google, Yahoo!, JPMorgan, and Playboy.
At issue are a pair of patents (US 7,599,985 and US 5,838,906), one of which (the '906) was successfully used in litigation against Microsoft Corp for a $565 million judgement.
Says Dr. Michael D. Doyle, chairman of Eolas, 'We developed these technologies over 15 years ago and demonstrated them widely, years before the marketplace had heard of interactive applications embedded in Web pages tapping into powerful remote resources.
Profiting from someone else's innovation without payment is fundamentally unfair.
All we want is what's fair.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439194</id>
	<title>Re:More power to 'em</title>
	<author>matzahboy</author>
	<datestamp>1260803280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Lol. Google wasn't even around 15 years ago. It was founded in 1998.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Lol .
Google was n't even around 15 years ago .
It was founded in 1998 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lol.
Google wasn't even around 15 years ago.
It was founded in 1998.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438580</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439058</id>
	<title>Re:Can someone explain the "dog" reference?</title>
	<author>supernova\_hq</author>
	<datestamp>1260802440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You are the dog, prepare to get sued.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You are the dog , prepare to get sued .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are the dog, prepare to get sued.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438818</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439088</id>
	<title>Re:More power to 'em</title>
	<author>BikeHelmet</author>
	<datestamp>1260802620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Okay, I know Adobe, Amazon, Apple, eBay, and Microsoft like to wield their patents like hammers - but has Google ever done it?</p><p>Not to mention all the small startups that could be harmed by a patent troll if these guys win.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Okay , I know Adobe , Amazon , Apple , eBay , and Microsoft like to wield their patents like hammers - but has Google ever done it ? Not to mention all the small startups that could be harmed by a patent troll if these guys win .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Okay, I know Adobe, Amazon, Apple, eBay, and Microsoft like to wield their patents like hammers - but has Google ever done it?Not to mention all the small startups that could be harmed by a patent troll if these guys win.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438580</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30442858</id>
	<title>Think redwoods and forest fires...</title>
	<author>itsdapead</author>
	<datestamp>1260885360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The only thing that will save our patent system now is for the big boys to get repeatedly dinged with massive patent troll judgements.</p></div><p>Unfortunately, the big boys have the resources to withstand repeated "dinging" as a "cost of doing business". In return, the patent system is an excellent insurance policy against the proverbial "one guy in a garage could put us out of business" scenario.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The only thing that will save our patent system now is for the big boys to get repeatedly dinged with massive patent troll judgements.Unfortunately , the big boys have the resources to withstand repeated " dinging " as a " cost of doing business " .
In return , the patent system is an excellent insurance policy against the proverbial " one guy in a garage could put us out of business " scenario .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only thing that will save our patent system now is for the big boys to get repeatedly dinged with massive patent troll judgements.Unfortunately, the big boys have the resources to withstand repeated "dinging" as a "cost of doing business".
In return, the patent system is an excellent insurance policy against the proverbial "one guy in a garage could put us out of business" scenario.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30440824</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30440218</id>
	<title>Re:I made a webapp with a tcl/tk browser add-on in</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260810720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Did you publish it at all to the public and do you have any evidence? Otherwise it's not going to be very helpful.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did you publish it at all to the public and do you have any evidence ?
Otherwise it 's not going to be very helpful .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did you publish it at all to the public and do you have any evidence?
Otherwise it's not going to be very helpful.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439274</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30441794</id>
	<title>Abundance</title>
	<author>jprupp</author>
	<datestamp>1260871860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ideas and information (including music, video and software) are abundant by nature, ergo they are not subject to the same scarcity rules that apply for other goods. The only way to make them scarce is through coercion by force. This coercion is exerted by government on all us so we accept their view of intellectual property as such, for the sake of large private consortia that pays them to do it. As long as the industrial governments insist on intellectual property beyond commercial brands, we'll not be truly free.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ideas and information ( including music , video and software ) are abundant by nature , ergo they are not subject to the same scarcity rules that apply for other goods .
The only way to make them scarce is through coercion by force .
This coercion is exerted by government on all us so we accept their view of intellectual property as such , for the sake of large private consortia that pays them to do it .
As long as the industrial governments insist on intellectual property beyond commercial brands , we 'll not be truly free .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ideas and information (including music, video and software) are abundant by nature, ergo they are not subject to the same scarcity rules that apply for other goods.
The only way to make them scarce is through coercion by force.
This coercion is exerted by government on all us so we accept their view of intellectual property as such, for the sake of large private consortia that pays them to do it.
As long as the industrial governments insist on intellectual property beyond commercial brands, we'll not be truly free.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30441802</id>
	<title>missing tag : 'america'</title>
	<author>unity100</author>
	<datestamp>1260871920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>these kind of shit almost exclusively happens in america, due to the shitty patent and copyright system. tag is missing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>these kind of shit almost exclusively happens in america , due to the shitty patent and copyright system .
tag is missing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>these kind of shit almost exclusively happens in america, due to the shitty patent and copyright system.
tag is missing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438636</id>
	<title>Trolling the trolls</title>
	<author>MrEricSir</author>
	<datestamp>1260800100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's a good thing I have a patent on patent trolling, because I'm going to be able to sue these guys for millions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a good thing I have a patent on patent trolling , because I 'm going to be able to sue these guys for millions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a good thing I have a patent on patent trolling, because I'm going to be able to sue these guys for millions.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439062</id>
	<title>US 7,599,985  is the friggin internet!!</title>
	<author>purpleraison</author>
	<datestamp>1260802440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What a sad, pathetic joke we in the USA are subjecting the world to when a patent such as "US 7,599,985 " exists.</p><p>In short, it is basically defining the interaction of a computer with a server.</p><p>This is exactly the same as if I were able to patent the idea of 'placing one foot in front of the other in order to achieve motion'</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What a sad , pathetic joke we in the USA are subjecting the world to when a patent such as " US 7,599,985 " exists.In short , it is basically defining the interaction of a computer with a server.This is exactly the same as if I were able to patent the idea of 'placing one foot in front of the other in order to achieve motion'</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What a sad, pathetic joke we in the USA are subjecting the world to when a patent such as "US 7,599,985 " exists.In short, it is basically defining the interaction of a computer with a server.This is exactly the same as if I were able to patent the idea of 'placing one foot in front of the other in order to achieve motion'</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30442928</id>
	<title>Retarded on another basis</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1260886020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Web browser making requests to web server is just the 1990s+ version of mainframe terminal making requests to a mainframe. The difference is a one-to-few relationship becomes a one-to-many relationship. IBM terminals (and some others) understand page layout, and things like form elements. What we really need to defeat is "...on the internet" patents, and that's essentially what this is given the similarity to mainframes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Web browser making requests to web server is just the 1990s + version of mainframe terminal making requests to a mainframe .
The difference is a one-to-few relationship becomes a one-to-many relationship .
IBM terminals ( and some others ) understand page layout , and things like form elements .
What we really need to defeat is " ...on the internet " patents , and that 's essentially what this is given the similarity to mainframes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Web browser making requests to web server is just the 1990s+ version of mainframe terminal making requests to a mainframe.
The difference is a one-to-few relationship becomes a one-to-many relationship.
IBM terminals (and some others) understand page layout, and things like form elements.
What we really need to defeat is "...on the internet" patents, and that's essentially what this is given the similarity to mainframes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30440824</id>
	<title>Let's hope the judgement is massive</title>
	<author>rastoboy29</author>
	<datestamp>1260816240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><tt>The only thing that will save our patent system now is for the big boys to get repeatedly dinged with massive patent troll judgements.<br><br>That'll get them using their lobbying power properly.</tt></htmltext>
<tokenext>The only thing that will save our patent system now is for the big boys to get repeatedly dinged with massive patent troll judgements.That 'll get them using their lobbying power properly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only thing that will save our patent system now is for the big boys to get repeatedly dinged with massive patent troll judgements.That'll get them using their lobbying power properly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438714</id>
	<title>Re:More power to 'em</title>
	<author>meerling</author>
	<datestamp>1260800460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>It is not reasonable to allow spurious or unfounded litigations simply because the target does so themselves.<br>That would set a very bad precedent.<br><br>Now as to this case, I have no idea if it's a load of b.s. since I can't seem to get the article to load.<br>Maybe it got slashdotted.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)<br><br>Personally, I'm sick of the software patent scams, just slap them back to copyrights like it used to be.<br>As long as we're wishing for things, eliminate business patents also.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is not reasonable to allow spurious or unfounded litigations simply because the target does so themselves.That would set a very bad precedent.Now as to this case , I have no idea if it 's a load of b.s .
since I ca n't seem to get the article to load.Maybe it got slashdotted .
: ) Personally , I 'm sick of the software patent scams , just slap them back to copyrights like it used to be.As long as we 're wishing for things , eliminate business patents also .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is not reasonable to allow spurious or unfounded litigations simply because the target does so themselves.That would set a very bad precedent.Now as to this case, I have no idea if it's a load of b.s.
since I can't seem to get the article to load.Maybe it got slashdotted.
:)Personally, I'm sick of the software patent scams, just slap them back to copyrights like it used to be.As long as we're wishing for things, eliminate business patents also.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438580</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30443124</id>
	<title>My Patent</title>
	<author>carlosfocker</author>
	<datestamp>1260887460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I wanted to let everyone know I received a patent in 1995 that states that I invented the idea of displaying text in a browser in paragraph format.  Anyone who profited from my invention owes me money.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wanted to let everyone know I received a patent in 1995 that states that I invented the idea of displaying text in a browser in paragraph format .
Anyone who profited from my invention owes me money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wanted to let everyone know I received a patent in 1995 that states that I invented the idea of displaying text in a browser in paragraph format.
Anyone who profited from my invention owes me money.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30442538</id>
	<title>Are we done yet?!?!</title>
	<author>elkto</author>
	<datestamp>1260881820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Seriously, are we done yet? If I called for patents on what I created in the past two decades, the hell would be immense. I do not as I call the solutions self evident, just as the patent&rsquo;s that is being discussed are.
<br> <br>
Cripes, I here by call dibs on the patent for extending digits into ones nostril for dried mucus removal.
<br> <br>
Software patents.  What a joke.
<br> <br>
And on that note, If Mr. Taco (or who ever) would please add the pass through of obvious text formating without having to embed HTML gliph's, I would apreciate it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , are we done yet ?
If I called for patents on what I created in the past two decades , the hell would be immense .
I do not as I call the solutions self evident , just as the patent    s that is being discussed are .
Cripes , I here by call dibs on the patent for extending digits into ones nostril for dried mucus removal .
Software patents .
What a joke .
And on that note , If Mr. Taco ( or who ever ) would please add the pass through of obvious text formating without having to embed HTML gliph 's , I would apreciate it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, are we done yet?
If I called for patents on what I created in the past two decades, the hell would be immense.
I do not as I call the solutions self evident, just as the patent’s that is being discussed are.
Cripes, I here by call dibs on the patent for extending digits into ones nostril for dried mucus removal.
Software patents.
What a joke.
