<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_24_1417257</id>
	<title>Scary Smartphone Motion Control Patent Granted</title>
	<author>CmdrTaco</author>
	<datestamp>1269444960000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"On March 16th, the United States Patent and Trademark Office issued <a href="http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&amp;Sect2=HITOFF&amp;d=PALL&amp;p=1&amp;u=\%2Fnetahtml\%2FPTO\%2Fsrchnum.htm&amp;r=1&amp;f=G&amp;l=50&amp;s1=7,679,604.PN.&amp;OS=PN/7,679,604&amp;RS=PN/7,679,604">a very broad patent</a> on motion control in computing devices, <a href="http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/20100324/motion-control-a-powder-keg-in-the-mobile-patent-war/">one that seems to cover any smartphone that uses a built-in accelerometer</a>. It was filed in July 2006 and preceded by a nearly identical patent granted in 2004 after a 2001 application. So it predates many of today's popular smartphones &mdash; the iPhone, the DROID, the Nexus One, etc. What will happen if the company that owns the patent asserts it?"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " On March 16th , the United States Patent and Trademark Office issued a very broad patent on motion control in computing devices , one that seems to cover any smartphone that uses a built-in accelerometer .
It was filed in July 2006 and preceded by a nearly identical patent granted in 2004 after a 2001 application .
So it predates many of today 's popular smartphones    the iPhone , the DROID , the Nexus One , etc .
What will happen if the company that owns the patent asserts it ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "On March 16th, the United States Patent and Trademark Office issued a very broad patent on motion control in computing devices, one that seems to cover any smartphone that uses a built-in accelerometer.
It was filed in July 2006 and preceded by a nearly identical patent granted in 2004 after a 2001 application.
So it predates many of today's popular smartphones — the iPhone, the DROID, the Nexus One, etc.
What will happen if the company that owns the patent asserts it?
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599088</id>
	<title>Re:I'd claim my pedometer as prior art.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269450900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://www.engadget.com/2004/04/12/checking-out-myorigos-tilt-controlled-smartphone/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.engadget.com/2004/04/12/checking-out-myorigos-tilt-controlled-smartphone/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.engadget.com/2004/04/12/checking-out-myorigos-tilt-controlled-smartphone/</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598702</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599182</id>
	<title>Prior Art from DEC WRL?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269451320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Consider this as prior art:</p><p>http://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/Compaq-DEC/WRL-2000-3.pdf</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Consider this as prior art : http : //www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/Compaq-DEC/WRL-2000-3.pdf</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Consider this as prior art:http://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/Compaq-DEC/WRL-2000-3.pdf</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599932</id>
	<title>Re:To hack a patent...</title>
	<author>Megaweapon</author>
	<datestamp>1269454140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Could at least the editors</p></div><p>What "editors"?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Could at least the editorsWhat " editors " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Could at least the editorsWhat "editors"?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598714</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599878</id>
	<title>Re:To hack a patent...</title>
	<author>russotto</author>
	<datestamp>1269454020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Could at least the editors read the claims before posting nonsense like "cover any smartphone with built-in accelerometer"? This patent is not overly broad in any sense.</p></div></blockquote><p>Claim 1 covers any computing device which can be controlled by moving it back and forth, up and down, left and right, or turning it in both directions around any of the three axes.  That's not overbroad?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Could at least the editors read the claims before posting nonsense like " cover any smartphone with built-in accelerometer " ?
This patent is not overly broad in any sense.Claim 1 covers any computing device which can be controlled by moving it back and forth , up and down , left and right , or turning it in both directions around any of the three axes .
That 's not overbroad ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Could at least the editors read the claims before posting nonsense like "cover any smartphone with built-in accelerometer"?
This patent is not overly broad in any sense.Claim 1 covers any computing device which can be controlled by moving it back and forth, up and down, left and right, or turning it in both directions around any of the three axes.
That's not overbroad?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598714</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31600698</id>
	<title>Tactics</title>
	<author>ridgecritter</author>
	<datestamp>1269456900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Durham gets around this by assigning its rights or selling the patents to a big boy with a big legal budget.  Durham could negotiate a nice pile of risk-free cash up front plus a share of future license revenues.  Happens all the time.  If you've got a genuinely valuable patent portfolio, there are ways to monetize it even if the potential infringement defendants have lots of $.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Durham gets around this by assigning its rights or selling the patents to a big boy with a big legal budget .
Durham could negotiate a nice pile of risk-free cash up front plus a share of future license revenues .
Happens all the time .
If you 've got a genuinely valuable patent portfolio , there are ways to monetize it even if the potential infringement defendants have lots of $ .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Durham gets around this by assigning its rights or selling the patents to a big boy with a big legal budget.
Durham could negotiate a nice pile of risk-free cash up front plus a share of future license revenues.
Happens all the time.
If you've got a genuinely valuable patent portfolio, there are ways to monetize it even if the potential infringement defendants have lots of $.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598676</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599392</id>
	<title>Do my car's seatbelts violate this patent?</title>
	<author>davidwr</author>
	<datestamp>1269452100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>OK, probably not because there's no "computer," but they do change their behavior in response to an accelerometer.</p><p>So do the emergency brakes on many elevators.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>OK , probably not because there 's no " computer , " but they do change their behavior in response to an accelerometer.So do the emergency brakes on many elevators .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OK, probably not because there's no "computer," but they do change their behavior in response to an accelerometer.So do the emergency brakes on many elevators.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598364</id>
	<title>To hack a patent...</title>
	<author>alain94040</author>
	<datestamp>1269448560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here's how you hack a patent. From claim 1:</p><blockquote><div><p>wherein the initial motion meets or exceeds an initial motion <b>threshold</b>; sensing a complementary motion of said computer device in a <b>reverse</b> direction to the initial direction</p></div></blockquote><p>As long as the iPhone or Android do not use one threshold and are more generic than detecting reverse direction, they do not infringe on that patent. Whoever wrote that claim made it way too specific, and easy to work around it.</p><p>--<br><a href="http://fairsoftware.net/" title="fairsoftware.net">co-founders wanted</a> [fairsoftware.net].</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's how you hack a patent .
From claim 1 : wherein the initial motion meets or exceeds an initial motion threshold ; sensing a complementary motion of said computer device in a reverse direction to the initial directionAs long as the iPhone or Android do not use one threshold and are more generic than detecting reverse direction , they do not infringe on that patent .
Whoever wrote that claim made it way too specific , and easy to work around it.--co-founders wanted [ fairsoftware.net ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here's how you hack a patent.
From claim 1:wherein the initial motion meets or exceeds an initial motion threshold; sensing a complementary motion of said computer device in a reverse direction to the initial directionAs long as the iPhone or Android do not use one threshold and are more generic than detecting reverse direction, they do not infringe on that patent.
Whoever wrote that claim made it way too specific, and easy to work around it.--co-founders wanted [fairsoftware.net].
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599502</id>
	<title>Re:To hack a patent...</title>
	<author>drerwk</author>
	<datestamp>1269452520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>iPhone uses 'shake' as an undo. I can imagine that the undo might be done similar to the claim. Might have to re-write it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>iPhone uses 'shake ' as an undo .
I can imagine that the undo might be done similar to the claim .
Might have to re-write it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>iPhone uses 'shake' as an undo.
I can imagine that the undo might be done similar to the claim.
Might have to re-write it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598562</id>
	<title>Patents</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269449160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Patents are invalidated by proof of prior art.  I work in R&amp;D, and every so often, will publish in a totally obscure journal just to get something into the public domain - if it stays under the radar, I can still patent, and the prior art doesn't matter because I'm not going to sue myself over it.  If nothing becomes of the technology in-house, another party may well patent it later, in which case I have lost the exclusive revenue, but I can pull out the journal article and invalidate the other patent, essentially leveling the playing field if there is indeed money to be made.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Patents are invalidated by proof of prior art .
I work in R&amp;D , and every so often , will publish in a totally obscure journal just to get something into the public domain - if it stays under the radar , I can still patent , and the prior art does n't matter because I 'm not going to sue myself over it .
If nothing becomes of the technology in-house , another party may well patent it later , in which case I have lost the exclusive revenue , but I can pull out the journal article and invalidate the other patent , essentially leveling the playing field if there is indeed money to be made .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Patents are invalidated by proof of prior art.
I work in R&amp;D, and every so often, will publish in a totally obscure journal just to get something into the public domain - if it stays under the radar, I can still patent, and the prior art doesn't matter because I'm not going to sue myself over it.
If nothing becomes of the technology in-house, another party may well patent it later, in which case I have lost the exclusive revenue, but I can pull out the journal article and invalidate the other patent, essentially leveling the playing field if there is indeed money to be made.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598660</id>
	<title>Re:To hack a patent...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269449520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> Oh noes, they only claimed their invention...whatever shall they do???</p></div><p>You call it an invention, I call it an algorithm.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh noes , they only claimed their invention...whatever shall they do ? ?
