Re: rough first impressions

[gregs@xxxxxxxxxx (Gregory T. Sullivan)]

>>>>> "Raffael" == Raffael Cavallaro <raffaelcavallaro@mac.com> writes:

 Raffael> On Tuesday, April 15, 2003, at 05:21 PM, James Knight wrote:

 >> This is a bogus argument. Absolutely everything is patented.

 Raffael> That is, of course, a gross overstatement.

 >> The only sensible path is to design as if there were no patents,
 >> until forced to do otherwise by some patent holder.

 Raffael> In the particular case we're discussing, a real company, Intentional
 Raffael> Software, has based their entire business model on this feature, so
 Raffael> you  can bet they'll be enforcing their patents if they feel their
 Raffael> business  is threatened. Sorry you don't like software/business method
 Raffael> patents -
 Raffael> neither do I, and with any luck some corporation with deep pockets
 Raffael> will  eventually take this issue to the Supreme Court and have them
 Raffael> struck  down. Till then, they are the law in the US. Pretending they
 Raffael> aren't  won't make them go away.

I'm familiar with Intentional Software's work and I'm quite certain
that anything covered in the current thread is more than adequately
covered by prior art.  

-- 
Greg      gregs@ai.mit.edu (617)253-5807
Sullivan  http://www.ai.mit.edu/~gregs/