And on that note, If Mr. Taco (or who ever) would please add the pass through of obvious text formating without having to embed HTML gliph's, I would apreciate it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30449318</id>
	<title>Re:More power to 'em</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260869520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>so how are you related to Eolas then?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>so how are you related to Eolas then ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>so how are you related to Eolas then?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438580</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30440846</id>
	<title>Re:They were on an island without internet...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260816420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>this seems to be a decleration of war in the buisness world, this will be an interesting legal battle, taking on some of the largest most  powerful compaines in the world. why not just decide this the old fashion way once and for all a duel, end it then and there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>this seems to be a decleration of war in the buisness world , this will be an interesting legal battle , taking on some of the largest most powerful compaines in the world .
why not just decide this the old fashion way once and for all a duel , end it then and there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>this seems to be a decleration of war in the buisness world, this will be an interesting legal battle, taking on some of the largest most  powerful compaines in the world.
why not just decide this the old fashion way once and for all a duel, end it then and there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439402</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30441580</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260869520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apple Developed OpenDoc in 1992 the above patent was filed in 1994</p><p>The basic idea of OpenDoc was to create small, reusable components, responsible for a specific task, such as text editing, bitmap editing or browsing an FTP server. OpenDoc provided a framework in which these components could run together, and a document format for storing the data created by each component. These documents could then be opened on other machines, where the OpenDoc frameworks would substitute suitable components for each part, even if they were from different vendors.[2]</p><p>what part of applications over a network doesn't OpenDoc fit?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple Developed OpenDoc in 1992 the above patent was filed in 1994The basic idea of OpenDoc was to create small , reusable components , responsible for a specific task , such as text editing , bitmap editing or browsing an FTP server .
OpenDoc provided a framework in which these components could run together , and a document format for storing the data created by each component .
These documents could then be opened on other machines , where the OpenDoc frameworks would substitute suitable components for each part , even if they were from different vendors .
[ 2 ] what part of applications over a network does n't OpenDoc fit ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple Developed OpenDoc in 1992 the above patent was filed in 1994The basic idea of OpenDoc was to create small, reusable components, responsible for a specific task, such as text editing, bitmap editing or browsing an FTP server.
OpenDoc provided a framework in which these components could run together, and a document format for storing the data created by each component.
These documents could then be opened on other machines, where the OpenDoc frameworks would substitute suitable components for each part, even if they were from different vendors.
[2]what part of applications over a network doesn't OpenDoc fit?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438976</id>
	<title>Comonly used patents shouldn't stand</title>
	<author>werfu</author>
	<datestamp>1260801960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Commonly used patented technologies that didn't got enforced for a few years should lose their patented status and fall under public domain. This is plain common sense. The best examples are FAT technologies, which most of the world embedded stuff use. Why should MS let everybody use it for years than once if got global domination try to enforce the patent on everybody and cash in. That's just evil. (Patent trolls are evil, but they shouldn't exist first, that's because of the boggus patent system in the US).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Commonly used patented technologies that did n't got enforced for a few years should lose their patented status and fall under public domain .
This is plain common sense .
The best examples are FAT technologies , which most of the world embedded stuff use .
Why should MS let everybody use it for years than once if got global domination try to enforce the patent on everybody and cash in .
That 's just evil .
( Patent trolls are evil , but they should n't exist first , that 's because of the boggus patent system in the US ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Commonly used patented technologies that didn't got enforced for a few years should lose their patented status and fall under public domain.
This is plain common sense.
The best examples are FAT technologies, which most of the world embedded stuff use.
Why should MS let everybody use it for years than once if got global domination try to enforce the patent on everybody and cash in.
That's just evil.
(Patent trolls are evil, but they shouldn't exist first, that's because of the boggus patent system in the US).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439252</id>
	<title>Re:More power to 'em</title>
	<author>Gadget\_Guy</author>
	<datestamp>1260803580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Given that the defendants are also ridiculously litigious about software patents</p></div><p>There is a big difference between publicly licenceing a patented technology to others (or at least uses that technology in a product of their own) verses a company who just sits on a portfolio of patents without using them to see what becomes hugely popular before suing all and sundry. If the first that you hear of these patents is when they start suing people, then you have a submarine patent. And that's bad.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Given that the defendants are also ridiculously litigious about software patentsThere is a big difference between publicly licenceing a patented technology to others ( or at least uses that technology in a product of their own ) verses a company who just sits on a portfolio of patents without using them to see what becomes hugely popular before suing all and sundry .
If the first that you hear of these patents is when they start suing people , then you have a submarine patent .
And that 's bad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Given that the defendants are also ridiculously litigious about software patentsThere is a big difference between publicly licenceing a patented technology to others (or at least uses that technology in a product of their own) verses a company who just sits on a portfolio of patents without using them to see what becomes hugely popular before suing all and sundry.
If the first that you hear of these patents is when they start suing people, then you have a submarine patent.
And that's bad.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438580</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30444278</id>
	<title>Troll test</title>
	<author>russotto</author>
	<datestamp>1260893340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hmm<br>1) Eastern District of Texas<br>2) Continuation patent<br>3) "On the Internet" patent</p><p>OK, stop there... confirmed patent troll.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hmm1 ) Eastern District of Texas2 ) Continuation patent3 ) " On the Internet " patentOK , stop there... confirmed patent troll .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hmm1) Eastern District of Texas2) Continuation patent3) "On the Internet" patentOK, stop there... confirmed patent troll.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30442978</id>
	<title>Re:Let's hope the judgement is massive</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260886500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I almost agree to this. Our patent system is ridiculously vague. This patent basically says we created putting stuff in a browser window. Stuff = Whatever we say it is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I almost agree to this .
Our patent system is ridiculously vague .
This patent basically says we created putting stuff in a browser window .
Stuff = Whatever we say it is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I almost agree to this.
Our patent system is ridiculously vague.
This patent basically says we created putting stuff in a browser window.
Stuff = Whatever we say it is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30440824</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438742</id>
	<title>Re:laughable</title>
	<author>Gudeldar</author>
	<datestamp>1260800640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I fail to see what is so evil about socialist/communist ideas. They don't work in practice but that doesn't make them evil.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I fail to see what is so evil about socialist/communist ideas .
They do n't work in practice but that does n't make them evil .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I fail to see what is so evil about socialist/communist ideas.
They don't work in practice but that doesn't make them evil.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438544</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30445494</id>
	<title>marvelous human progress</title>
	<author>arakis</author>
	<datestamp>1260898080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I marvel at the Eolas contribution to society every time I have to click into a control in order to interact with it. Then I usually suck my tounge, sigh and say Eolas instead of a less-vulgar curse.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I marvel at the Eolas contribution to society every time I have to click into a control in order to interact with it .
Then I usually suck my tounge , sigh and say Eolas instead of a less-vulgar curse .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I marvel at the Eolas contribution to society every time I have to click into a control in order to interact with it.
Then I usually suck my tounge, sigh and say Eolas instead of a less-vulgar curse.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30442136</id>
	<title>Bullshit!</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1260876780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>15 years ago &ldquo;AJAX&rdquo; was not technically possible with any of the major browser. Not even elegant (or nasty) tricks. I know, because I tried!</p><p>Only when browsers gained the ability to either communicate with a Java applet, which then communicated with the server (because of the lack of a real DOM, this was very crude back then), or the ability to change the content of a page inside a object tag (only possible with a bit of DOM), was it that this was possible at all.</p><p>I don&rsquo;t remember the exact date, but I was one of the first to do it. I had to do it all by myself. Because nobody on the net did even remotely know what I was talking about.</p><p>But you can check when those API parts were implemented by Netscape and Microsoft. This was definitely less than 15 years ago. More like 5-10.</p><p>And back then, we did not call it AJAX. It was not even XML. It was a simple server communication channel. Or &ldquo;network driver&rdquo;, in my &ldquo;browser OS&rdquo;.</p><p>But we all knew, that this would be patent trolling, so...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>15 years ago    AJAX    was not technically possible with any of the major browser .
Not even elegant ( or nasty ) tricks .
I know , because I tried ! Only when browsers gained the ability to either communicate with a Java applet , which then communicated with the server ( because of the lack of a real DOM , this was very crude back then ) , or the ability to change the content of a page inside a object tag ( only possible with a bit of DOM ) , was it that this was possible at all.I don    t remember the exact date , but I was one of the first to do it .
I had to do it all by myself .
Because nobody on the net did even remotely know what I was talking about.But you can check when those API parts were implemented by Netscape and Microsoft .
This was definitely less than 15 years ago .
More like 5-10.And back then , we did not call it AJAX .
It was not even XML .
It was a simple server communication channel .
Or    network driver    , in my    browser OS    .But we all knew , that this would be patent trolling , so.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>15 years ago “AJAX” was not technically possible with any of the major browser.
Not even elegant (or nasty) tricks.
I know, because I tried!Only when browsers gained the ability to either communicate with a Java applet, which then communicated with the server (because of the lack of a real DOM, this was very crude back then), or the ability to change the content of a page inside a object tag (only possible with a bit of DOM), was it that this was possible at all.I don’t remember the exact date, but I was one of the first to do it.
I had to do it all by myself.
Because nobody on the net did even remotely know what I was talking about.But you can check when those API parts were implemented by Netscape and Microsoft.
This was definitely less than 15 years ago.
More like 5-10.And back then, we did not call it AJAX.
It was not even XML.
It was a simple server communication channel.
Or “network driver”, in my “browser OS”.But we all knew, that this would be patent trolling, so...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438580</id>
	<title>More power to 'em</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260799860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Given that the defendants are also ridiculously litigious about software patents, I say more power to Eolas. I think the whole idea of software patents is absurd anyway but if there is going to be pain suffered by anyone then it needs to be suffered by all. Adobe, Amazon.com, Apple, eBay, Google, Yahoo!, JPMorgan, and Playboy are all probably really saddened by the fact that they didn't come up with this themselves quicker.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Given that the defendants are also ridiculously litigious about software patents , I say more power to Eolas .
I think the whole idea of software patents is absurd anyway but if there is going to be pain suffered by anyone then it needs to be suffered by all .
Adobe , Amazon.com , Apple , eBay , Google , Yahoo ! , JPMorgan , and Playboy are all probably really saddened by the fact that they did n't come up with this themselves quicker .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Given that the defendants are also ridiculously litigious about software patents, I say more power to Eolas.
I think the whole idea of software patents is absurd anyway but if there is going to be pain suffered by anyone then it needs to be suffered by all.
Adobe, Amazon.com, Apple, eBay, Google, Yahoo!, JPMorgan, and Playboy are all probably really saddened by the fact that they didn't come up with this themselves quicker.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438544</id>
	<title>Re:laughable</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260799680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If the world were "fair" every single human would have as an inalienable right free access to decent food, housing, healthcare, and security and working beyond that would be an optional choice to better their life.</p> </div><p>Disagreed. This is a socialist utopia. It can't even be called Marxist because Marx postulated working - socialists generally don't.</p><p>So - Free food, housing, healthcare and security, and working for any of this is optional? And any situation which does not fulfil this shitdream is 'unfair'?</p><p>Sadly you'll probably be modded 'insightful', because socialist moral concepts have spread a lot these days. Evil dies slowly and grows quickly if it's not fought.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If the world were " fair " every single human would have as an inalienable right free access to decent food , housing , healthcare , and security and working beyond that would be an optional choice to better their life .
Disagreed. This is a socialist utopia .
It ca n't even be called Marxist because Marx postulated working - socialists generally do n't.So - Free food , housing , healthcare and security , and working for any of this is optional ?
And any situation which does not fulfil this shitdream is 'unfair ' ? Sadly you 'll probably be modded 'insightful ' , because socialist moral concepts have spread a lot these days .
Evil dies slowly and grows quickly if it 's not fought .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the world were "fair" every single human would have as an inalienable right free access to decent food, housing, healthcare, and security and working beyond that would be an optional choice to better their life.
Disagreed. This is a socialist utopia.