? You call it an invention , I call it an algorithm .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Oh noes, they only claimed their invention...whatever shall they do??
?You call it an invention, I call it an algorithm.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598482</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598574</id>
	<title>Re:To hack a patent...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269449220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>An accelerometer only measure acceleration, a change in direction is a big acceleration. A big change in direction can cause the signal to clip, when this happens you get random data. You have to apply a transfer function; a lower limit threshold that is above the noise floor, and limit small movements, and a high threshold to prevent any clipping.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>An accelerometer only measure acceleration , a change in direction is a big acceleration .
A big change in direction can cause the signal to clip , when this happens you get random data .
You have to apply a transfer function ; a lower limit threshold that is above the noise floor , and limit small movements , and a high threshold to prevent any clipping .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An accelerometer only measure acceleration, a change in direction is a big acceleration.
A big change in direction can cause the signal to clip, when this happens you get random data.
You have to apply a transfer function; a lower limit threshold that is above the noise floor, and limit small movements, and a high threshold to prevent any clipping.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598920</id>
	<title>Motion</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269450300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"What will happen if the company that owns the patent asserts it?"</p><p>Easy answer.  Negotiations will start.</p><p>Patent lawyers will sit down and debate the issues.</p><p>They will either agree and buy or license the patent or litigate and then win or pay a license fee.</p><p>Happens all the time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" What will happen if the company that owns the patent asserts it ?
" Easy answer .
Negotiations will start.Patent lawyers will sit down and debate the issues.They will either agree and buy or license the patent or litigate and then win or pay a license fee.Happens all the time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"What will happen if the company that owns the patent asserts it?
"Easy answer.
Negotiations will start.Patent lawyers will sit down and debate the issues.They will either agree and buy or license the patent or litigate and then win or pay a license fee.Happens all the time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599206</id>
	<title>Here's an idea</title>
	<author>Kazymyr</author>
	<datestamp>1269451380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Has anyone patented yet any computing devices that are <i>blue</i>?</p><p>If not, I got dibs!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Has anyone patented yet any computing devices that are blue ? If not , I got dibs !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Has anyone patented yet any computing devices that are blue?If not, I got dibs!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598482</id>
	<title>Re:To hack a patent...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269448920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Whoever wrote that claim made it way too specific, and easy to work around it.</p></div><p>You mean<nobr> <wbr></nobr>::gasp:: someone actually applied for a patent THE WAY THEY FUCKING SHOULD???  Oh noes, they only claimed their invention...whatever shall they do???</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Whoever wrote that claim made it way too specific , and easy to work around it.You mean : : gasp : : someone actually applied for a patent THE WAY THEY FUCKING SHOULD ? ? ?
Oh noes , they only claimed their invention...whatever shall they do ? ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whoever wrote that claim made it way too specific, and easy to work around it.You mean ::gasp:: someone actually applied for a patent THE WAY THEY FUCKING SHOULD???
Oh noes, they only claimed their invention...whatever shall they do??
?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599304</id>
	<title>Re:To hack a patent...</title>
	<author>kjart</author>
	<datestamp>1269451800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Whoever wrote that claim made it way too specific, and easy to work around it.</p></div><p>You mean how all patents are supposed to be very specific?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Whoever wrote that claim made it way too specific , and easy to work around it.You mean how all patents are supposed to be very specific ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whoever wrote that claim made it way too specific, and easy to work around it.You mean how all patents are supposed to be very specific?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599120</id>
	<title>Re:To hack a patent...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269451080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>So the patent is for a pedometer that uses the accelerometer in the phone instead of the old "clicking" ones that had a moving part? I was just thinking that "My Tracks" for Android (from Google) and the app that is similar on the iPhone (don't know the name but somebody I used to work with used it) should add in pedometer function to say not only "you went x miles at y speed and had z elevation increase" but add in "you took q steps" as well. Or am I reading it wrong on the motion and reverse?</htmltext>
<tokenext>So the patent is for a pedometer that uses the accelerometer in the phone instead of the old " clicking " ones that had a moving part ?
I was just thinking that " My Tracks " for Android ( from Google ) and the app that is similar on the iPhone ( do n't know the name but somebody I used to work with used it ) should add in pedometer function to say not only " you went x miles at y speed and had z elevation increase " but add in " you took q steps " as well .
Or am I reading it wrong on the motion and reverse ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So the patent is for a pedometer that uses the accelerometer in the phone instead of the old "clicking" ones that had a moving part?
I was just thinking that "My Tracks" for Android (from Google) and the app that is similar on the iPhone (don't know the name but somebody I used to work with used it) should add in pedometer function to say not only "you went x miles at y speed and had z elevation increase" but add in "you took q steps" as well.
Or am I reading it wrong on the motion and reverse?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31600968</id>
	<title>Re:Scary smartphone motion</title>
	<author>radtea</author>
	<datestamp>1269458040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>But disappointingly, it's the PATENT that's scary, not the smartphone motion.</p></div><p>Hey, it's a patent story on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. so you should consider yourself fortunate that it has anything to do with phones at all.  The usual standard around here is that the headline says "XYZ Patents Breathing!" while the patent is actually for an extremely specialized widget that fits into a particular style of respirator used only by a few high-altitude climbers in yak-roasting emergencies.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But disappointingly , it 's the PATENT that 's scary , not the smartphone motion.Hey , it 's a patent story on / .
so you should consider yourself fortunate that it has anything to do with phones at all .
The usual standard around here is that the headline says " XYZ Patents Breathing !
" while the patent is actually for an extremely specialized widget that fits into a particular style of respirator used only by a few high-altitude climbers in yak-roasting emergencies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But disappointingly, it's the PATENT that's scary, not the smartphone motion.Hey, it's a patent story on /.
so you should consider yourself fortunate that it has anything to do with phones at all.
The usual standard around here is that the headline says "XYZ Patents Breathing!
" while the patent is actually for an extremely specialized widget that fits into a particular style of respirator used only by a few high-altitude climbers in yak-roasting emergencies.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598706</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31600754</id>
	<title>Re:To hack a patent...</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1269457140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sounds like an impact sensor, and a measurement of how hard the impact was. Like an airbag impact sensor (ball bearing, ramp, magnets, contacts) but using an accelerometer and software.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds like an impact sensor , and a measurement of how hard the impact was .
Like an airbag impact sensor ( ball bearing , ramp , magnets , contacts ) but using an accelerometer and software .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds like an impact sensor, and a measurement of how hard the impact was.
Like an airbag impact sensor (ball bearing, ramp, magnets, contacts) but using an accelerometer and software.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598780</id>
	<title>"What if the patent owner asserts it?"</title>
	<author>John Hasler</author>
	<datestamp>1269449880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The world will end.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The world will end .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The world will end.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598876</id>
	<title>If that company tries to assert it?</title>
	<author>phonewebcam</author>
	<datestamp>1269450120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> If it does have legs, Google buys that company and tells Apple to lay off of HTC or iPhone sales stop dead.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If it does have legs , Google buys that company and tells Apple to lay off of HTC or iPhone sales stop dead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> If it does have legs, Google buys that company and tells Apple to lay off of HTC or iPhone sales stop dead.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599524</id>
	<title>Popular smartphones?</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1269452640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>the iPhone, the DROID, the Nexus One</p></div><p>You said <em>popular</em>! Try Nokia and Samsung. ^^</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>the iPhone , the DROID , the Nexus OneYou said popular !
Try Nokia and Samsung .
^ ^</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the iPhone, the DROID, the Nexus OneYou said popular!
Try Nokia and Samsung.
^^
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31600948</id>
	<title>Prior Art</title>
	<author>RenderSeven</author>
	<datestamp>1269457980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I did the initial demo software integration under contract for an accelerometer manufacturer and a phone maker (whom shall remain nameless for now). But I sure as hell have prior art, it's an exact match, predates the application, was shown publicly at large trade show, and I (and 2 Fortune-100 companies) can prove it. I personally dont have a stake in this, but what do I do now?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I did the initial demo software integration under contract for an accelerometer manufacturer and a phone maker ( whom shall remain nameless for now ) .
But I sure as hell have prior art , it 's an exact match , predates the application , was shown publicly at large trade show , and I ( and 2 Fortune-100 companies ) can prove it .
I personally dont have a stake in this , but what do I do now ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I did the initial demo software integration under contract for an accelerometer manufacturer and a phone maker (whom shall remain nameless for now).
But I sure as hell have prior art, it's an exact match, predates the application, was shown publicly at large trade show, and I (and 2 Fortune-100 companies) can prove it.
I personally dont have a stake in this, but what do I do now?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31603760</id>
	<title>Re:To hack a patent...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269425640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dude, you're wrong. (Sorry.)</p><p>If you use more than one threshold, you're still using "a threshold."<br>For a claim to read on only using one threshold, it would have to specifically state that it was single motion threshold.</p><p>Also, if they sense the complementary motion and it includes reverse directions and other directions as well, the same reasoning applies.</p><p>Terms in patent claims are read to be "open" unless specifically indicated otherwise. See http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/matters/matters-9511.html</p><p>(IAAPA - I am a patent attorney.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dude , you 're wrong .
