RE: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] Patent infringement on MLUG server!

["Sam Napier" <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

	The prior art stipulation is a great thing, prove that your
program is either significantly different in either function or use then
you have a new application for a patent, improve the existing one and
then apply for an inclusion on the original patent, riding on all the
money spent by this ID10T to receive the original patent. Then, when
he/she sells the patent (and you know they will) you can receive some of
that cash too.
	The question is now did he/she include "Patent Pending" on all
functional beta / pre-release software or source code that was either
downloaded or distributed.

Sam

-----Original Message-----
From: EMAIL:PROTECTED
[mailto:EMAIL:PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ross, Matt
Sent: Friday, August 16, 2002 2:37 PM
To: EMAIL:PROTECTED
Subject: RE: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] Patent infringement on MLUG server!

> I remember IRC and MUD bots being around for like a decade or 
> better. As
> they are something like the grandaddies of online chat 
> wouldn't those bots
> be prior art? I was writing those bots over a decade ago so I 
> know that
> they must have been around longer as I certainly didn't originate the
> idea.

Would IRC and MUD bots be the same as instant messenger bots?
I too have written my share of IRC bots in my day(last tuesday? ;-) and
find
the notion of those being patented to be ludicrous.  Even if it is,
though,
you could prove easily that your bot was significantly different from
the
patented bot, aside from predating it.
--
To unsubscribe, go to http://mlug.missouri.edu/members/edit.php

Archives are available at http://mlug.missouri.edu/list-archives/



--
To unsubscribe, go to http://mlug.missouri.edu/members/edit.php

Archives are available at http://mlug.missouri.edu/list-archives/