It can't even be called Marxist because Marx postulated working - socialists generally don't.So - Free food, housing, healthcare and security, and working for any of this is optional?
And any situation which does not fulfil this shitdream is 'unfair'?Sadly you'll probably be modded 'insightful', because socialist moral concepts have spread a lot these days.
Evil dies slowly and grows quickly if it's not fought.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438492</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439752</id>
	<title>Re:A Modest Proposal, but...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260806820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Why don't we create an industry funded board whose job is to make sure that silly software patents are no longer awarded? Oh wait... The industry only dislikes SOME software patents, while anyone who cares to look will see that all software patents threaten innovation and are largely anti-competitive because they rig the game in favor of big corporations. Unfortunately, software patents have become the last hurdle that the proprietary world can throw at the free software movement. Moglen and Lessig are both very persuasive (If you got a bit of free time, read "Free Culture" by the latter) I hope that upon hearing their arguments European Commission will be wise enough to reconsider its position on software patents.</p></div><p>And just why would the EU shoot itself in the foot by refusing European companies patent protection in their domestic markets, when the US freely gives it to theirs?  The EU is quite wise enough that when it sees the US do something unpleasant and anti-competitive, it readily says "me too".</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why do n't we create an industry funded board whose job is to make sure that silly software patents are no longer awarded ?
Oh wait... The industry only dislikes SOME software patents , while anyone who cares to look will see that all software patents threaten innovation and are largely anti-competitive because they rig the game in favor of big corporations .
Unfortunately , software patents have become the last hurdle that the proprietary world can throw at the free software movement .
Moglen and Lessig are both very persuasive ( If you got a bit of free time , read " Free Culture " by the latter ) I hope that upon hearing their arguments European Commission will be wise enough to reconsider its position on software patents.And just why would the EU shoot itself in the foot by refusing European companies patent protection in their domestic markets , when the US freely gives it to theirs ?
The EU is quite wise enough that when it sees the US do something unpleasant and anti-competitive , it readily says " me too " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why don't we create an industry funded board whose job is to make sure that silly software patents are no longer awarded?
Oh wait... The industry only dislikes SOME software patents, while anyone who cares to look will see that all software patents threaten innovation and are largely anti-competitive because they rig the game in favor of big corporations.
Unfortunately, software patents have become the last hurdle that the proprietary world can throw at the free software movement.
Moglen and Lessig are both very persuasive (If you got a bit of free time, read "Free Culture" by the latter) I hope that upon hearing their arguments European Commission will be wise enough to reconsider its position on software patents.And just why would the EU shoot itself in the foot by refusing European companies patent protection in their domestic markets, when the US freely gives it to theirs?
The EU is quite wise enough that when it sees the US do something unpleasant and anti-competitive, it readily says "me too".
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438672</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438918</id>
	<title>inaccurate title</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260801600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is no Dog corporation in the lawsuit</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is no Dog corporation in the lawsuit</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is no Dog corporation in the lawsuit</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439402</id>
	<title>They were on an island without internet...</title>
	<author>webdog314</author>
	<datestamp>1260804540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>... for the last 15 years and didn't notice that, well, <b>every damn company on the web</b> was violating their patent. You should only be able to claim damages from the time you file a suit. Sorry you waited until now to get off your asses and do something about it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>... for the last 15 years and did n't notice that , well , every damn company on the web was violating their patent .
You should only be able to claim damages from the time you file a suit .
Sorry you waited until now to get off your asses and do something about it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... for the last 15 years and didn't notice that, well, every damn company on the web was violating their patent.
You should only be able to claim damages from the time you file a suit.
Sorry you waited until now to get off your asses and do something about it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438492</id>
	<title>laughable</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260799380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Profiting from someone else's innovation without payment is fundamentally unfair. All we want is what's fair.</p></div><p>There is ridiculous dishonesty in this assertion.</p><p>Of course profiting off someone else's work is unfair.  Nothing about what the litigant or the defendants have done or will do relates in any way with "fair".  If the world were "fair" every single human would have as an inalienable right free access to decent food, housing, healthcare, and security  and working beyond that would be an optional choice to better their life.  Humanity is far, far from this ideal, and everything we do now in the business world is *nothing* about fair, it is about power and capital, and having long chains of other humans working for the profit of those few who have learned how to escape or work the system.  Remember more than half of your planet's population still farms their food by hand, and dies in large numbers when there are droughts.</p><p>"Profiting from someone else's innovation" is at the very basic essence of working capitalism.  It an the assumption driving nearly all investment.  Using capital to buy a stock, and having that stock rise in value, has the effect of making a profit off the wealth creation and innovation in that company.  I don't take a position for or against that system  it is highly efficient, when it works, at allocating resources and creating significant development.</p><p>But even beyond the nature of business and profit, these folks have gone down into the depths of corporate IP litigation, where the idealistic light of "fair" shines like smelly dirt.  Lawsuits rarely have much to do with a high notion of justice; they are what you can pay for, and what you can win.  To assert that ones actions are about "fair" when filing a corporate IP litigation lawsuit is patently absurd and frankly laughable.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Profiting from someone else 's innovation without payment is fundamentally unfair .
All we want is what 's fair.There is ridiculous dishonesty in this assertion.Of course profiting off someone else 's work is unfair .
Nothing about what the litigant or the defendants have done or will do relates in any way with " fair " .
If the world were " fair " every single human would have as an inalienable right free access to decent food , housing , healthcare , and security and working beyond that would be an optional choice to better their life .
Humanity is far , far from this ideal , and everything we do now in the business world is * nothing * about fair , it is about power and capital , and having long chains of other humans working for the profit of those few who have learned how to escape or work the system .
Remember more than half of your planet 's population still farms their food by hand , and dies in large numbers when there are droughts .
" Profiting from someone else 's innovation " is at the very basic essence of working capitalism .
It an the assumption driving nearly all investment .
Using capital to buy a stock , and having that stock rise in value , has the effect of making a profit off the wealth creation and innovation in that company .
I do n't take a position for or against that system it is highly efficient , when it works , at allocating resources and creating significant development.But even beyond the nature of business and profit , these folks have gone down into the depths of corporate IP litigation , where the idealistic light of " fair " shines like smelly dirt .
Lawsuits rarely have much to do with a high notion of justice ; they are what you can pay for , and what you can win .
To assert that ones actions are about " fair " when filing a corporate IP litigation lawsuit is patently absurd and frankly laughable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Profiting from someone else's innovation without payment is fundamentally unfair.
All we want is what's fair.There is ridiculous dishonesty in this assertion.Of course profiting off someone else's work is unfair.
Nothing about what the litigant or the defendants have done or will do relates in any way with "fair".
If the world were "fair" every single human would have as an inalienable right free access to decent food, housing, healthcare, and security  and working beyond that would be an optional choice to better their life.
Humanity is far, far from this ideal, and everything we do now in the business world is *nothing* about fair, it is about power and capital, and having long chains of other humans working for the profit of those few who have learned how to escape or work the system.
Remember more than half of your planet's population still farms their food by hand, and dies in large numbers when there are droughts.
"Profiting from someone else's innovation" is at the very basic essence of working capitalism.
It an the assumption driving nearly all investment.
Using capital to buy a stock, and having that stock rise in value, has the effect of making a profit off the wealth creation and innovation in that company.
I don't take a position for or against that system  it is highly efficient, when it works, at allocating resources and creating significant development.But even beyond the nature of business and profit, these folks have gone down into the depths of corporate IP litigation, where the idealistic light of "fair" shines like smelly dirt.
Lawsuits rarely have much to do with a high notion of justice; they are what you can pay for, and what you can win.
To assert that ones actions are about "fair" when filing a corporate IP litigation lawsuit is patently absurd and frankly laughable.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438834</id>
	<title>Already reported</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260801240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://yro.slashdot.org/story/09/10/06/2055214/Eolas-To-Sue-Apple-Google-and-21-Others?from=rss" title="slashdot.org">http://yro.slashdot.org/story/09/10/06/2055214/Eolas-To-Sue-Apple-Google-and-21-Others?from=rss</a> [slashdot.org]</p><p>What I wonder is, we've had little information since. Reactions from the companies involved in the suit? I only heard that GoDaddy released a statement "We're not guilty and we'll defend ourselves vigorously". The other companies have withheld comment.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //yro.slashdot.org/story/09/10/06/2055214/Eolas-To-Sue-Apple-Google-and-21-Others ? from = rss [ slashdot.org ] What I wonder is , we 've had little information since .
Reactions from the companies involved in the suit ?
I only heard that GoDaddy released a statement " We 're not guilty and we 'll defend ourselves vigorously " .
The other companies have withheld comment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://yro.slashdot.org/story/09/10/06/2055214/Eolas-To-Sue-Apple-Google-and-21-Others?from=rss [slashdot.org]What I wonder is, we've had little information since.
Reactions from the companies involved in the suit?
I only heard that GoDaddy released a statement "We're not guilty and we'll defend ourselves vigorously".
The other companies have withheld comment.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30443000</id>
	<title>Re:Sadly they didn't sue Slashdot...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260886680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Amen.  Just copy Digg's threaded comment style, it is 1000x better.  And is Slashdot's UI designer colorblind too?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Amen .
Just copy Digg 's threaded comment style , it is 1000x better .
And is Slashdot 's UI designer colorblind too ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Amen.
Just copy Digg's threaded comment style, it is 1000x better.
And is Slashdot's UI designer colorblind too?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438708</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30441066</id>
	<title>I can sort of understand part of the judgement</title>
	<author>scourfish</author>
	<datestamp>1260819120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The company did, at one point, make some browser based off of NCSA mosaic, and they did bring their portfolio to Microsoft in the early 90's, who turned it down, so I can see how they got the ruling against Microsoft.<br> <br>

That said, I think there will be a difference, from the viewpoint of the court, between suing a company that made money distributing a web browser and a company that is simply implementing a web page.  At this point, EOLAS is like a gambler who just won the jackpot at the slot machines and doesn't know when to quit.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The company did , at one point , make some browser based off of NCSA mosaic , and they did bring their portfolio to Microsoft in the early 90 's , who turned it down , so I can see how they got the ruling against Microsoft .
That said , I think there will be a difference , from the viewpoint of the court , between suing a company that made money distributing a web browser and a company that is simply implementing a web page .
At this point , EOLAS is like a gambler who just won the jackpot at the slot machines and does n't know when to quit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The company did, at one point, make some browser based off of NCSA mosaic, and they did bring their portfolio to Microsoft in the early 90's, who turned it down, so I can see how they got the ruling against Microsoft.
That said, I think there will be a difference, from the viewpoint of the court, between suing a company that made money distributing a web browser and a company that is simply implementing a web page.
At this point, EOLAS is like a gambler who just won the jackpot at the slot machines and doesn't know when to quit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439274</id>
	<title>I made a webapp with a tcl/tk browser add-on in 93</title>
	<author>presidenteloco</author>
	<datestamp>1260803700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A couple of months after Mosaic browser was publicised.</p><p>Does that count?</p><p>It used a tcl/tk app to draw vector topographic maps. The tcl/tk app<br>commanded the mosaic browser to fetch data for the map, and to<br>display accompanying text info in its browser window, changing the<br>text depending on clicks in different locations on the map.</p><p>It seemed f'ing obvious at the time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A couple of months after Mosaic browser was publicised.Does that count ? It used a tcl/tk app to draw vector topographic maps .
The tcl/tk appcommanded the mosaic browser to fetch data for the map , and todisplay accompanying text info in its browser window , changing thetext depending on clicks in different locations on the map.It seemed f'ing obvious at the time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A couple of months after Mosaic browser was publicised.Does that count?It used a tcl/tk app to draw vector topographic maps.