( Sorry. ) If you use more than one threshold , you 're still using " a threshold .
" For a claim to read on only using one threshold , it would have to specifically state that it was single motion threshold.Also , if they sense the complementary motion and it includes reverse directions and other directions as well , the same reasoning applies.Terms in patent claims are read to be " open " unless specifically indicated otherwise .
See http : //www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/matters/matters-9511.html ( IAAPA - I am a patent attorney .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dude, you're wrong.
(Sorry.)If you use more than one threshold, you're still using "a threshold.
"For a claim to read on only using one threshold, it would have to specifically state that it was single motion threshold.Also, if they sense the complementary motion and it includes reverse directions and other directions as well, the same reasoning applies.Terms in patent claims are read to be "open" unless specifically indicated otherwise.
See http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/matters/matters-9511.html(IAAPA - I am a patent attorney.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31601508</id>
	<title>Really?</title>
	<author>DoofusOfDeath</author>
	<datestamp>1269459960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does the Patent Office even <i>pretend</i> to do their job any more?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does the Patent Office even pretend to do their job any more ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does the Patent Office even pretend to do their job any more?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31601340</id>
	<title>Prior art</title>
	<author>Misagon</author>
	<datestamp>1269459300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I recall that I saw a hardware add-on for the PalmPilot back in 1999 that did this.
<br> <br>
Oh yeah. I think I found it<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... or <i>one</i> of them: <a href="http://www.harbaum.org/till/palm/adxl202/index.html" title="harbaum.org">Palm Tilt Sensor</a> [harbaum.org]. I remember a lot more freeware apps than are available on that page, there being more than one of them seems quite likely.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I recall that I saw a hardware add-on for the PalmPilot back in 1999 that did this .
Oh yeah .
I think I found it ... or one of them : Palm Tilt Sensor [ harbaum.org ] .
I remember a lot more freeware apps than are available on that page , there being more than one of them seems quite likely .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I recall that I saw a hardware add-on for the PalmPilot back in 1999 that did this.
Oh yeah.
I think I found it ... or one of them: Palm Tilt Sensor [harbaum.org].
I remember a lot more freeware apps than are available on that page, there being more than one of them seems quite likely.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598744</id>
	<title>Re:To hack a patent...</title>
	<author>cgenman</author>
	<datestamp>1269449700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This was an "on a" patent.  Buying things on the internet.  GPS in a car.  Accelerometer in a phone.  They weren't trying to claim an actual invention, as accelerometers in wands and other computer controllers have been around for a long time.  They were attempting to patent troll.</p><p>We'll have to see how this one turns out.  But in general, it seems pretty safe to say that the patent system in this country needs a healthcare-sized overhaul.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This was an " on a " patent .
Buying things on the internet .
GPS in a car .
Accelerometer in a phone .
They were n't trying to claim an actual invention , as accelerometers in wands and other computer controllers have been around for a long time .
They were attempting to patent troll.We 'll have to see how this one turns out .
But in general , it seems pretty safe to say that the patent system in this country needs a healthcare-sized overhaul .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This was an "on a" patent.
Buying things on the internet.
GPS in a car.
Accelerometer in a phone.
They weren't trying to claim an actual invention, as accelerometers in wands and other computer controllers have been around for a long time.
They were attempting to patent troll.We'll have to see how this one turns out.
But in general, it seems pretty safe to say that the patent system in this country needs a healthcare-sized overhaul.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598482</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31601584</id>
	<title>Re:To hack a patent...</title>
	<author>coolsnowmen</author>
	<datestamp>1269460260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You either didn't explain yourself very well, or you really don't know what you are talking about.  If you do-</p><p>How is a 'clipped' signal random ever?  A clipped signal is one that saturates the max maximum or minimum so when it should be varying out side of the range, it is pegged at exactly one value. E.G. input (0-5 accepted): 2,3,4,5,6,7,6,5,4 -- actual: 2,3,4,5,5,5,5,5,4</p><p>The rest of your post is really generic-</p><p>"You have to apply a transfer function"  Which one? For what mathematical purpose?</p><p>"a lower limit threshold that is above the noise floor" Yeah, isn't this standard for ANY input device ?</p><p>"and limit small movements" How can you limit what the user is doing with the camera?</p><p>"and a high threshold to prevent any clipping." How can an imposed threshold prevent clipping, either you allow the full range of the input device, or you artificially clip it.</p><p>Teach me!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You either did n't explain yourself very well , or you really do n't know what you are talking about .
If you do-How is a 'clipped ' signal random ever ?
A clipped signal is one that saturates the max maximum or minimum so when it should be varying out side of the range , it is pegged at exactly one value .
E.G. input ( 0-5 accepted ) : 2,3,4,5,6,7,6,5,4 -- actual : 2,3,4,5,5,5,5,5,4The rest of your post is really generic- " You have to apply a transfer function " Which one ?
For what mathematical purpose ?
" a lower limit threshold that is above the noise floor " Yeah , is n't this standard for ANY input device ?
" and limit small movements " How can you limit what the user is doing with the camera ?
" and a high threshold to prevent any clipping .
" How can an imposed threshold prevent clipping , either you allow the full range of the input device , or you artificially clip it.Teach me !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You either didn't explain yourself very well, or you really don't know what you are talking about.
If you do-How is a 'clipped' signal random ever?
A clipped signal is one that saturates the max maximum or minimum so when it should be varying out side of the range, it is pegged at exactly one value.
E.G. input (0-5 accepted): 2,3,4,5,6,7,6,5,4 -- actual: 2,3,4,5,5,5,5,5,4The rest of your post is really generic-"You have to apply a transfer function"  Which one?
For what mathematical purpose?
"a lower limit threshold that is above the noise floor" Yeah, isn't this standard for ANY input device ?
"and limit small movements" How can you limit what the user is doing with the camera?
"and a high threshold to prevent any clipping.
" How can an imposed threshold prevent clipping, either you allow the full range of the input device, or you artificially clip it.Teach me!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598574</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599630</id>
	<title>Re:To hack a patent...</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1269453000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And I call it an <em>idea</em>.<br>Something that irrevocably has a human originator/inventor. But that can not be owned by anyone, because that is not fitting physics, but rather like asking what came before time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And I call it an idea.Something that irrevocably has a human originator/inventor .
But that can not be owned by anyone , because that is not fitting physics , but rather like asking what came before time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And I call it an idea.Something that irrevocably has a human originator/inventor.
But that can not be owned by anyone, because that is not fitting physics, but rather like asking what came before time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598660</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31600108</id>
	<title>Re:Motion</title>
	<author>sohp</author>
	<datestamp>1269454740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In summary: Lawyers will make money.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In summary : Lawyers will make money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In summary: Lawyers will make money.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598920</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31601534</id>
	<title>1999: Tills Palm Pages: Tilt Sensor</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269460020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Remembered that there was something before 2000 for old Palms: the Palm Tilt Sensor project and some associated software for games. See: http://www.harbaum.org/till/palm/adxl202/index.html</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Remembered that there was something before 2000 for old Palms : the Palm Tilt Sensor project and some associated software for games .
See : http : //www.harbaum.org/till/palm/adxl202/index.html</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Remembered that there was something before 2000 for old Palms: the Palm Tilt Sensor project and some associated software for games.
See: http://www.harbaum.org/till/palm/adxl202/index.html</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598884</id>
	<title>I wonder what the MEMS Manufacturers will do...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269450180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Got to wonder how aggressively the people like Analog Devices, Honeywell, Motorola (Freescale) will do to invalidate this patent, since they own the manufacturing process.  I sincerely hope they look not just to invalidate this patent, but all other patents "owned" by these applicants as payback.  What the [Obscene Gerund] were the Patent Office reviewers thinking?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Got to wonder how aggressively the people like Analog Devices , Honeywell , Motorola ( Freescale ) will do to invalidate this patent , since they own the manufacturing process .
I sincerely hope they look not just to invalidate this patent , but all other patents " owned " by these applicants as payback .
What the [ Obscene Gerund ] were the Patent Office reviewers thinking ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Got to wonder how aggressively the people like Analog Devices, Honeywell, Motorola (Freescale) will do to invalidate this patent, since they own the manufacturing process.
I sincerely hope they look not just to invalidate this patent, but all other patents "owned" by these applicants as payback.
