On TechRepublic: Male bashing in the workplace
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 17 of 54:
Next »
« Previous
Eolas sued...
... they went to court, the court found for IOLAS, Microsoft still disagreed and removed the abilities from their product. The fact still remains that Microsoft believes prior art should have prevailed. And so do I after having read the documentation and the information available on prior art.

Just because someone accuses, does not mean that someone is guilty.
Posted by: Confused by religion   Posted on: 04/18/06 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use
Reply to Story Reply to Message

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

HMMM!  Free_Thinker | 04/17/06
When Apple sues people for nothing ? it?s OK; why not the opposite? (NT)  Vily Clay | 04/17/06
Are you encouraging frivolous lawsuits Vily?  tic swayback | 04/18/06
Not me - Apple. (NT)  Vily Clay | 04/18/06
Bad Move for Burst  el1jones | 04/17/06
We're all up S.C.  gordon@... | 04/18/06
Oh well, so many suites can be won  Boot_Agnostic | 04/18/06
choose Linux and OSS  Linux Geek | 04/18/06
Blah. Blah BLAH blah...  John Zern | 04/18/06
Doesn't Apple usually sue quite a few people?  ju1ce | 04/18/06
More Patent trolls (NT)  DarthRidiculous | 04/18/06
... can you say RIM ..... SCO .... Apple-core ....  Reverend MacFellow | 04/18/06
At least Microsoft respects IP  NonZealot | 04/18/06
re: At least Microsoft respects IP  b.d.hi | 04/18/06
LOL... a perfect 10 !!!  MacCanuck | 04/18/06
Tell that to Eolas....(nt)  tic swayback | 04/18/06
Eolas sued...  Confused by religion | 04/18/06
Addendum  tic swayback | 04/19/06
I'm really hoping you're  Rick_K | 04/18/06
This is the internet; sarcasm doesn't convey itself well  orange_z | 04/18/06
Congratulations!  UserLand | 04/18/06
Blackmail  tic swayback | 04/18/06
Here's the thing...  yyuko@... | 04/18/06
RE: Here's the thing...  JakAttak | 04/18/06
Nope  tic swayback | 04/18/06
It will not go well for Apple.  osreinstall | 04/18/06
IANAL  tic swayback | 04/18/06
SCO? This is about Burst.  osreinstall | 04/18/06
Wasn't SCO's original suit about patents?  tic swayback | 04/18/06
SCO was too convoluted to follow.  osreinstall | 04/18/06
We'll see  berck | 04/18/06
That technology theft was patented by Burst.  osreinstall | 04/18/06
Prior art  tic swayback | 04/19/06
You are defending your Mistress.  osreinstall | 04/19/06
Again, you missed the point  berck | 04/19/06
Berck, you don't understand patents  osreinstall | 04/19/06
I'll wait to see what the courts decide  tic swayback | 04/19/06
That is a safe position.  osreinstall | 04/19/06
Safe seems reasonable for now  tic swayback | 04/19/06
Comeon Tic, you can do better than that.  osreinstall | 04/19/06
I find the USPTO too confusing  tic swayback | 04/20/06
Actually the USPTO is not all that bad.  osreinstall | 04/20/06
As I said, we'll see  tic swayback | 04/20/06
It is real easy Tic.  osreinstall | 04/20/06
Duration of patent is no indication of quality  tic swayback | 04/20/06
Yes it is.  osreinstall | 04/20/06
Did MS try to get it thrown out?  tic swayback | 04/21/06
After reading the patent....  osreinstall | 04/21/06
Interesting  rapson | 04/18/06
Some differences  tic swayback | 04/18/06
Could be  rapson | 04/18/06
True enough....  tic swayback | 04/18/06
And one of those guys looks back at you ...  ShadeTree | 04/19/06
Think what you'd like...  tic swayback | 04/19/06

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement
advertisement

SmartPlanet

Click Here