The tcl/tk appcommanded the mosaic browser to fetch data for the map, and todisplay accompanying text info in its browser window, changing thetext depending on clicks in different locations on the map.It seemed f'ing obvious at the time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439018</id>
	<title>"Eolas"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260802200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I invented the name "Eolas" for a story I wrote in 1972 (6th grade).</p><p>All their base are belong to me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I invented the name " Eolas " for a story I wrote in 1972 ( 6th grade ) .All their base are belong to me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I invented the name "Eolas" for a story I wrote in 1972 (6th grade).All their base are belong to me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30440812</id>
	<title>15 years</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260816060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;&gt;&gt; We developed these technologies over 15 years ago<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.... Profiting from someone else's innovation without payment is fundamentally unfair... All we want is what's fair.'"</p><p>15 years is too long for a software patent to last. Eolas had more than enough opportunity in that time to capitalise and recover R&amp;D costs on any software technology by making a real product. Eolas didn't ever do anything using this technology so is provably just patent trolling.</p><p>Whats fair is that the patent office should remove patent rights from owners not actively developing or marketing provably available products within a certain time period, otherwise they're just allowing troll companies to hold the whole tech world back from developing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; &gt; &gt; We developed these technologies over 15 years ago .... Profiting from someone else 's innovation without payment is fundamentally unfair... All we want is what 's fair .
' " 15 years is too long for a software patent to last .
Eolas had more than enough opportunity in that time to capitalise and recover R&amp;D costs on any software technology by making a real product .
Eolas did n't ever do anything using this technology so is provably just patent trolling.Whats fair is that the patent office should remove patent rights from owners not actively developing or marketing provably available products within a certain time period , otherwise they 're just allowing troll companies to hold the whole tech world back from developing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;&gt;&gt; We developed these technologies over 15 years ago .... Profiting from someone else's innovation without payment is fundamentally unfair... All we want is what's fair.
'"15 years is too long for a software patent to last.
Eolas had more than enough opportunity in that time to capitalise and recover R&amp;D costs on any software technology by making a real product.
Eolas didn't ever do anything using this technology so is provably just patent trolling.Whats fair is that the patent office should remove patent rights from owners not actively developing or marketing provably available products within a certain time period, otherwise they're just allowing troll companies to hold the whole tech world back from developing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439378</id>
	<title>fuck a 3itch</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260804360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">It a break, if to fight what has the party in street don't feel that BSD sux0rs. What battled in court, of events today, prima donnas to goal here? How can long terM survival goal here? How can both believed that distribution make play parties the 'Yes' to any All servers. Coming bunch of gay negros of business and was the project is in rotting corpse declined in market be a lot slower Very distracting to AMERICA) is the you join today! theorists - Sure@ that I've in a head spinning</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>It a break , if to fight what has the party in street do n't feel that BSD sux0rs .
What battled in court , of events today , prima donnas to goal here ?
How can long terM survival goal here ?
How can both believed that distribution make play parties the 'Yes ' to any All servers .
Coming bunch of gay negros of business and was the project is in rotting corpse declined in market be a lot slower Very distracting to AMERICA ) is the you join today !
theorists - Sure @ that I 've in a head spinning [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It a break, if to fight what has the party in street don't feel that BSD sux0rs.
What battled in court, of events today, prima donnas to goal here?
How can long terM survival goal here?
How can both believed that distribution make play parties the 'Yes' to any All servers.
Coming bunch of gay negros of business and was the project is in rotting corpse declined in market be a lot slower Very distracting to AMERICA) is the you join today!
theorists - Sure@ that I've in a head spinning [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439054</id>
	<title>I say we pay them.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260802380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nobody else can get any money for doing this type of thing ever again then right?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nobody else can get any money for doing this type of thing ever again then right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nobody else can get any money for doing this type of thing ever again then right?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30441592</id>
	<title>Re:I made a webapp with a tcl/tk browser add-on in</title>
	<author>gencha</author>
	<datestamp>1260869700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sounds to me like Google totally ripped you off! You should definitively sue.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds to me like Google totally ripped you off !
You should definitively sue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds to me like Google totally ripped you off!
You should definitively sue.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439274</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439468</id>
	<title>All Glory</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260805020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>The world is a better place thanks to Eolas, inventors of the Hypnotoad.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The world is a better place thanks to Eolas , inventors of the Hypnotoad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The world is a better place thanks to Eolas, inventors of the Hypnotoad.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30440792</id>
	<title>Re:I made a webapp with a tcl/tk browser add-on in</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260816000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now all you have to do is offer to sell that app to all those companies for half of what Eolas wants!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now all you have to do is offer to sell that app to all those companies for half of what Eolas wants !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now all you have to do is offer to sell that app to all those companies for half of what Eolas wants!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439274</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438708</id>
	<title>Sadly they didn't sue Slashdot...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260800460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>... otherwise we <i>could</i> have had a chance of removing this godawful AJAX UI for good.</htmltext>
<tokenext>... otherwise we could have had a chance of removing this godawful AJAX UI for good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... otherwise we could have had a chance of removing this godawful AJAX UI for good.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30440370</id>
	<title>Anyone remember Netscape LiveConnect?</title>
	<author>TodLiebeck</author>
	<datestamp>1260812280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I made a webapp in early 2001 that used both AJAX (with a hidden frame for client-server communication, rather than an XHR) and a Java applet.  It was used to create presentations from within a web browser.  The Java applet was used for laying out a presentation slide, providing the user with the capability to create/position elements of the presentation (text, images, and so forth).  The app was operational more than a year before the filing date of US7599985.</p><p>The application made use of Netscape's LiveConnect (an old Java/JavaScript communication API) to do this.   LiveConnect was introduced in 1997, with Netscape 4.   As far as I can see, LiveConnect was designed to enable what this patent claims to invent.</p><p>See <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LiveConnect" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LiveConnect</a> [wikipedia.org] and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netscape\_Navigator" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netscape\_Navigator</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I made a webapp in early 2001 that used both AJAX ( with a hidden frame for client-server communication , rather than an XHR ) and a Java applet .
It was used to create presentations from within a web browser .
The Java applet was used for laying out a presentation slide , providing the user with the capability to create/position elements of the presentation ( text , images , and so forth ) .
The app was operational more than a year before the filing date of US7599985.The application made use of Netscape 's LiveConnect ( an old Java/JavaScript communication API ) to do this .
LiveConnect was introduced in 1997 , with Netscape 4 .
As far as I can see , LiveConnect was designed to enable what this patent claims to invent.See http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LiveConnect [ wikipedia.org ] and http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netscape \ _Navigator [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I made a webapp in early 2001 that used both AJAX (with a hidden frame for client-server communication, rather than an XHR) and a Java applet.
It was used to create presentations from within a web browser.
The Java applet was used for laying out a presentation slide, providing the user with the capability to create/position elements of the presentation (text, images, and so forth).
The app was operational more than a year before the filing date of US7599985.The application made use of Netscape's LiveConnect (an old Java/JavaScript communication API) to do this.
LiveConnect was introduced in 1997, with Netscape 4.
As far as I can see, LiveConnect was designed to enable what this patent claims to invent.See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LiveConnect [wikipedia.org] and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netscape\_Navigator [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30444714</id>
	<title>Hell will be very busy soon...</title>
	<author>dwiget001</author>
	<datestamp>1260895260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... when these wankers start drying off from old age and find themselves in front of the Gates of Hell (TM).</p><p>Other than that, I hope the patents are challenged and that each and every one of them are invalidated, with Eolas getting hit for fees, etc. Bunch of blood sucking psychopaths.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... when these wankers start drying off from old age and find themselves in front of the Gates of Hell ( TM ) .Other than that , I hope the patents are challenged and that each and every one of them are invalidated , with Eolas getting hit for fees , etc .
Bunch of blood sucking psychopaths .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... when these wankers start drying off from old age and find themselves in front of the Gates of Hell (TM).Other than that, I hope the patents are challenged and that each and every one of them are invalidated, with Eolas getting hit for fees, etc.
Bunch of blood sucking psychopaths.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439296</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit</title>
	<author>kseise</author>
	<datestamp>1260803820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>It was hosted on Geocities, otherwise they would be able to show you.  Trust them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It was hosted on Geocities , otherwise they would be able to show you .
Trust them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It was hosted on Geocities, otherwise they would be able to show you.
Trust them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438752</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438818</id>
	<title>Can someone explain the "dog" reference?</title>
	<author>Fry-kun</author>
	<datestamp>1260801180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't get it -\_-</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't get it - \ _-</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't get it -\_-</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30440978</id>
	<title>Allow me to be the first to say,</title>
	<author>FreakyGreenLeaky</author>
	<datestamp>1260817920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>:)))))</p><p>Between my sputtering and aching belly, I almost feel sorry for the yanks with their patent mess.  Then I remember what life would be like without this comedy going on across the pond...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>: ) ) ) ) ) Between my sputtering and aching belly , I almost feel sorry for the yanks with their patent mess .
Then I remember what life would be like without this comedy going on across the pond.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>:)))))Between my sputtering and aching belly, I almost feel sorry for the yanks with their patent mess.
Then I remember what life would be like without this comedy going on across the pond...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30441590</id>
	<title>Sun?</title>
	<author>pspahn</author>
	<datestamp>1260869640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I find it interesting that Sun is on this list. They invent Java, which morphs and ends up in the hands of a patent holder. Then they get sued. Brilliant.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I find it interesting that Sun is on this list .
They invent Java , which morphs and ends up in the hands of a patent holder .
Then they get sued .
Brilliant .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I find it interesting that Sun is on this list.
They invent Java, which morphs and ends up in the hands of a patent holder.
Then they get sued.
Brilliant.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30440580</id>
	<title>Or an animated GIF?</title>
	<author>Nkwe</author>
	<datestamp>1260814140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Animated GIF? Web page executes in a browser causing the browser to perform additional I/O (the IMG SRC tag) to the server to retrieve an application (the GIF file) and executes it. (Animated GIF files contain a "program" of sorts that specify what images to decompress in what order and how long to display them.) How long has GIF been around?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Animated GIF ?
Web page executes in a browser causing the browser to perform additional I/O ( the IMG SRC tag ) to the server to retrieve an application ( the GIF file ) and executes it .
( Animated GIF files contain a " program " of sorts that specify what images to decompress in what order and how long to display them .
) How long has GIF been around ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Animated GIF?
Web page executes in a browser causing the browser to perform additional I/O (the IMG SRC tag) to the server to retrieve an application (the GIF file) and executes it.
(Animated GIF files contain a "program" of sorts that specify what images to decompress in what order and how long to display them.
) How long has GIF been around?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439274</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438798</id>
	<title>Open Source</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260801000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>From my perspective, one of the key advantages to open source software is it will make busting these kinds of patents a whole lot easier.  There's almost certainly prior art <i>somewhere</i> for nearly every software patent on the books, but it's all in unsearchable proprietary code that may or may not have been deleted years ago.  As more code gets added to sourceforge and other repositories it's going to get a lot easier to say "Hey, this thing you patented was done twenty years ago in an obscure open source project nobody uses anymore.  And I can prove it."</htmltext>
<tokenext>From my perspective , one of the key advantages to open source software is it will make busting these kinds of patents a whole lot easier .
There 's almost certainly prior art somewhere for nearly every software patent on the books , but it 's all in unsearchable proprietary code that may or may not have been deleted years ago .