What the [Obscene Gerund] were the Patent Office reviewers thinking?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599850</id>
	<title>Re:Scary smartphone motion</title>
	<author>BillGannon</author>
	<datestamp>1269453900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Here's your wicked scary smartphone motion - <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0Ta-wAdvh8&amp;feature=player\_embedded" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0Ta-wAdvh8&amp;feature=player\_embedded</a> [youtube.com]

Gotta like the one-handed operation! heh heh</htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's your wicked scary smartphone motion - http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = K0Ta-wAdvh8&amp;feature = player \ _embedded [ youtube.com ] Got ta like the one-handed operation !
heh heh</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here's your wicked scary smartphone motion - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0Ta-wAdvh8&amp;feature=player\_embedded [youtube.com]

Gotta like the one-handed operation!
heh heh</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598706</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599986</id>
	<title>Prior Art</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269454320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wow. The patent office really sucks these days. When I was in University in the 90's there was a whole department which was working on alternative input devices which did just that. It would take about 10 seconds to find prior art. I suppose lawyers need to eat too.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow .
The patent office really sucks these days .
When I was in University in the 90 's there was a whole department which was working on alternative input devices which did just that .
It would take about 10 seconds to find prior art .
I suppose lawyers need to eat too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow.
The patent office really sucks these days.
When I was in University in the 90's there was a whole department which was working on alternative input devices which did just that.
It would take about 10 seconds to find prior art.
I suppose lawyers need to eat too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598950</id>
	<title>Re:To hack a patent...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269450420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>*Everything* is an algorithm. This includes mechanical stuff - they can be described as algorithms.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>* Everything * is an algorithm .
This includes mechanical stuff - they can be described as algorithms .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>*Everything* is an algorithm.
This includes mechanical stuff - they can be described as algorithms.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598660</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598972</id>
	<title>Ignore them.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269450540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Time for everyone to take a stand.  Ignore patent trolls, even with threat legal ramifications.</p><p>Tell them under no uncertain terms that they are known to be a patent troll and that you (we/us/everyone) does not recognize their claim.</p><p>When the system supports insanity, fuck the system.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Time for everyone to take a stand .
Ignore patent trolls , even with threat legal ramifications.Tell them under no uncertain terms that they are known to be a patent troll and that you ( we/us/everyone ) does not recognize their claim.When the system supports insanity , fuck the system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Time for everyone to take a stand.
Ignore patent trolls, even with threat legal ramifications.Tell them under no uncertain terms that they are known to be a patent troll and that you (we/us/everyone) does not recognize their claim.When the system supports insanity, fuck the system.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598680</id>
	<title>Mickey Mouse's Magic Wand</title>
	<author>rossjudson</author>
	<datestamp>1269449580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>After reading the patent I couldn't help but think of Mickey Mouse, Sorcerer, in <a href="http://images.google.com/images?q=fantasia+mickey+mouse" title="google.com">Fantasia</a> [google.com]. That's gestural control, and it's definitely prior art (if not in the patent sense).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>After reading the patent I could n't help but think of Mickey Mouse , Sorcerer , in Fantasia [ google.com ] .
That 's gestural control , and it 's definitely prior art ( if not in the patent sense ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After reading the patent I couldn't help but think of Mickey Mouse, Sorcerer, in Fantasia [google.com].
That's gestural control, and it's definitely prior art (if not in the patent sense).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598534</id>
	<title>motion detection?</title>
	<author>polar red</author>
	<datestamp>1269449040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A mouse can detect motion, does that mean that a simple mouse infringes on that patent ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A mouse can detect motion , does that mean that a simple mouse infringes on that patent ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A mouse can detect motion, does that mean that a simple mouse infringes on that patent ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598706</id>
	<title>Scary smartphone motion</title>
	<author>Captain Spam</author>
	<datestamp>1269449640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When I first read the headline, I was expecting to read about a new phone with a slide-out QWERTY keyboard wherein the slide-out mechanism moves in a manner akin to Lovecraftian abominations, defying our understanding of the laws of physics and driving people irrevocably mad from the revelations, all while trying to text their friends.</p><p>But disappointingly, it's the PATENT that's scary, not the smartphone motion.  Ah, well.  I'll just have to find some other way to get those dang texting kids off my lawn.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When I first read the headline , I was expecting to read about a new phone with a slide-out QWERTY keyboard wherein the slide-out mechanism moves in a manner akin to Lovecraftian abominations , defying our understanding of the laws of physics and driving people irrevocably mad from the revelations , all while trying to text their friends.But disappointingly , it 's the PATENT that 's scary , not the smartphone motion .
Ah , well .
I 'll just have to find some other way to get those dang texting kids off my lawn .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I first read the headline, I was expecting to read about a new phone with a slide-out QWERTY keyboard wherein the slide-out mechanism moves in a manner akin to Lovecraftian abominations, defying our understanding of the laws of physics and driving people irrevocably mad from the revelations, all while trying to text their friends.But disappointingly, it's the PATENT that's scary, not the smartphone motion.
Ah, well.
I'll just have to find some other way to get those dang texting kids off my lawn.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31602434</id>
	<title>Sounds like the HP iPAQ</title>
	<author>Black Art</author>
	<datestamp>1269463560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This sounds like the motion sensors in the HP iPAQ from around 2000.</p><p>Patents like this show why the patent system needs to be dismantled.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This sounds like the motion sensors in the HP iPAQ from around 2000.Patents like this show why the patent system needs to be dismantled .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This sounds like the motion sensors in the HP iPAQ from around 2000.Patents like this show why the patent system needs to be dismantled.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31603978</id>
	<title>Re:To hack a patent...</title>
	<author>Jane Q. Public</author>
	<datestamp>1269426420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>No, that's only <b>one</b> of the claims. Look at 2, 3, 4, 5, etc. Those are much broader claims. The patent covers <b>any</b> of those claims, not all of them in concert. Claim 4 is a good example:
<br> <br>
<i>"4. The method as defined in claim 1 wherein sensing the initial or complementary motions includes sensing rotational motion about one or more of an x, y, or z axis."</i>
<br> <br>
Notice that it says "initial <b>or</b> complementary motions...". The "complementary motion" does not have to be part of the process.
<br> <br>
It appears to me that this patent is far too broad. It covers everything from the use of semiconductor accelerometers to the old ball-and-cage tilt switches. It should never have been granted.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No , that 's only one of the claims .
Look at 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , etc .
Those are much broader claims .
The patent covers any of those claims , not all of them in concert .
Claim 4 is a good example : " 4 .
The method as defined in claim 1 wherein sensing the initial or complementary motions includes sensing rotational motion about one or more of an x , y , or z axis .
" Notice that it says " initial or complementary motions... " .
The " complementary motion " does not have to be part of the process .
It appears to me that this patent is far too broad .
It covers everything from the use of semiconductor accelerometers to the old ball-and-cage tilt switches .
It should never have been granted .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, that's only one of the claims.
Look at 2, 3, 4, 5, etc.
Those are much broader claims.
The patent covers any of those claims, not all of them in concert.
Claim 4 is a good example:
 
"4.
The method as defined in claim 1 wherein sensing the initial or complementary motions includes sensing rotational motion about one or more of an x, y, or z axis.
"
 
Notice that it says "initial or complementary motions...".
The "complementary motion" does not have to be part of the process.
It appears to me that this patent is far too broad.
It covers everything from the use of semiconductor accelerometers to the old ball-and-cage tilt switches.
It should never have been granted.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599560</id>
	<title>Re:I'd claim my pedometer as prior art.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269452760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I had a pedometer in the 90s that used motion to record events, each motion event would trigger an update on the display, it was hand held when reading the display, and it was a computing device that would calculate distance traveled (not to mention history).  Sounds like it covers just about every aspect of that patent.</p></div><p>You didn't read the claims of the patent, did you? I've never seen a pedometer that can independently detect at least six fields of motion.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I had a pedometer in the 90s that used motion to record events , each motion event would trigger an update on the display , it was hand held when reading the display , and it was a computing device that would calculate distance traveled ( not to mention history ) .
Sounds like it covers just about every aspect of that patent.You did n't read the claims of the patent , did you ?
I 've never seen a pedometer that can independently detect at least six fields of motion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had a pedometer in the 90s that used motion to record events, each motion event would trigger an update on the display, it was hand held when reading the display, and it was a computing device that would calculate distance traveled (not to mention history).
Sounds like it covers just about every aspect of that patent.You didn't read the claims of the patent, did you?
I've never seen a pedometer that can independently detect at least six fields of motion.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598702</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31600388</id>
	<title>Re:I'd claim my pedometer as prior art.</title>
	<author>Myrv</author>
	<datestamp>1269455880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From the patent, claim #1:</p><blockquote><div><p>and wherein the initial or complementary motions comprise motion <b>in one</b> or more of at least six fields of motion including lateral x, y, or z motion or rotational x, y, or z motion</p></div></blockquote><p>Emphasis mine.  They aren't claiming you have to detect all six.  The "<i>at least six fields</i>" part is just defining the set of possible motions to detect; not that you have to detect all six of them. At least that is my take on that line.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>From the patent , claim # 1 : and wherein the initial or complementary motions comprise motion in one or more of at least six fields of motion including lateral x , y , or z motion or rotational x , y , or z motionEmphasis mine .
They are n't claiming you have to detect all six .
The " at least six fields " part is just defining the set of possible motions to detect ; not that you have to detect all six of them .
At least that is my take on that line .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the patent, claim #1:and wherein the initial or complementary motions comprise motion in one or more of at least six fields of motion including lateral x, y, or z motion or rotational x, y, or z motionEmphasis mine.
They aren't claiming you have to detect all six.
The "at least six fields" part is just defining the set of possible motions to detect; not that you have to detect all six of them.
At least that is my take on that line.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599560</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31601436</id>
	<title>Its about the assignments...</title>
	<author>LeadSongDog</author>
	<datestamp>1269459660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>At <a href="http://assignments.uspto.gov/assignments/q?db=pat&amp;asned=DURHAM\%20LOGISTICS,\%20LLC" title="uspto.gov" rel="nofollow">http://assignments.uspto.gov/assignments/q?db=pat&amp;asned=DURHAM\%20LOGISTICS,\%20LLC</a> [uspto.gov] we find that all twelve of Durham Logistics' patent assignments were from smart antenna maker ArrayComm (remember Martin Cooper)? Further, they were all assigned on the same day. I haven't checked them all yet, but one of the assignment applications was on August 31, 2006. Wonder what was happening around then? Oh yeah, ArrayComm was teaming with KT for a Korean WiBro network.<a href="http://www.mobilehandsetdesignline.com/192200181;jsessionid=PVVYX1VQ5EXXGQSNDLPCKH0CJUNN2JVN?printableArticle=true" title="mobilehand...gnline.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.mobilehandsetdesignline.com/192200181;jsessionid=PVVYX1VQ5EXXGQSNDLPCKH0CJUNN2JVN?printableArticle=true</a> [mobilehand...gnline.com] Think those patents might be under Samsung's control now? Anyhow, they were clearly intended for applications in signalling, not user interface.</htmltext>
<tokenext>At http : //assignments.uspto.gov/assignments/q ? db = pat&amp;asned = DURHAM \ % 20LOGISTICS , \ % 20LLC [ uspto.gov ] we find that all twelve of Durham Logistics ' patent assignments were from smart antenna maker ArrayComm ( remember Martin Cooper ) ?
Further , they were all assigned on the same day .
I have n't checked them all yet , but one of the assignment applications was on August 31 , 2006 .
Wonder what was happening around then ?
Oh yeah , ArrayComm was teaming with KT for a Korean WiBro network.http : //www.mobilehandsetdesignline.com/192200181 ; jsessionid = PVVYX1VQ5EXXGQSNDLPCKH0CJUNN2JVN ? printableArticle = true [ mobilehand...gnline.com ] Think those patents might be under Samsung 's control now ?
Anyhow , they were clearly intended for applications in signalling , not user interface .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At http://assignments.uspto.gov/assignments/q?db=pat&amp;asned=DURHAM\%20LOGISTICS,\%20LLC [uspto.gov] we find that all twelve of Durham Logistics' patent assignments were from smart antenna maker ArrayComm (remember Martin Cooper)?
Further, they were all assigned on the same day.
I haven't checked them all yet, but one of the assignment applications was on August 31, 2006.
Wonder what was happening around then?
Oh yeah, ArrayComm was teaming with KT for a Korean WiBro network.http://www.mobilehandsetdesignline.com/192200181;jsessionid=PVVYX1VQ5EXXGQSNDLPCKH0CJUNN2JVN?printableArticle=true [mobilehand...gnline.com] Think those patents might be under Samsung's control now?
Anyhow, they were clearly intended for applications in signalling, not user interface.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599276</id>
	<title>What Will Happen?</title>
	<author>Bob9113</author>
	<datestamp>1269451680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>What will happen if the company that owns the patent asserts it?</i></p><p>Not sure exactly, but a few general truths will hold:</p><p>1. Giant corporations and fast attack hitmen will do battle.<br>2. Hundreds of thousands (perhaps millions) of dollars of our GDP will be redistributed to law firms.<br>3. Tens (perhaps hundreds) of thousands of dollars of our GDP will pay the salaries of judges and court functionaries.<br>4. Some of the parties will give some of the other parties giant piles of cash in a settlement before the court passes judgment. (none of the parties want an actual precedent to be set -- clarification of laws only serves to reduce the effectiveness of spurious legal arm-twisting)<br>5. In recognition of the settlement in item 4, the parties will all get the right to participate in the fiat monopoly.<br>6. No natural person who actually invents things will benefit in any rational proportion to their contribution or to the leviathan sums of money that get hurled around.</p><p>The patent system may support the progress of science and the useful arts, but in its current form it only does so as a tiny fraction of the extent to which it supports the progress of barratry and the wasteful arts.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What will happen if the company that owns the patent asserts it ? Not sure exactly , but a few general truths will hold : 1 .
Giant corporations and fast attack hitmen will do battle.2 .
Hundreds of thousands ( perhaps millions ) of dollars of our GDP will be redistributed to law firms.3 .
Tens ( perhaps hundreds ) of thousands of dollars of our GDP will pay the salaries of judges and court functionaries.4 .
Some of the parties will give some of the other parties giant piles of cash in a settlement before the court passes judgment .
( none of the parties want an actual precedent to be set -- clarification of laws only serves to reduce the effectiveness of spurious legal arm-twisting ) 5 .
In recognition of the settlement in item 4 , the parties will all get the right to participate in the fiat monopoly.6 .
No natural person who actually invents things will benefit in any rational proportion to their contribution or to the leviathan sums of money that get hurled around.The patent system may support the progress of science and the useful arts , but in its current form it only does so as a tiny fraction of the extent to which it supports the progress of barratry and the wasteful arts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What will happen if the company that owns the patent asserts it?Not sure exactly, but a few general truths will hold:1.
Giant corporations and fast attack hitmen will do battle.2.
Hundreds of thousands (perhaps millions) of dollars of our GDP will be redistributed to law firms.3.
Tens (perhaps hundreds) of thousands of dollars of our GDP will pay the salaries of judges and court functionaries.4.
Some of the parties will give some of the other parties giant piles of cash in a settlement before the court passes judgment.
(none of the parties want an actual precedent to be set -- clarification of laws only serves to reduce the effectiveness of spurious legal arm-twisting)5.
In recognition of the settlement in item 4, the parties will all get the right to participate in the fiat monopoly.6.
No natural person who actually invents things will benefit in any rational proportion to their contribution or to the leviathan sums of money that get hurled around.The patent system may support the progress of science and the useful arts, but in its current form it only does so as a tiny fraction of the extent to which it supports the progress of barratry and the wasteful arts.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31600064</id>
	<title>if they assert it?</title>
	<author>josepha48</author>
	<datestamp>1269454620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>they will, and it will be a big mess</htmltext>
<tokenext>they will , and it will be a big mess</tokentext>
<sentencetext>they will, and it will be a big mess</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31601042</id>
	<title>Shut down US patent office already before</title>
	<author>unity100</author>
	<datestamp>1269458340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>they give a patent to someone for "if a =&gt; b, and b =&gt; c then a =&gt; c"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>they give a patent to someone for " if a = &gt; b , and b = &gt; c then a = &gt; c " .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>they give a patent to someone for "if a =&gt; b, and b =&gt; c then a =&gt; c" ...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31604000</id>
	<title>Re:To hack a patent...</title>
	<author>Jane Q. Public</author>
	<datestamp>1269426540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And now that I think about it, not only is this device far too "obvious" to have gotten a patent, there are boatloads of prior art. This patent would cover a pinball machine. After all, it's a "computing device", and it has a tilt switch.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And now that I think about it , not only is this device far too " obvious " to have gotten a patent , there are boatloads of prior art .
This patent would cover a pinball machine .
After all , it 's a " computing device " , and it has a tilt switch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And now that I think about it, not only is this device far too "obvious" to have gotten a patent, there are boatloads of prior art.
This patent would cover a pinball machine.
After all, it's a "computing device", and it has a tilt switch.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599468</id>
	<title>Where is the invention?</title>
	<author>kawabago</author>
	<datestamp>1269452400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't understand why when one person invents the wheel, someone else can 'invent' rolling it.  Isn't rolling the wheel inherent to the invention of the wheel?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't understand why when one person invents the wheel , someone else can 'invent ' rolling it .
Is n't rolling the wheel inherent to the invention of the wheel ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't understand why when one person invents the wheel, someone else can 'invent' rolling it.
Isn't rolling the wheel inherent to the invention of the wheel?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599232</id>
	<title>What will happen</title>
	<author>Lord Lode</author>
	<datestamp>1269451500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"What will happen if the company that owns the patent asserts it?"</p><p>What will happen to a company that would assert a patent on the wheel? That is my answer to the question.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" What will happen if the company that owns the patent asserts it ?
" What will happen to a company that would assert a patent on the wheel ?
That is my answer to the question .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"What will happen if the company that owns the patent asserts it?
"What will happen to a company that would assert a patent on the wheel?