As more code gets added to sourceforge and other repositories it 's going to get a lot easier to say " Hey , this thing you patented was done twenty years ago in an obscure open source project nobody uses anymore .
And I can prove it .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From my perspective, one of the key advantages to open source software is it will make busting these kinds of patents a whole lot easier.
There's almost certainly prior art somewhere for nearly every software patent on the books, but it's all in unsearchable proprietary code that may or may not have been deleted years ago.
As more code gets added to sourceforge and other repositories it's going to get a lot easier to say "Hey, this thing you patented was done twenty years ago in an obscure open source project nobody uses anymore.
And I can prove it.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438752</id>
	<title>Bullshit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260800700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>'We developed these technologies over 15 years ago and demonstrated them widely, years before the marketplace had heard of interactive applications embedded in Web pages tapping into powerful remote resources.</i></p><p>Bullshit</p><p>Show me the web site that you made providing an interactive web app back in 1994, only one year after the web was even invented.</p><p>Don't have one?  No one did?  Thought as much...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>'We developed these technologies over 15 years ago and demonstrated them widely , years before the marketplace had heard of interactive applications embedded in Web pages tapping into powerful remote resources.BullshitShow me the web site that you made providing an interactive web app back in 1994 , only one year after the web was even invented.Do n't have one ?
No one did ?
Thought as much.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>'We developed these technologies over 15 years ago and demonstrated them widely, years before the marketplace had heard of interactive applications embedded in Web pages tapping into powerful remote resources.BullshitShow me the web site that you made providing an interactive web app back in 1994, only one year after the web was even invented.Don't have one?
No one did?
Thought as much...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30441498</id>
	<title>Why those...!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260868440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So they want to profit off technologies like Javascript and HTML, and for the even bigger picture web browsers? Talk about hypocrites.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So they want to profit off technologies like Javascript and HTML , and for the even bigger picture web browsers ?
Talk about hypocrites .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So they want to profit off technologies like Javascript and HTML, and for the even bigger picture web browsers?
Talk about hypocrites.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439492</id>
	<title>Re:More power to 'em</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260805140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Who ever patented software in the first place, as maybe an arbitrary sequence of machine readable instructions executed by one or more processors to perform operations resulting in the execution of said instructions and then output the result(s) of the operations in a human readable format (or whatever patent-eze is the norm), should stand-up and say ENOUGH!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who ever patented software in the first place , as maybe an arbitrary sequence of machine readable instructions executed by one or more processors to perform operations resulting in the execution of said instructions and then output the result ( s ) of the operations in a human readable format ( or whatever patent-eze is the norm ) , should stand-up and say ENOUGH !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who ever patented software in the first place, as maybe an arbitrary sequence of machine readable instructions executed by one or more processors to perform operations resulting in the execution of said instructions and then output the result(s) of the operations in a human readable format (or whatever patent-eze is the norm), should stand-up and say ENOUGH!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438580</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30445318</id>
	<title>This is good</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1260897420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe now large companies will start understanding why software patents are bad.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe now large companies will start understanding why software patents are bad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe now large companies will start understanding why software patents are bad.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438850</id>
	<title>Re:More power to 'em</title>
	<author>Shakrai</author>
	<datestamp>1260801300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Adobe, Amazon.com, Apple, eBay, Google, Yahoo!, JPMorgan, and Playboy are all probably really saddened by the fact that they didn't come up with this themselves quicker.</p></div><p>I'm not going to stand by and let you insult Playboy by lumping them in with the likes of Adobe, Apple and JPMorgan<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Adobe , Amazon.com , Apple , eBay , Google , Yahoo ! , JPMorgan , and Playboy are all probably really saddened by the fact that they did n't come up with this themselves quicker.I 'm not going to stand by and let you insult Playboy by lumping them in with the likes of Adobe , Apple and JPMorgan ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Adobe, Amazon.com, Apple, eBay, Google, Yahoo!, JPMorgan, and Playboy are all probably really saddened by the fact that they didn't come up with this themselves quicker.I'm not going to stand by and let you insult Playboy by lumping them in with the likes of Adobe, Apple and JPMorgan ;)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438580</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30440702</id>
	<title>how about charity?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260815160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If they win the case, the fair thing would bpe to share the money to poor people.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If they win the case , the fair thing would bpe to share the money to poor people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they win the case, the fair thing would bpe to share the money to poor people.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439122</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit</title>
	<author>Zebra\_X</author>
	<datestamp>1260802860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sadly, no. An actual working prototype is not needed to file for a patent. All you really need (I'm no patent lawyer) is a fairly detailed description of an idea. You also need to search for any ideas similar to yours. If applicable you may need to reference them as works.</p><p>I believe the only way this can be overturned is if there is evidence of prior art - (possibly) a working implementation of the idea before the patent was filed.</p><p>Also, it's not any particular implementation that they are going after, it is the general "method" of how plugins work within the browser that is the violation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sadly , no .
An actual working prototype is not needed to file for a patent .
All you really need ( I 'm no patent lawyer ) is a fairly detailed description of an idea .
You also need to search for any ideas similar to yours .
If applicable you may need to reference them as works.I believe the only way this can be overturned is if there is evidence of prior art - ( possibly ) a working implementation of the idea before the patent was filed.Also , it 's not any particular implementation that they are going after , it is the general " method " of how plugins work within the browser that is the violation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sadly, no.
An actual working prototype is not needed to file for a patent.
All you really need (I'm no patent lawyer) is a fairly detailed description of an idea.
You also need to search for any ideas similar to yours.
If applicable you may need to reference them as works.I believe the only way this can be overturned is if there is evidence of prior art - (possibly) a working implementation of the idea before the patent was filed.Also, it's not any particular implementation that they are going after, it is the general "method" of how plugins work within the browser that is the violation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439046</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30440464</id>
	<title>AJAX is just fancy client / server</title>
	<author>tjstork</author>
	<datestamp>1260813180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>AJAX is just client server fancied up a little bit.  There's no real difference architecturally between a 1985 FoxPro application and a 2008 AJAX application, except that the AJAX application will be slower but scale to a million users and have prettier fonts and worse reporting.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>AJAX is just client server fancied up a little bit .
There 's no real difference architecturally between a 1985 FoxPro application and a 2008 AJAX application , except that the AJAX application will be slower but scale to a million users and have prettier fonts and worse reporting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>AJAX is just client server fancied up a little bit.
There's no real difference architecturally between a 1985 FoxPro application and a 2008 AJAX application, except that the AJAX application will be slower but scale to a million users and have prettier fonts and worse reporting.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30440440</id>
	<title>Judgment -- Overturned -- Settlement</title>
	<author>cmsjr</author>
	<datestamp>1260812940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"one of which (the '906) was successfully used in litigation against Microsoft Corp for a $565 million judgement." (sic)</p><p>This isn't clear from the article, but other sources indicate that the judgment in question was overturned on appeal, and the case then settled out of court, presumably, for a lesser, but still staggering amount of money.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" one of which ( the '906 ) was successfully used in litigation against Microsoft Corp for a $ 565 million judgement .
" ( sic ) This is n't clear from the article , but other sources indicate that the judgment in question was overturned on appeal , and the case then settled out of court , presumably , for a lesser , but still staggering amount of money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"one of which (the '906) was successfully used in litigation against Microsoft Corp for a $565 million judgement.
" (sic)This isn't clear from the article, but other sources indicate that the judgment in question was overturned on appeal, and the case then settled out of court, presumably, for a lesser, but still staggering amount of money.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30441694</id>
	<title>Nothing funny.</title>
	<author>twebb72</author>
	<datestamp>1260870780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Nothing funny about this thread...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. takes copyright very seriously.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nothing funny about this thread... /. takes copyright very seriously .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nothing funny about this thread... /. takes copyright very seriously.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30443434</id>
	<title>HMS Ajax</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260889380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What WWII British ship, along with HMS Exeter and HMNZS Achillies, defeated the German pocket Battleship Graf Spee in 1939?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What WWII British ship , along with HMS Exeter and HMNZS Achillies , defeated the German pocket Battleship Graf Spee in 1939 ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What WWII British ship, along with HMS Exeter and HMNZS Achillies, defeated the German pocket Battleship Graf Spee in 1939?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30441148</id>
	<title>Re:I made a webapp with a tcl/tk browser add-on in</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260820140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Does that count?

It used a tcl/tk app to draw vector topographic maps. The tcl/tk app
commanded the mosaic browser to fetch data for the map, and to
display accompanying text info in its browser window, changing the
text depending on clicks in different locations on the map.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
Depends.  First, does your app meet the requirements of one of the sections of <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/35/usc\_sec\_35\_00000102----000-.html" title="cornell.edu" rel="nofollow">35 U.S.C. 102</a> [cornell.edu] or <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/35/usc\_sec\_35\_00000103----000-.html" title="cornell.edu" rel="nofollow">35. U.S.C. 103</a> [cornell.edu]?  Note that "known or used by others" in 102(a) requires public use.  Second, does your app, perhaps combined with other prior art, perform ALL the steps of one of the patent claims?  Looking at claim 1 of the '906 patent for instance I'd guess not, based on your description.  Third, can you show that your app predates the date of conception of the '906 patent?  That was filed in 1994, the date of conception could be substantially earlier.</p><p>If you can show all these things, congratulations, you may have found prior art!  Now send it to the PTO for re-exam so Eolas can slightly amend a few claims and get around it.  Aren't patents great?</p><p>
Why yes, as a matter of fact I am a patent attorney.  How'd you know?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does that count ?
It used a tcl/tk app to draw vector topographic maps .
The tcl/tk app commanded the mosaic browser to fetch data for the map , and to display accompanying text info in its browser window , changing the text depending on clicks in different locations on the map .
Depends. First , does your app meet the requirements of one of the sections of 35 U.S.C .
102 [ cornell.edu ] or 35 .
U.S.C. 103 [ cornell.edu ] ?
Note that " known or used by others " in 102 ( a ) requires public use .
Second , does your app , perhaps combined with other prior art , perform ALL the steps of one of the patent claims ?
Looking at claim 1 of the '906 patent for instance I 'd guess not , based on your description .
Third , can you show that your app predates the date of conception of the '906 patent ?
That was filed in 1994 , the date of conception could be substantially earlier.If you can show all these things , congratulations , you may have found prior art !
Now send it to the PTO for re-exam so Eolas can slightly amend a few claims and get around it .
Are n't patents great ?
Why yes , as a matter of fact I am a patent attorney .
How 'd you know ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does that count?
It used a tcl/tk app to draw vector topographic maps.
The tcl/tk app
commanded the mosaic browser to fetch data for the map, and to
display accompanying text info in its browser window, changing the
text depending on clicks in different locations on the map.
Depends.  First, does your app meet the requirements of one of the sections of 35 U.S.C.
102 [cornell.edu] or 35.
U.S.C. 103 [cornell.edu]?
Note that "known or used by others" in 102(a) requires public use.
Second, does your app, perhaps combined with other prior art, perform ALL the steps of one of the patent claims?
Looking at claim 1 of the '906 patent for instance I'd guess not, based on your description.
Third, can you show that your app predates the date of conception of the '906 patent?
That was filed in 1994, the date of conception could be substantially earlier.If you can show all these things, congratulations, you may have found prior art!
Now send it to the PTO for re-exam so Eolas can slightly amend a few claims and get around it.
Aren't patents great?
Why yes, as a matter of fact I am a patent attorney.