That is my answer to the question.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598714</id>
	<title>Re:To hack a patent...</title>
	<author>Mindcontrolled</author>
	<datestamp>1269449640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Exactly right. Could at least the editors read the claims before posting nonsense like "cover any smartphone with built-in accelerometer"? This patent is not overly broad in any sense. It may be obvious - accelerometers are known, forward-back mousgestures are known, so the combination might lead the man skilled in the art to the subject matter of claim 1, but this patent in no way threatens "any smartphone".</htmltext>
<tokenext>Exactly right .
Could at least the editors read the claims before posting nonsense like " cover any smartphone with built-in accelerometer " ?
This patent is not overly broad in any sense .
It may be obvious - accelerometers are known , forward-back mousgestures are known , so the combination might lead the man skilled in the art to the subject matter of claim 1 , but this patent in no way threatens " any smartphone " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exactly right.
Could at least the editors read the claims before posting nonsense like "cover any smartphone with built-in accelerometer"?
This patent is not overly broad in any sense.
It may be obvious - accelerometers are known, forward-back mousgestures are known, so the combination might lead the man skilled in the art to the subject matter of claim 1, but this patent in no way threatens "any smartphone".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599090</id>
	<title>business as usual</title>
	<author>sohp</author>
	<datestamp>1269450900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What will happen if the company that owns the patent asserts it?</p></div><p>What will happen is the same thing that happens with any patent troll. The large companies that infringe will either cross-license their own patents back to Durham Logistics or pay royalties if the cost is reasonable. If the Durham Logistics demands too much, someone (again a big corporation) will buy the company, or sue them into oblivion and get the patents in the judgment. Small companies and individual entrepreneurs without deep pockets or a patent portfolio will be screwed, as usual.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What will happen if the company that owns the patent asserts it ? What will happen is the same thing that happens with any patent troll .
The large companies that infringe will either cross-license their own patents back to Durham Logistics or pay royalties if the cost is reasonable .
If the Durham Logistics demands too much , someone ( again a big corporation ) will buy the company , or sue them into oblivion and get the patents in the judgment .
Small companies and individual entrepreneurs without deep pockets or a patent portfolio will be screwed , as usual .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What will happen if the company that owns the patent asserts it?What will happen is the same thing that happens with any patent troll.
The large companies that infringe will either cross-license their own patents back to Durham Logistics or pay royalties if the cost is reasonable.
If the Durham Logistics demands too much, someone (again a big corporation) will buy the company, or sue them into oblivion and get the patents in the judgment.
Small companies and individual entrepreneurs without deep pockets or a patent portfolio will be screwed, as usual.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31603602</id>
	<title>Apple</title>
	<author>Weezul</author>
	<datestamp>1269424920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We're actually better off with some patent troll holding the patent rather than an excessively litigious big boy like Apple.  A patent troll will know they stand little chance when faced with a jury trial, so they'll take their money and go home.  Apple will try their best to prevent other players from even exploring similar avenues.</p><p>A smart patent troll would start by targeting smaller players, taking a payoff in exchange for an obligation to pay some fraction of their later payoffs.  So then once they reach a victim who'll fight the case, they've got a long list of settlements loosely indicating their patents validity.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We 're actually better off with some patent troll holding the patent rather than an excessively litigious big boy like Apple .
A patent troll will know they stand little chance when faced with a jury trial , so they 'll take their money and go home .
Apple will try their best to prevent other players from even exploring similar avenues.A smart patent troll would start by targeting smaller players , taking a payoff in exchange for an obligation to pay some fraction of their later payoffs .
So then once they reach a victim who 'll fight the case , they 've got a long list of settlements loosely indicating their patents validity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We're actually better off with some patent troll holding the patent rather than an excessively litigious big boy like Apple.
A patent troll will know they stand little chance when faced with a jury trial, so they'll take their money and go home.
Apple will try their best to prevent other players from even exploring similar avenues.A smart patent troll would start by targeting smaller players, taking a payoff in exchange for an obligation to pay some fraction of their later payoffs.
So then once they reach a victim who'll fight the case, they've got a long list of settlements loosely indicating their patents validity.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598676</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31602842</id>
	<title>Re:To hack a patent...</title>
	<author>pclminion</author>
	<datestamp>1269422040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <em>a change in direction is a big acceleration.</em> </p><p>That's just totally wrong. A decelerating object will eventually change direction, no matter how small the deceleration. Not to mention relativity -- "change in direction" is entirely dependent on reference frame, whereas acceleration is completely INDEPENDENT of frame (for inertial frames). Your statement is insane.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>a change in direction is a big acceleration .
That 's just totally wrong .
A decelerating object will eventually change direction , no matter how small the deceleration .
Not to mention relativity -- " change in direction " is entirely dependent on reference frame , whereas acceleration is completely INDEPENDENT of frame ( for inertial frames ) .
Your statement is insane .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> a change in direction is a big acceleration.
That's just totally wrong.
A decelerating object will eventually change direction, no matter how small the deceleration.
Not to mention relativity -- "change in direction" is entirely dependent on reference frame, whereas acceleration is completely INDEPENDENT of frame (for inertial frames).
Your statement is insane.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598574</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31601196</id>
	<title>Invention vs Discovery</title>
	<author>BlueBoxSW.com</author>
	<datestamp>1269458880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's time we had a more legal distinction between an Invention and a Discovery.</p><p>You should not be able to patent discoveries.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's time we had a more legal distinction between an Invention and a Discovery.You should not be able to patent discoveries .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's time we had a more legal distinction between an Invention and a Discovery.You should not be able to patent discoveries.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31601616</id>
	<title>Re:To hack a patent...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269460380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>shake as undo has copious prior art:</p><p>http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/718GXZS1MNL.\_SS500\_.gif</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>shake as undo has copious prior art : http : //ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/718GXZS1MNL. \ _SS500 \ _.gif</tokentext>
<sentencetext>shake as undo has copious prior art:http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/718GXZS1MNL.\_SS500\_.gif</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599502</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31600872</id>
	<title>My god, Pinky! ...</title>
	<author>Walt Dismal</author>
	<datestamp>1269457680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They've patented MICE!<p>

-- Brain</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They 've patented MICE !
-- Brain</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They've patented MICE!
-- Brain</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598798</id>
	<title>Viva Las Vegas</title>
	<author>abbynormal brain</author>
	<datestamp>1269449940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Quickie (sometimes drive-through) marriages and LLCs as far as the bloodshot eyes can see.<br>All that glitters is gold don't you know<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... and somehow, I see the end of this drama ending in my wallet.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Quickie ( sometimes drive-through ) marriages and LLCs as far as the bloodshot eyes can see.All that glitters is gold do n't you know ... and somehow , I see the end of this drama ending in my wallet .
: (</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Quickie (sometimes drive-through) marriages and LLCs as far as the bloodshot eyes can see.All that glitters is gold don't you know ... and somehow, I see the end of this drama ending in my wallet.
:(</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598676</id>
	<title>No danger here for the big boys</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269449580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>FTA: "patent #7,679,604....belongs to Durham Logistics, a Las Vegas limited liability company about which I can find little information..."</p><p>&gt;"What will happen if the company that owns the patent asserts it?"</p><p>My guess is Apple &amp; Co deploy expensive lawyers &amp; hammer Durham firmly into a small, smoking hole in the ground...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>FTA : " patent # 7,679,604....belongs to Durham Logistics , a Las Vegas limited liability company about which I can find little information... " &gt; " What will happen if the company that owns the patent asserts it ?
" My guess is Apple &amp; Co deploy expensive lawyers &amp; hammer Durham firmly into a small , smoking hole in the ground.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FTA: "patent #7,679,604....belongs to Durham Logistics, a Las Vegas limited liability company about which I can find little information..."&gt;"What will happen if the company that owns the patent asserts it?
"My guess is Apple &amp; Co deploy expensive lawyers &amp; hammer Durham firmly into a small, smoking hole in the ground...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598442</id>
	<title>Re:To hack a patent...</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1269448800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The "threshold" probably refers to the boundary of a <a href="http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=1006031104229" title="yahoo.com">dead zone</a> [yahoo.com] that distinguishes sensor noise and vibration from intentional movements.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The " threshold " probably refers to the boundary of a dead zone [ yahoo.com ] that distinguishes sensor noise and vibration from intentional movements .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The "threshold" probably refers to the boundary of a dead zone [yahoo.com] that distinguishes sensor noise and vibration from intentional movements.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599996</id>
	<title>Re:Looks like it's Google's patent?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269454380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's not. The original article notes that the patent was authored by a Google engineer, but that it's been assigned to that Vegas LLC.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not .
The original article notes that the patent was authored by a Google engineer , but that it 's been assigned to that Vegas LLC .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not.
The original article notes that the patent was authored by a Google engineer, but that it's been assigned to that Vegas LLC.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599586</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31603656</id>
	<title>Re:Here's an idea</title>
	<author>not-my-real-name</author>
	<datestamp>1269425220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ever hear of "Big Blue", aka IBM?  Even if they haven't patented it, I'm sure that they have prior art and enough lawyers to sink you.</p><p>Sorry about that.  You'll have to pick another color.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ever hear of " Big Blue " , aka IBM ?
Even if they have n't patented it , I 'm sure that they have prior art and enough lawyers to sink you.Sorry about that .
You 'll have to pick another color .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ever hear of "Big Blue", aka IBM?
Even if they haven't patented it, I'm sure that they have prior art and enough lawyers to sink you.Sorry about that.
You'll have to pick another color.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599206</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598702</id>
	<title>I'd claim my pedometer as prior art.</title>
	<author>Myrv</author>
	<datestamp>1269449640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I had a pedometer in the 90s that used motion to record events, each motion event would trigger an update on the display, it was hand held when reading the display, and it was a computing device that would calculate distance traveled (not to mention history).  Sounds like it covers just about every aspect of that patent.<br>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I had a pedometer in the 90s that used motion to record events , each motion event would trigger an update on the display , it was hand held when reading the display , and it was a computing device that would calculate distance traveled ( not to mention history ) .
Sounds like it covers just about every aspect of that patent .
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had a pedometer in the 90s that used motion to record events, each motion event would trigger an update on the display, it was hand held when reading the display, and it was a computing device that would calculate distance traveled (not to mention history).
Sounds like it covers just about every aspect of that patent.
 </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31600608</id>
	<title>I don't think so.</title>
	<author>ridgecritter</author>
	<datestamp>1269456660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As you said, if you publish patentable matter, no matter how obscure the journal, that matter becomes part of the public domain  and is therefore not patentable by definition.  Further, if you were to try to subsequently patent your published matter, your failure to disclose the prior publication in your patent application (c/w)ould constitute Fraud on the Patent Office, which is punishable by law.  Finally, there is no journal so obscure it cannot be found by a dedicated searcher - and when found, your prior publication of your art would lead to the revocation of an issued patent, either through a FotPO charge, or through a petition for re-examination.  Short story:  if you want to patent, don't publish until after you file the patent app.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As you said , if you publish patentable matter , no matter how obscure the journal , that matter becomes part of the public domain and is therefore not patentable by definition .
Further , if you were to try to subsequently patent your published matter , your failure to disclose the prior publication in your patent application ( c/w ) ould constitute Fraud on the Patent Office , which is punishable by law .
Finally , there is no journal so obscure it can not be found by a dedicated searcher - and when found , your prior publication of your art would lead to the revocation of an issued patent , either through a FotPO charge , or through a petition for re-examination .
Short story : if you want to patent , do n't publish until after you file the patent app .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As you said, if you publish patentable matter, no matter how obscure the journal, that matter becomes part of the public domain  and is therefore not patentable by definition.
Further, if you were to try to subsequently patent your published matter, your failure to disclose the prior publication in your patent application (c/w)ould constitute Fraud on the Patent Office, which is punishable by law.
Finally, there is no journal so obscure it cannot be found by a dedicated searcher - and when found, your prior publication of your art would lead to the revocation of an issued patent, either through a FotPO charge, or through a petition for re-examination.
Short story:  if you want to patent, don't publish until after you file the patent app.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598562</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31602684</id>
	<title>What will happen?</title>
	<author>nurb432</author>
	<datestamp>1269421320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They will get paid off and the cost passed down to the consumer ( and the attorneys on BOTH sides get richer  ).  Like every other time something like this happens.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They will get paid off and the cost passed down to the consumer ( and the attorneys on BOTH sides get richer ) .
Like every other time something like this happens .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They will get paid off and the cost passed down to the consumer ( and the attorneys on BOTH sides get richer  ).
Like every other time something like this happens.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31602346</id>
	<title>we all know....</title>
	<author>Opie812</author>
	<datestamp>1269463200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What will happen if the company that owns the patent asserts it?
<br> <br>
Lawyers will get rich.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What will happen if the company that owns the patent asserts it ?
Lawyers will get rich .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What will happen if the company that owns the patent asserts it?
Lawyers will get rich.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598404</id>
	<title>Apple - part II?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269448680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>&gt;&gt; What will happen if the company that owns the patent asserts it?
<br> <br>
If this means Apple is in trouble, I am all in for it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; &gt; What will happen if the company that owns the patent asserts it ?
If this means Apple is in trouble , I am all in for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;&gt; What will happen if the company that owns the patent asserts it?
If this means Apple is in trouble, I am all in for it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599830</id>
	<title>Re:I'd claim my pedometer as prior art.</title>
	<author>phantomfive</author>
	<datestamp>1269453840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/03/24/022209/Tridgell-Recommends-Reading-Software-Patents" title="slashdot.org">Prior art isn't a very good defense</a> [slashdot.org]. You don't have to find something that fits the description (which may or may not be related to the actual patent), you have to find something that matches all the claims.   If your pedometer didn't do exactly what is in the claims section, it is not prior art.<br> <br>
In this case, if this company decides to sue an open-source project, it would be easier to find a workaround and publicize it far and wide, so everyone knows they don't have to license this patent anymore, they can just use the workaround.  This sort of response would make patent trolls afraid of suing open source projects, because the potential money-loss is serious.<br> <br>
This particular patent is not very scary, and <a href="http://mobile.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1593770&amp;cid=31598364" title="slashdot.org">there is an easy workaround</a> [slashdot.org].</htmltext>
<tokenext>Prior art is n't a very good defense [ slashdot.org ] .
You do n't have to find something that fits the description ( which may or may not be related to the actual patent ) , you have to find something that matches all the claims .
If your pedometer did n't do exactly what is in the claims section , it is not prior art .
In this case , if this company decides to sue an open-source project , it would be easier to find a workaround and publicize it far and wide , so everyone knows they do n't have to license this patent anymore , they can just use the workaround .
This sort of response would make patent trolls afraid of suing open source projects , because the potential money-loss is serious .
This particular patent is not very scary , and there is an easy workaround [ slashdot.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Prior art isn't a very good defense [slashdot.org].
You don't have to find something that fits the description (which may or may not be related to the actual patent), you have to find something that matches all the claims.
If your pedometer didn't do exactly what is in the claims section, it is not prior art.
In this case, if this company decides to sue an open-source project, it would be easier to find a workaround and publicize it far and wide, so everyone knows they don't have to license this patent anymore, they can just use the workaround.
This sort of response would make patent trolls afraid of suing open source projects, because the potential money-loss is serious.
This particular patent is not very scary, and there is an easy workaround [slashdot.org].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598702</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599586</id>
	<title>Looks like it's Google's patent?</title>
	<author>taskiss</author>
	<datestamp>1269452880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From the patent application:<br>First: Note the question mark in the subject of this post. Then read the following;</p><p>Inventors:      Uhlik; Christopher R. (Danville, CA), Orchard; John T. (Palo Alto, CA)<br>Appl. No.:     11/497,567<br>Filed:     July 31, 2006</p><p>http://home.pacbell.net/cuhlik/cu\_resume.html<br>Dr. Chris Uhlik<br>7/2002 to present, Engineering Director -- Google, Inc. Mountain View, CA</p><p>http://www.spoke.com/info/p2WHRbr/JohnOrchard<br>John Orchard, Dir Engineering, Vyyo Inc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From the patent application : First : Note the question mark in the subject of this post .
Then read the following ; Inventors : Uhlik ; Christopher R. ( Danville , CA ) , Orchard ; John T. ( Palo Alto , CA ) Appl .
No. : 11/497,567Filed : July 31 , 2006http : //home.pacbell.net/cuhlik/cu \ _resume.htmlDr .
Chris Uhlik7/2002 to present , Engineering Director -- Google , Inc. Mountain View , CAhttp : //www.spoke.com/info/p2WHRbr/JohnOrchardJohn Orchard , Dir Engineering , Vyyo Inc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the patent application:First: Note the question mark in the subject of this post.
Then read the following;Inventors:      Uhlik; Christopher R. (Danville, CA), Orchard; John T. (Palo Alto, CA)Appl.
No.:     11/497,567Filed:     July 31, 2006http://home.pacbell.net/cuhlik/cu\_resume.htmlDr.
Chris Uhlik7/2002 to present, Engineering Director -- Google, Inc. Mountain View, CAhttp://www.spoke.com/info/p2WHRbr/JohnOrchardJohn Orchard, Dir Engineering, Vyyo Inc.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598576</id>
	<title>One way to solve a problem..</title>
	<author>Vector7</author>
	<datestamp>1269449220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What to do if the patent is asserted? Hunt down the parties responsible and butcher them like cattle. I don't know anything about hiring assassins, but surely compared to the hundreds of millions (billions?) paid out in bullshit patent lawsuit settlements, buying the death of the head of every known patent troll company (and their lawyers) would be a drop in the bucket, and probably a net benefit to society aside. Imagine if RIM were run by the mafia - they'd have taken care of this years ago, and anyone left would be too terrified to troll patents today!</p><p>Justice, glorious justice.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What to do if the patent is asserted ?