How'd you know?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439274</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30440954</id>
	<title>Patent is Pre-dated</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260817680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't see where either patent references the Web in its mention of a "browser."  The MacOS, Windows, and UNIX operating systems all have file "browsers" that pre-date these patents.  In such file browsers, an icon (embedded object reference) can be selected that opens a local or remote application.  In college, back in '91, I remember opening an application hosted on a remote Macintosh computer by clicking on the icon for that application in the local Macintosh's file "browser." From that point forward, the application was sent over AppleTalk to the local machine to be run as expected.  If we consider the opening of the remote application's window on the local/client machine to be defined by the remote application, then the graphics portion of the patents are covered as well.</p><p>Not related, but... stop outsourcing USA labor, collect income tax from outsourced USA labor, or start outsourcing USA management and see how they like it... because outsourcing isn't helping our country's workers.  It might help if we actually start using our hands and start building some of our own technology in the USA again too.  What are the odds that your next mobile phone will be built in Asia?  Why don't we make anything in our own country anymore?  If we look at it from the salary side, then I guess we should all be moving into cardboard shacks to compete with our outsourcing counterparts, but we're not... and we probably don't want to.  If they had our same quality of life, do you think they would still be charging cheaper rates?  The USA has become a 3rd world service industry nation... and our tech industry leaders aren't helping matters because their companies build and package more and more overseas.  When your body is losing blood, you shouldn't care about getting a cheaper watch at the Asian Emporium.  You should be worrying about how to stop the bleeding.  I love my quality of life.  I don't want to live in a cardboard shack!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't see where either patent references the Web in its mention of a " browser .
" The MacOS , Windows , and UNIX operating systems all have file " browsers " that pre-date these patents .
In such file browsers , an icon ( embedded object reference ) can be selected that opens a local or remote application .
In college , back in '91 , I remember opening an application hosted on a remote Macintosh computer by clicking on the icon for that application in the local Macintosh 's file " browser .
" From that point forward , the application was sent over AppleTalk to the local machine to be run as expected .
If we consider the opening of the remote application 's window on the local/client machine to be defined by the remote application , then the graphics portion of the patents are covered as well.Not related , but... stop outsourcing USA labor , collect income tax from outsourced USA labor , or start outsourcing USA management and see how they like it... because outsourcing is n't helping our country 's workers .
It might help if we actually start using our hands and start building some of our own technology in the USA again too .
What are the odds that your next mobile phone will be built in Asia ?
Why do n't we make anything in our own country anymore ?
If we look at it from the salary side , then I guess we should all be moving into cardboard shacks to compete with our outsourcing counterparts , but we 're not... and we probably do n't want to .
If they had our same quality of life , do you think they would still be charging cheaper rates ?
The USA has become a 3rd world service industry nation... and our tech industry leaders are n't helping matters because their companies build and package more and more overseas .
When your body is losing blood , you should n't care about getting a cheaper watch at the Asian Emporium .
You should be worrying about how to stop the bleeding .
I love my quality of life .
I do n't want to live in a cardboard shack !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't see where either patent references the Web in its mention of a "browser.
"  The MacOS, Windows, and UNIX operating systems all have file "browsers" that pre-date these patents.
In such file browsers, an icon (embedded object reference) can be selected that opens a local or remote application.
In college, back in '91, I remember opening an application hosted on a remote Macintosh computer by clicking on the icon for that application in the local Macintosh's file "browser.
" From that point forward, the application was sent over AppleTalk to the local machine to be run as expected.
If we consider the opening of the remote application's window on the local/client machine to be defined by the remote application, then the graphics portion of the patents are covered as well.Not related, but... stop outsourcing USA labor, collect income tax from outsourced USA labor, or start outsourcing USA management and see how they like it... because outsourcing isn't helping our country's workers.
It might help if we actually start using our hands and start building some of our own technology in the USA again too.
What are the odds that your next mobile phone will be built in Asia?
Why don't we make anything in our own country anymore?
If we look at it from the salary side, then I guess we should all be moving into cardboard shacks to compete with our outsourcing counterparts, but we're not... and we probably don't want to.
If they had our same quality of life, do you think they would still be charging cheaper rates?
The USA has become a 3rd world service industry nation... and our tech industry leaders aren't helping matters because their companies build and package more and more overseas.
When your body is losing blood, you shouldn't care about getting a cheaper watch at the Asian Emporium.
You should be worrying about how to stop the bleeding.
I love my quality of life.
I don't want to live in a cardboard shack!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439562</id>
	<title>Re:More power to 'em</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260805500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Aside from the fact that the company is a Berkley spin-off that was created purely to market this product and is very friendly towards open source.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Aside from the fact that the company is a Berkley spin-off that was created purely to market this product and is very friendly towards open source .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Aside from the fact that the company is a Berkley spin-off that was created purely to market this product and is very friendly towards open source.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438806</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438748</id>
	<title>ma8e</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260800700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">TRANSFER, NETlSCAPE to avoid so as to</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>TRANSFER , NETlSCAPE to avoid so as to [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>TRANSFER, NETlSCAPE to avoid so as to [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30441760</id>
	<title>Re:More power to 'em</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260871440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That is not quite true... only things made in the US is at risk. I.e projects in EU will not have any problem. This is the fundamental problem with software patents, it will cripple your economy while leaving others intact. A system built to protect industries will in a global world destroy them. Irony at it's peak.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That is not quite true... only things made in the US is at risk .
I.e projects in EU will not have any problem .
This is the fundamental problem with software patents , it will cripple your economy while leaving others intact .
A system built to protect industries will in a global world destroy them .
Irony at it 's peak .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is not quite true... only things made in the US is at risk.
I.e projects in EU will not have any problem.
This is the fundamental problem with software patents, it will cripple your economy while leaving others intact.
A system built to protect industries will in a global world destroy them.
Irony at it's peak.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438806</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439014</id>
	<title>Is there an echo in here?</title>
	<author>kennykb</author>
	<datestamp>1260802140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The news story was dated October 6, and I'm pretty sure I remember reading about it in Slashdot a couple of months ago.

Anyway, Mike loves jerking the chain of the legal system. I'm making popcorn.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The news story was dated October 6 , and I 'm pretty sure I remember reading about it in Slashdot a couple of months ago .
Anyway , Mike loves jerking the chain of the legal system .
I 'm making popcorn .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The news story was dated October 6, and I'm pretty sure I remember reading about it in Slashdot a couple of months ago.
Anyway, Mike loves jerking the chain of the legal system.
I'm making popcorn.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30440356</id>
	<title>If I were the judge...</title>
	<author>ponraul</author>
	<datestamp>1260812040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'd ask Eolas to show their technologies that they demonstrated widely over 15 years ago.


If they're trying to sue the pants off of everyone for copying their demo, they should have it handy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd ask Eolas to show their technologies that they demonstrated widely over 15 years ago .
If they 're trying to sue the pants off of everyone for copying their demo , they should have it handy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd ask Eolas to show their technologies that they demonstrated widely over 15 years ago.
If they're trying to sue the pants off of everyone for copying their demo, they should have it handy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438806</id>
	<title>Re:More power to 'em</title>
	<author>thePowerOfGrayskull</author>
	<datestamp>1260801060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Given that the defendants are also ridiculously litigious about software patents,</p></div><p>Every case like this that is lost by the defendants serves to further legitimize this type of patent. If they win this, any project using Ajax is at risk, including many popular FOSS forum and CMS packages.  So you'll pardon me if I'm less than enthusiastic about this, regardless of who is defending.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Given that the defendants are also ridiculously litigious about software patents,Every case like this that is lost by the defendants serves to further legitimize this type of patent .
If they win this , any project using Ajax is at risk , including many popular FOSS forum and CMS packages .
So you 'll pardon me if I 'm less than enthusiastic about this , regardless of who is defending .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Given that the defendants are also ridiculously litigious about software patents,Every case like this that is lost by the defendants serves to further legitimize this type of patent.
If they win this, any project using Ajax is at risk, including many popular FOSS forum and CMS packages.
So you'll pardon me if I'm less than enthusiastic about this, regardless of who is defending.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438580</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30454550</id>
	<title>Eolas Patents</title>
	<author>RNomad</author>
	<datestamp>1260904980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>These patents are egregious. I worked for a decade at Data Resources, Inc., a leading timesharing firm. We had the concept of executable code inside documents more than twenty years ago. EPS largely created by Bob Lacey was years ahead of its time. In 1983 with Visicorp we shipped VisiLink and DataKits for the Apple II.

VisiLink installed on the Apple II. The user filled out a form downloaded from the Burroughs mainframe. Connectivity was via a dial-up modem. Billing was by credit card. Requests were fulfilled by running a program unique to each form on the mainframe using as arguments the entries in the form. What was delivered to the Apple II was a VisiCalc spreadsheet to be executed on the Apple II in VisiCalc. I still have a retail package.

Almost everything Eolas claims is covered by EPS and VisiLink/DataKits. Maybe everything. I tried to help Microsoft in their suit, going so far as to send some documentation to their attorneys who I reached by calling Steve Ballmer. The attorneys decided to take a different path in fighting the patents and never used it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>These patents are egregious .
I worked for a decade at Data Resources , Inc. , a leading timesharing firm .
We had the concept of executable code inside documents more than twenty years ago .
EPS largely created by Bob Lacey was years ahead of its time .
In 1983 with Visicorp we shipped VisiLink and DataKits for the Apple II .
VisiLink installed on the Apple II .
The user filled out a form downloaded from the Burroughs mainframe .
Connectivity was via a dial-up modem .
Billing was by credit card .
Requests were fulfilled by running a program unique to each form on the mainframe using as arguments the entries in the form .
What was delivered to the Apple II was a VisiCalc spreadsheet to be executed on the Apple II in VisiCalc .
I still have a retail package .
Almost everything Eolas claims is covered by EPS and VisiLink/DataKits .
Maybe everything .
I tried to help Microsoft in their suit , going so far as to send some documentation to their attorneys who I reached by calling Steve Ballmer .
The attorneys decided to take a different path in fighting the patents and never used it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>These patents are egregious.
I worked for a decade at Data Resources, Inc., a leading timesharing firm.
We had the concept of executable code inside documents more than twenty years ago.
EPS largely created by Bob Lacey was years ahead of its time.
In 1983 with Visicorp we shipped VisiLink and DataKits for the Apple II.
VisiLink installed on the Apple II.
The user filled out a form downloaded from the Burroughs mainframe.
Connectivity was via a dial-up modem.
Billing was by credit card.
Requests were fulfilled by running a program unique to each form on the mainframe using as arguments the entries in the form.
What was delivered to the Apple II was a VisiCalc spreadsheet to be executed on the Apple II in VisiCalc.
I still have a retail package.
Almost everything Eolas claims is covered by EPS and VisiLink/DataKits.
Maybe everything.
I tried to help Microsoft in their suit, going so far as to send some documentation to their attorneys who I reached by calling Steve Ballmer.
The attorneys decided to take a different path in fighting the patents and never used it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438796</id>
	<title>Re:More power to 'em</title>
	<author>TapeCutter</author>
	<datestamp>1260801000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Playboy are into softporn not software.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Playboy are into softporn not software .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Playboy are into softporn not software.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438580</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438698</id>
	<title>Eolas, the bogus patent king?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260800400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Looks to me like they patented distributed computing embedded into a web browser.  Anyone have more background on the patents (I lost interest in trying to interpret patent-speak after page 3 or so of their patent application).  It seems to be merely abstracting a technology seen in mainframes and mainframe clients (remote computing), into what could be described as the biggest mainframe in the world (the internet).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Looks to me like they patented distributed computing embedded into a web browser .
Anyone have more background on the patents ( I lost interest in trying to interpret patent-speak after page 3 or so of their patent application ) .
It seems to be merely abstracting a technology seen in mainframes and mainframe clients ( remote computing ) , into what could be described as the biggest mainframe in the world ( the internet ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Looks to me like they patented distributed computing embedded into a web browser.
Anyone have more background on the patents (I lost interest in trying to interpret patent-speak after page 3 or so of their patent application).
It seems to be merely abstracting a technology seen in mainframes and mainframe clients (remote computing), into what could be described as the biggest mainframe in the world (the internet).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30440426</id>
	<title>Re:I made a webapp with a tcl/tk browser add-on in</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260812880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Congratulations, you now owe them $20M, you should have kept quiet about it. And when they threaten to begin discovery and reveal all of your pr0n IP history in court and to your wife you will settle out of court. Dirty companies with dirty lawyers play dirty games.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Congratulations , you now owe them $ 20M , you should have kept quiet about it .
And when they threaten to begin discovery and reveal all of your pr0n IP history in court and to your wife you will settle out of court .
Dirty companies with dirty lawyers play dirty games .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Congratulations, you now owe them $20M, you should have kept quiet about it.
And when they threaten to begin discovery and reveal all of your pr0n IP history in court and to your wife you will settle out of court.
Dirty companies with dirty lawyers play dirty games.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439274</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30442908</id>
	<title>Assignee: Regents of Univ of California</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260885780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you look at the patent, it says the assignee is the University of California. Presumably Doyle filed the patent while there? Then Eolas bought the patent rights? Seems so from his bio: http://www.eolas.com/about\_us.html.</p><p>So he developed this patent while working for a publicly funded University as "Director for the Center for Knowledge Management".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you look at the patent , it says the assignee is the University of California .
Presumably Doyle filed the patent while there ?
Then Eolas bought the patent rights ?
Seems so from his bio : http : //www.eolas.com/about \ _us.html.So he developed this patent while working for a publicly funded University as " Director for the Center for Knowledge Management " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you look at the patent, it says the assignee is the University of California.
Presumably Doyle filed the patent while there?
Then Eolas bought the patent rights?
Seems so from his bio: http://www.eolas.com/about\_us.html.So he developed this patent while working for a publicly funded University as "Director for the Center for Knowledge Management".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439046</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit</title>
	<author>supernova\_hq</author>
	<datestamp>1260802320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Doesn't a patent need to be very explicit in how something is performed? Last I checked, the browser technology (specifically Javascript) available now wasn't even conseived in 1944.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does n't a patent need to be very explicit in how something is performed ?
Last I checked , the browser technology ( specifically Javascript ) available now was n't even conseived in 1944 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Doesn't a patent need to be very explicit in how something is performed?
Last I checked, the browser technology (specifically Javascript) available now wasn't even conseived in 1944.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438752</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439538</id>
	<title>So.. hmm.</title>
	<author>Azureflare</author>
	<datestamp>1260805380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is it really possible for a company to wait until everyone is using technology which they patented, and then go after everyone for using it without paying them? I mean, no one even knew Eolas had this did they?<br> <br>
I know this "defense" thing usually is only applicable to trademarks, but really. I couldn't think of a more despicable thing than waiting in the shadows until everyone uses a (supposedly) free technology that didn't even originate from their company, and then striking when everyone is using it. Shame on them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is it really possible for a company to wait until everyone is using technology which they patented , and then go after everyone for using it without paying them ?
I mean , no one even knew Eolas had this did they ?
I know this " defense " thing usually is only applicable to trademarks , but really .
I could n't think of a more despicable thing than waiting in the shadows until everyone uses a ( supposedly ) free technology that did n't even originate from their company , and then striking when everyone is using it .
Shame on them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is it really possible for a company to wait until everyone is using technology which they patented, and then go after everyone for using it without paying them?
I mean, no one even knew Eolas had this did they?
I know this "defense" thing usually is only applicable to trademarks, but really.
I couldn't think of a more despicable thing than waiting in the shadows until everyone uses a (supposedly) free technology that didn't even originate from their company, and then striking when everyone is using it.
Shame on them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30440498</id>
	<title>Unfair use of whose technology?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260813480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They didn't invent/implement Javascript.<br>They didn't invent/implement DOM-based document markup specifications.<br>They didn't invent/implement Dynamic HTML capable browsers.<br>They didn't invent/implement threaded asynchronous XMLHTTPRequest() functions.<br>They didn't invent/implement XML or JSON data abstraction specifications.</p><p>Yeah, it would be a real shame if someone profited from someone elses innovation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They did n't invent/implement Javascript.They did n't invent/implement DOM-based document markup specifications.They did n't invent/implement Dynamic HTML capable browsers.They did n't invent/implement threaded asynchronous XMLHTTPRequest ( ) functions.They did n't invent/implement XML or JSON data abstraction specifications.Yeah , it would be a real shame if someone profited from someone elses innovation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They didn't invent/implement Javascript.They didn't invent/implement DOM-based document markup specifications.They didn't invent/implement Dynamic HTML capable browsers.They didn't invent/implement threaded asynchronous XMLHTTPRequest() functions.They didn't invent/implement XML or JSON data abstraction specifications.Yeah, it would be a real shame if someone profited from someone elses innovation.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30442250</id>
	<title>Re:Open Source</title>
	<author>JasonMaloney101</author>
	<datestamp>1260878040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>but it's all in unsearchable proprietary code that may or may not have been deleted years ago</p></div><p>In this case, that might not be necessary.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The '985 Patent is a continuation of the '906 patent, and allows websites to add fully-interactive embedded applications to their online offerings through the use of plug-in and AJAX (asynchronous JavaScript and XML) web development techniques. The Patent Office issued the '985 Patent in <b>October 2009</b>.</p></div><p>Microsoft <a href="http://garrettsmith.net/blog/archives/2006/01/microsoft\_inven\_1.html" title="garrettsmith.net" rel="nofollow">invented</a> [garrettsmith.net] <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outlook\_Web\_Access#Technology" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">AJAX</a> [wikipedia.org] in 1999 to be used with Outlook Web Access.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>but it 's all in unsearchable proprietary code that may or may not have been deleted years agoIn this case , that might not be necessary.The '985 Patent is a continuation of the '906 patent , and allows websites to add fully-interactive embedded applications to their online offerings through the use of plug-in and AJAX ( asynchronous JavaScript and XML ) web development techniques .
The Patent Office issued the '985 Patent in October 2009.Microsoft invented [ garrettsmith.net ] AJAX [ wikipedia.org ] in 1999 to be used with Outlook Web Access .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but it's all in unsearchable proprietary code that may or may not have been deleted years agoIn this case, that might not be necessary.The '985 Patent is a continuation of the '906 patent, and allows websites to add fully-interactive embedded applications to their online offerings through the use of plug-in and AJAX (asynchronous JavaScript and XML) web development techniques.
The Patent Office issued the '985 Patent in October 2009.Microsoft invented [garrettsmith.net] AJAX [wikipedia.org] in 1999 to be used with Outlook Web Access.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438798</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30442530</id>
	<title>This is a lot broader than AJAX...</title>
	<author>davide marney</author>
	<datestamp>1260881640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.boliven.com/patent/US5838906/description" title="boliven.com">Patent US5838906</a> [boliven.com]</p><p>Abstract:</p><blockquote><div><p>"A system allowing a user of a browser program on a computer connected to an open distributed hypermedia system to access and execute an embedded program object. The program object is embedded into a hypermedia document much like data objects. The user may select the program object from the screen. Once selected the program object executes on the user's (client) computer or may execute on a remote server or additional remote computers in a distributed processing arrangement. After launching the program object, the user is able to interact with the object as the invention provides for ongoing interprocess communication between the application object (program) and the browser program. One application of the embedded program object allows a user to view large and complex multi-dimensional objects from within the browser's window. The user can manipulate a control panel to change the viewpoint used to view the image. The invention allows a program to execute on a remote server or other computers to calculate the viewing transformations and send frame data to the client computer thus providing the user of the client computer with interactive features and allowing the user to have access to greater computing power than may be available at the user's client computer."</p></div></blockquote><p>In other words, the patent is on the entire concept of embedding objects in a browser.  I think this illustrates perfectly some of the faults of software patents:  1) It is a concept for an invention, not an actual invention;  2) It is a re-statement of general practices and patterns (remote procedure call; client/server; interactive user interface) that only looks new because it is being re-applied to another technology (browsers, in this case);  3) It is over-broad in scope, covering not a particular invention but an entire class of inventions;  4) It is general in execution, not requiring any specific device or implementation.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Patent US5838906 [ boliven.com ] Abstract : " A system allowing a user of a browser program on a computer connected to an open distributed hypermedia system to access and execute an embedded program object .
The program object is embedded into a hypermedia document much like data objects .
The user may select the program object from the screen .
Once selected the program object executes on the user 's ( client ) computer or may execute on a remote server or additional remote computers in a distributed processing arrangement .
After launching the program object , the user is able to interact with the object as the invention provides for ongoing interprocess communication between the application object ( program ) and the browser program .
One application of the embedded program object allows a user to view large and complex multi-dimensional objects from within the browser 's window .
The user can manipulate a control panel to change the viewpoint used to view the image .
The invention allows a program to execute on a remote server or other computers to calculate the viewing transformations and send frame data to the client computer thus providing the user of the client computer with interactive features and allowing the user to have access to greater computing power than may be available at the user 's client computer .
" In other words , the patent is on the entire concept of embedding objects in a browser .
I think this illustrates perfectly some of the faults of software patents : 1 ) It is a concept for an invention , not an actual invention ; 2 ) It is a re-statement of general practices and patterns ( remote procedure call ; client/server ; interactive user interface ) that only looks new because it is being re-applied to another technology ( browsers , in this case ) ; 3 ) It is over-broad in scope , covering not a particular invention but an entire class of inventions ; 4 ) It is general in execution , not requiring any specific device or implementation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Patent US5838906 [boliven.com]Abstract:"A system allowing a user of a browser program on a computer connected to an open distributed hypermedia system to access and execute an embedded program object.
The program object is embedded into a hypermedia document much like data objects.
The user may select the program object from the screen.
Once selected the program object executes on the user's (client) computer or may execute on a remote server or additional remote computers in a distributed processing arrangement.
After launching the program object, the user is able to interact with the object as the invention provides for ongoing interprocess communication between the application object (program) and the browser program.
One application of the embedded program object allows a user to view large and complex multi-dimensional objects from within the browser's window.
The user can manipulate a control panel to change the viewpoint used to view the image.
The invention allows a program to execute on a remote server or other computers to calculate the viewing transformations and send frame data to the client computer thus providing the user of the client computer with interactive features and allowing the user to have access to greater computing power than may be available at the user's client computer.
"In other words, the patent is on the entire concept of embedding objects in a browser.
I think this illustrates perfectly some of the faults of software patents:  1) It is a concept for an invention, not an actual invention;  2) It is a re-statement of general practices and patterns (remote procedure call; client/server; interactive user interface) that only looks new because it is being re-applied to another technology (browsers, in this case);  3) It is over-broad in scope, covering not a particular invention but an entire class of inventions;  4) It is general in execution, not requiring any specific device or implementation.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30444308</id>
	<title>Anyone else...</title>
	<author>vegiVamp</author>
	<datestamp>1260893520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Anyone else read "Legolas sues World + Dog" ?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone else read " Legolas sues World + Dog " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone else read "Legolas sues World + Dog" ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30452766</id>
	<title>Ridiculous</title>
	<author>petekjohnson</author>
	<datestamp>1260886200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I had to wade through 100+ posts debating capitalism vs libertarianism vs communism vs socialism before finding even one post mentioning the lawsuit this topic is supposed to be about.  Why do I even bother reading this site anymore?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I had to wade through 100 + posts debating capitalism vs libertarianism vs communism vs socialism before finding even one post mentioning the lawsuit this topic is supposed to be about .