Hunt down the parties responsible and butcher them like cattle .
I do n't know anything about hiring assassins , but surely compared to the hundreds of millions ( billions ?
) paid out in bullshit patent lawsuit settlements , buying the death of the head of every known patent troll company ( and their lawyers ) would be a drop in the bucket , and probably a net benefit to society aside .
Imagine if RIM were run by the mafia - they 'd have taken care of this years ago , and anyone left would be too terrified to troll patents today ! Justice , glorious justice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What to do if the patent is asserted?
Hunt down the parties responsible and butcher them like cattle.
I don't know anything about hiring assassins, but surely compared to the hundreds of millions (billions?
) paid out in bullshit patent lawsuit settlements, buying the death of the head of every known patent troll company (and their lawyers) would be a drop in the bucket, and probably a net benefit to society aside.
Imagine if RIM were run by the mafia - they'd have taken care of this years ago, and anyone left would be too terrified to troll patents today!Justice, glorious justice.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598540</id>
	<title>Re:To hack a patent...</title>
	<author>Theaetetus</author>
	<datestamp>1269449040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Here's how you hack a patent. From claim 1:</p><blockquote><div><p>wherein the initial motion meets or exceeds an initial motion <b>threshold</b>; sensing a complementary motion of said computer device in a <b>reverse</b> direction to the initial direction</p></div></blockquote><p>As long as the iPhone or Android do not use one threshold and are more generic than detecting reverse direction, they do not infringe on that patent. Whoever wrote that claim made it way too specific, and easy to work around it.</p><p>--
<a href="http://fairsoftware.net/" title="fairsoftware.net">co-founders wanted</a> [fairsoftware.net].</p></div><p>Or, as long as they don't sense the complementary motion in a reverse direction, with both the initial motion and the complementary motion being necessary to effect the system change.</p><p>
Alternately:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>wherein sensing the initial motion and sensing the complementary motion occur before the generating the at least one control signal</p></div><p>Generate a control signal after sensing the initial motion, but before the complementary motion and you're good, too.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's how you hack a patent .
From claim 1 : wherein the initial motion meets or exceeds an initial motion threshold ; sensing a complementary motion of said computer device in a reverse direction to the initial directionAs long as the iPhone or Android do not use one threshold and are more generic than detecting reverse direction , they do not infringe on that patent .
Whoever wrote that claim made it way too specific , and easy to work around it.-- co-founders wanted [ fairsoftware.net ] .Or , as long as they do n't sense the complementary motion in a reverse direction , with both the initial motion and the complementary motion being necessary to effect the system change .
Alternately : wherein sensing the initial motion and sensing the complementary motion occur before the generating the at least one control signalGenerate a control signal after sensing the initial motion , but before the complementary motion and you 're good , too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here's how you hack a patent.
From claim 1:wherein the initial motion meets or exceeds an initial motion threshold; sensing a complementary motion of said computer device in a reverse direction to the initial directionAs long as the iPhone or Android do not use one threshold and are more generic than detecting reverse direction, they do not infringe on that patent.
Whoever wrote that claim made it way too specific, and easy to work around it.--
co-founders wanted [fairsoftware.net].Or, as long as they don't sense the complementary motion in a reverse direction, with both the initial motion and the complementary motion being necessary to effect the system change.
Alternately:wherein sensing the initial motion and sensing the complementary motion occur before the generating the at least one control signalGenerate a control signal after sensing the initial motion, but before the complementary motion and you're good, too.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31600368</id>
	<title>Re:I'd claim my pedometer as prior art.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269455760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, a pedometer can detect 2 or 3 fields of motion; then someone comes along and tries to patent the exact same function (but more generalized - a handhend computing device) by upping that number to 6 (more generalization - at least 6) they should be allowed to have a 17 year monopoly on the "invention?"</p><p>I read the patent claims, there really wasn't much to it - the claims are (1) obvious, (2) too general, and (3) just ideas which shouldn't be patentable. They fail to describe a specific "invention" being patented.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , a pedometer can detect 2 or 3 fields of motion ; then someone comes along and tries to patent the exact same function ( but more generalized - a handhend computing device ) by upping that number to 6 ( more generalization - at least 6 ) they should be allowed to have a 17 year monopoly on the " invention ?
" I read the patent claims , there really was n't much to it - the claims are ( 1 ) obvious , ( 2 ) too general , and ( 3 ) just ideas which should n't be patentable .
They fail to describe a specific " invention " being patented .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, a pedometer can detect 2 or 3 fields of motion; then someone comes along and tries to patent the exact same function (but more generalized - a handhend computing device) by upping that number to 6 (more generalization - at least 6) they should be allowed to have a 17 year monopoly on the "invention?
"I read the patent claims, there really wasn't much to it - the claims are (1) obvious, (2) too general, and (3) just ideas which shouldn't be patentable.
They fail to describe a specific "invention" being patented.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599560</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31602098</id>
	<title>They can't put anyone out of business.</title>
	<author>blair1q</author>
	<datestamp>1269462240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When asserting a patent, the patent holder is required to license the patent to anyone wishing to use it, at reasonable rates.  If they refuse, they can be sued back, and lose the patent.</p><p>Given how little of the function of a smartphone is reliant on the accelerometer, the "reasonable" value of motion-control features as a portion of a smartphone's cost is going to be very small.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When asserting a patent , the patent holder is required to license the patent to anyone wishing to use it , at reasonable rates .
If they refuse , they can be sued back , and lose the patent.Given how little of the function of a smartphone is reliant on the accelerometer , the " reasonable " value of motion-control features as a portion of a smartphone 's cost is going to be very small .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When asserting a patent, the patent holder is required to license the patent to anyone wishing to use it, at reasonable rates.
If they refuse, they can be sued back, and lose the patent.Given how little of the function of a smartphone is reliant on the accelerometer, the "reasonable" value of motion-control features as a portion of a smartphone's cost is going to be very small.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598612</id>
	<title>What about inertial navigation systems?</title>
	<author>ircmaxell</author>
	<datestamp>1269449340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Inertial navigation systems use accelerometers as input to a computer for controlling its output (Navigation readings, autopilots, etc), and have been used in (civilian and military) aviation for decades.  Doesn't that negate this patent as prior art?  Or can you now patent the application of an idea to a market?  Or am I misunderstanding how vague this patent is?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Inertial navigation systems use accelerometers as input to a computer for controlling its output ( Navigation readings , autopilots , etc ) , and have been used in ( civilian and military ) aviation for decades .
Does n't that negate this patent as prior art ?
Or can you now patent the application of an idea to a market ?
Or am I misunderstanding how vague this patent is ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Inertial navigation systems use accelerometers as input to a computer for controlling its output (Navigation readings, autopilots, etc), and have been used in (civilian and military) aviation for decades.
Doesn't that negate this patent as prior art?
Or can you now patent the application of an idea to a market?
Or am I misunderstanding how vague this patent is?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_1417257_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31603760
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598364
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_1417257_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31600388
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599560
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598702
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_1417257_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598744
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598364
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_1417257_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599850
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598706
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_1417257_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598714
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598364
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_1417257_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31601616
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599502
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598364
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_1417257_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31600968
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598706
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_1417257_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31600754
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598364
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_1417257_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599088
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598702
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_1417257_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599630
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598660
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598364
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_1417257_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598702
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_1417257_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31600608
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598562
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_1417257_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598442
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598364
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_1417257_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598364
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_1417257_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31600698
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598676
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_1417257_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31603656
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599206
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_1417257_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599120
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598364
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_1417257_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599304
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598364
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_1417257_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31602842
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598574
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598364
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_1417257_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599932
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598714
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598364
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_1417257_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31603978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598364
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_1417257_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31604000
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598364
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_1417257_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31601584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598574
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598364
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_1417257_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31600368
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599560
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598702
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_1417257_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31600108
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598920
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_1417257_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599586
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_1417257_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598950
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598660
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598364
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_1417257_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31603602
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598676
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_24_1417257.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599468
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_24_1417257.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598676
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31603602
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31600698
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_24_1417257.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598920
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31600108
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_24_1417257.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599206
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31603656
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_24_1417257.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31602098
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_24_1417257.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598884
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_24_1417257.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598780
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_24_1417257.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598534
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_24_1417257.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598364
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599120
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31604000
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598574
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31601584
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31602842
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598714
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599932
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599878
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599502
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31601616
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31600754
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599304
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31603760
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598482
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598744
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598660
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598950
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599630
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598442
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598540
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31603978
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_24_1417257.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598706
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31600968
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599850
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_24_1417257.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599586
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599996
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_24_1417257.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598576
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_24_1417257.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31601196
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_24_1417257.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598702
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599560
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31600368
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31600388
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599088
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599830
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_24_1417257.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31598562
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31600608
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_24_1417257.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_1417257.31599986
</commentlist>
</conversation>