Why do I even bother reading this site anymore ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had to wade through 100+ posts debating capitalism vs libertarianism vs communism vs socialism before finding even one post mentioning the lawsuit this topic is supposed to be about.
Why do I even bother reading this site anymore?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30441196</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260907260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Show me the web site that you made providing an interactive web app back in 1994, only one year after the web was even invented.

Don't have one? No one did? Thought as much...</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
Doesn't matter.  One does need to show actual possession of an invention to qualify for a patent.  A patentee must show reduction to practice, which can be actual or constructive.  Actual RTP is possession of the invention.  Constructive RTP is describing the invention in enough detail that one of ordinary skill in the art can implement it.  This can be done without ever actually constructing the invention.

</p><p>
If this seems ridiculously lenient, consider designing a new jumbo jet that will take 10 years to actually build.  Or the garage inventor who can't afford a fab plant to build his new microchip.  There are cases where actual possession is an unreasonable requirement.

</p><p>
Yes I am a patent attorney.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Show me the web site that you made providing an interactive web app back in 1994 , only one year after the web was even invented .
Do n't have one ?
No one did ?
Thought as much.. . Does n't matter .
One does need to show actual possession of an invention to qualify for a patent .
A patentee must show reduction to practice , which can be actual or constructive .
Actual RTP is possession of the invention .
Constructive RTP is describing the invention in enough detail that one of ordinary skill in the art can implement it .
This can be done without ever actually constructing the invention .
If this seems ridiculously lenient , consider designing a new jumbo jet that will take 10 years to actually build .
Or the garage inventor who ca n't afford a fab plant to build his new microchip .
There are cases where actual possession is an unreasonable requirement .
Yes I am a patent attorney .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Show me the web site that you made providing an interactive web app back in 1994, only one year after the web was even invented.
Don't have one?
No one did?
Thought as much...

Doesn't matter.
One does need to show actual possession of an invention to qualify for a patent.
A patentee must show reduction to practice, which can be actual or constructive.
Actual RTP is possession of the invention.
Constructive RTP is describing the invention in enough detail that one of ordinary skill in the art can implement it.
This can be done without ever actually constructing the invention.
If this seems ridiculously lenient, consider designing a new jumbo jet that will take 10 years to actually build.
Or the garage inventor who can't afford a fab plant to build his new microchip.
There are cases where actual possession is an unreasonable requirement.
Yes I am a patent attorney.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438752</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30440750</id>
	<title>Re:I made a webapp with a tcl/tk browser add-on in</title>
	<author>Tablizer</author>
	<datestamp>1260815520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Shit, and we *still* don't have click-addressable vector graphics in web browsers.</p><p>If you can prove that app existed via promotional videos, published works, etc., it could serve as prior art. I imaging proving is the hard part.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Shit , and we * still * do n't have click-addressable vector graphics in web browsers.If you can prove that app existed via promotional videos , published works , etc. , it could serve as prior art .
I imaging proving is the hard part .
   </tokentext>
<sentencetext>Shit, and we *still* don't have click-addressable vector graphics in web browsers.If you can prove that app existed via promotional videos, published works, etc., it could serve as prior art.
I imaging proving is the hard part.
   </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439274</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30441876</id>
	<title>SW Patents = how to shoot oneself in the foot</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260873000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seems to me that the economic tradeoff of sw patenting in the US will kill the US IT business in the long run (or maybe not so long at all...).</p><p>Continous patent fights will drive home market SW costs through the roof, while the rest of the world happily innovates and moves on.</p><p>I presume that when all lawyers and greedy sueers are over and done fighting most existing 20th century IP, they will find that most interesting 21st century stuff is being made in other countries and that there's no market footprint left over for US companies...</p><p>I could be wrong though, I'm no economist, but it seems so entirely obvious...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seems to me that the economic tradeoff of sw patenting in the US will kill the US IT business in the long run ( or maybe not so long at all... ) .Continous patent fights will drive home market SW costs through the roof , while the rest of the world happily innovates and moves on.I presume that when all lawyers and greedy sueers are over and done fighting most existing 20th century IP , they will find that most interesting 21st century stuff is being made in other countries and that there 's no market footprint left over for US companies...I could be wrong though , I 'm no economist , but it seems so entirely obvious.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seems to me that the economic tradeoff of sw patenting in the US will kill the US IT business in the long run (or maybe not so long at all...).Continous patent fights will drive home market SW costs through the roof, while the rest of the world happily innovates and moves on.I presume that when all lawyers and greedy sueers are over and done fighting most existing 20th century IP, they will find that most interesting 21st century stuff is being made in other countries and that there's no market footprint left over for US companies...I could be wrong though, I'm no economist, but it seems so entirely obvious...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439166</id>
	<title>Re:Can someone explain the "dog" reference?</title>
	<author>h4rr4r</author>
	<datestamp>1260803040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Sieg Heil" means "Hail victory" not "For the Win". You might want to fix your tagline there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Sieg Heil " means " Hail victory " not " For the Win " .
You might want to fix your tagline there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Sieg Heil" means "Hail victory" not "For the Win".
You might want to fix your tagline there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438818</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30442456</id>
	<title>Bilski?</title>
	<author>Dunkirk</author>
	<datestamp>1260880800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are 442 comments on this article at the time I write this, and no one has written the word, "Bilski." All I want to know is whether that case could impact this one. Is it possible that this case could finally force the courts to say that it's not possible to patent software at all?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are 442 comments on this article at the time I write this , and no one has written the word , " Bilski .
" All I want to know is whether that case could impact this one .
Is it possible that this case could finally force the courts to say that it 's not possible to patent software at all ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are 442 comments on this article at the time I write this, and no one has written the word, "Bilski.
" All I want to know is whether that case could impact this one.
Is it possible that this case could finally force the courts to say that it's not possible to patent software at all?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438702</id>
	<title>Good</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260800400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is great, because the problem is not Eolas, it's the patent system.  Congress will never fix it until their corporate masters are in pain.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is great , because the problem is not Eolas , it 's the patent system .
Congress will never fix it until their corporate masters are in pain .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is great, because the problem is not Eolas, it's the patent system.
Congress will never fix it until their corporate masters are in pain.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438832</id>
	<title>Cached</title>
	<author>icepick72</author>
	<datestamp>1260801240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>by Google <a href="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&amp;site=&amp;btnG=Search&amp;q=cache:http://imvivo.com/DetailsView/tabid/104/IndexID/1779944/Default.aspx" title="google.com">http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&amp;site=&amp;btnG=Search&amp;q=cache:http://imvivo.com/DetailsView/tabid/104/IndexID/1779944/Default.aspx</a> [google.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>by Google http : //www.google.com/search ? hl = en&amp;site = &amp;btnG = Search&amp;q = cache : http : //imvivo.com/DetailsView/tabid/104/IndexID/1779944/Default.aspx [ google.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>by Google http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&amp;site=&amp;btnG=Search&amp;q=cache:http://imvivo.com/DetailsView/tabid/104/IndexID/1779944/Default.aspx [google.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438672</id>
	<title>A Modest Proposal, but...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260800280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why don't we create an industry funded board whose job is to make sure that silly software patents are no longer awarded? Oh wait... The industry only dislikes SOME software patents, while anyone who cares to look will see that all software patents threaten innovation and are largely <a href="http://audio-video.gnu.org/audio/rms-speech-patents-westminster.ogg" title="gnu.org" rel="nofollow">anti-competitive</a> [gnu.org] because they rig the game in favor of big corporations.

Unfortunately, software patents have become the last hurdle that the proprietary world can throw at the free software movement.

Moglen and Lessig are both very persuasive (If you got a bit of free time, read "Free Culture" by the latter) I hope that upon hearing their arguments European Commission will be wise enough to reconsider its position on software patents.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why do n't we create an industry funded board whose job is to make sure that silly software patents are no longer awarded ?
Oh wait... The industry only dislikes SOME software patents , while anyone who cares to look will see that all software patents threaten innovation and are largely anti-competitive [ gnu.org ] because they rig the game in favor of big corporations .
Unfortunately , software patents have become the last hurdle that the proprietary world can throw at the free software movement .
Moglen and Lessig are both very persuasive ( If you got a bit of free time , read " Free Culture " by the latter ) I hope that upon hearing their arguments European Commission will be wise enough to reconsider its position on software patents .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why don't we create an industry funded board whose job is to make sure that silly software patents are no longer awarded?
Oh wait... The industry only dislikes SOME software patents, while anyone who cares to look will see that all software patents threaten innovation and are largely anti-competitive [gnu.org] because they rig the game in favor of big corporations.
Unfortunately, software patents have become the last hurdle that the proprietary world can throw at the free software movement.
Moglen and Lessig are both very persuasive (If you got a bit of free time, read "Free Culture" by the latter) I hope that upon hearing their arguments European Commission will be wise enough to reconsider its position on software patents.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_15_001212_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30441592
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439274
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_15_001212_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30442858
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30440824
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_15_001212_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439046
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438752
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_15_001212_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438580
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_15_001212_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439296
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438752
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_15_001212_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438742
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438544
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438492
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_15_001212_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438580
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_15_001212_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30440426
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439274
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_15_001212_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30441196
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438752
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_15_001212_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30440750
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439274
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_15_001212_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30441760
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438580
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_15_001212_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30443000
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438708
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_15_001212_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30440580
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439274
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_15_001212_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439492
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438580
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_15_001212_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438850
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438580
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_15_001212_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439058
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438818
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_15_001212_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30440792
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439274
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_15_001212_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30440846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439402
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_15_001212_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30441148
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439274
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_15_001212_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438714
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438580
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_15_001212_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439166
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438818
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_15_001212_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439088
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438580
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_15_001212_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439752
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438672
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_15_001212_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438580
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_15_001212_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30442250
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438798
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_15_001212_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30440218
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439274
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_15_001212_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30449318
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438580
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_15_001212_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438796
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438580
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_15_001212_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30442978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30440824
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_15_001212.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438818
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439058
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439166
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_15_001212.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438708
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30443000
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_15_001212.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439062
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_15_001212.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438834
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_15_001212.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439018
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_15_001212.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439274
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30440750
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30440792
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30441592
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30441148
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30440218
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30440426
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30440580
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_15_001212.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30440440
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_15_001212.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439402
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30440846
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_15_001212.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439538
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_15_001212.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30445494
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_15_001212.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30440812
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_15_001212.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30444714
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_15_001212.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438580
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30449318
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438796
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438806
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30441760
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439562
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438850
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438714
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439492
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439088
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439194
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439252
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_15_001212.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438752
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439296
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30441196
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439046
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439122
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_15_001212.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438492
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438544
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438742
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_15_001212.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30444278
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_15_001212.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30440824
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30442858
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30442978
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_15_001212.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30442530
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_15_001212.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30440370
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_15_001212.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30440954
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_15_001212.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438798
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30442250
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_15_001212.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438672
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30439752
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_15_001212.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438636
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_15_001212.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_15_001212.30438918
</commentlist>
</conversation>
