RE: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news)
Or at least implement them within a certain amount of time. Rick -Original Message- From: Thomas Chiverton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, 27 October, 2003 07:24 To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news) On Friday 24 Oct 2003 17:46 pm, Matt Liotta wrote: > ideas they never implement? Because the practice of patenting ideas > without implementing them into a product is quite common. And shouldn't be allowed. If you event a physical device and patent it (in the US) you have to provide a working example. This does not seem to be the case with buisness process patents, which is wrong. -- Tom Chiverton Advanced ColdFusion Programmer Tel: +44(0)1749 834997 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] BlueFinger Limited Underwood Business Park Wookey Hole Road, WELLS. BA5 1AF Tel: +44 (0)1749 834900 Fax: +44 (0)1749 834901 web: www.bluefinger.com Company Reg No: 4209395 Registered Office: 2 Temple Back East, Temple Quay, BRISTOL. BS1 6EG. *** This E-mail contains confidential information for the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify us immediately. You should not use, disclose, distribute or copy this communication if received in error. No binding contract will result from this e-mail until such time as a written document is signed on behalf of the company. BlueFinger Limited cannot accept responsibility for the completeness or accuracy of this message as it has been transmitted over public networks.*** _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news)
On Friday 24 Oct 2003 17:46 pm, Matt Liotta wrote: > ideas they never implement? Because the practice of patenting ideas > without implementing them into a product is quite common. And shouldn't be allowed. If you event a physical device and patent it (in the US) you have to provide a working example. This does not seem to be the case with buisness process patents, which is wrong. -- Tom Chiverton Advanced ColdFusion Programmer Tel: +44(0)1749 834997 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] BlueFinger Limited Underwood Business Park Wookey Hole Road, WELLS. BA5 1AF Tel: +44 (0)1749 834900 Fax: +44 (0)1749 834901 web: www.bluefinger.com Company Reg No: 4209395 Registered Office: 2 Temple Back East, Temple Quay, BRISTOL. BS1 6EG. *** This E-mail contains confidential information for the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify us immediately. You should not use, disclose, distribute or copy this communication if received in error. No binding contract will result from this e-mail until such time as a written document is signed on behalf of the company. BlueFinger Limited cannot accept responsibility for the completeness or accuracy of this message as it has been transmitted over public networks.*** [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news), beat the horse dead
> No worries, I'm taking out a Patent on being an Asshole, then I'm going > after Eolas and all these other jokers for infringement. Ask anyone I > know, I'll get the patent. > You'd have a tough time doing full discovery on all "prior art" on the topic. Besides, you'd only get a Patent on the PROCESS of becoming an Asshole, not just on having achieved Asshole-ishness ... the latter, in today's parlance, is called a design pattern. [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news), beat the horse dead
I suppose you could "sit on" your patent for a while like eolas (lol). -Original Message- From: Joshua Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 24, 2003 2:53 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news), beat the horse dead No worries, I'm taking out a Patent on being an Asshole, then I'm going after Eolas and all these other jokers for infringement. Ask anyone I know, I'll get the patent. I wonder if one can get a patent on "Lawsuit as Business Model". Then we could really stick it to some people. On Fri, 2003-10-24 at 15:38, Kevin Marino wrote: > Matt, > > > Agree. as developers purely technical situations as this are a > nuisance for > sure, but the patents you need to be outraged about center on business > methods. Its these patents that make it almost impossible to say for > example, build an ecommerce site. I can pretty much bet anybody on > this > list who has built an ecommerce site has for most intents and purposes > probably infringed on a patent. > > > So instead of being outraged because you have to add a few lines of > code to > work around a patent to make your project accessible to the majority > of your > customer base, you should take up the grievance with the patent office > and > government when they allow business method patents and other far more > damaging patents. > > > That's my 2 cents, hope this thread ends soon (filling my mail box up, > gonna > have to start a new folder for this thread alone hehe ) > > > > -Kevin Marino > -- > Webmaster - HealthObjects > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 410 895 0377 > > -----Original Message- > From: Matt Liotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, October 24, 2003 3:17 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news) > > > But Eolas is still only suing MS and that is precisely my issue with > > him. I don't think he has any intentions of suing Apple and AOL. > Which > > in my book are still pretty big fish. They have openly said they are > > trying to 'balance the internet browser war'. (ie. We're only going > to > > sue MS) > > > I don't know how many times I have to repeat myself. It is standard > practice to sue the biggest fish first and then to handle the rest > after that case is finished. This a legal strategy used in all > industries. Further, this strategy has the additional business benefit > of reducing overall legal expenses as the other companies will > generally settle if the first lawsuit is won. Eolas's decision to > pursue only Microsoft at this point is common and expected behavior. > > All of the reasons people keeping pointing out that make Eolas a bad > company in their eyes can be applied to most of the top companies in > existence. IMHO, web developers only seem to care about this > particular > patent issue because it affects them directly. Where is the outcry for > all the other stupid patents and the companies behind them? > > Matt Liotta > President & CEO > Montara Software, Inc. > http://www.MontaraSoftware.com > (888) 408-0900 x901 > > _ > > > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news), beat the horse dead
No worries, I'm taking out a Patent on being an Asshole, then I'm going after Eolas and all these other jokers for infringement. Ask anyone I know, I'll get the patent. I wonder if one can get a patent on "Lawsuit as Business Model". Then we could really stick it to some people. On Fri, 2003-10-24 at 15:38, Kevin Marino wrote: > Matt, > > > Agree. as developers purely technical situations as this are a > nuisance for > sure, but the patents you need to be outraged about center on business > methods. Its these patents that make it almost impossible to say for > example, build an ecommerce site. I can pretty much bet anybody on > this > list who has built an ecommerce site has for most intents and purposes > probably infringed on a patent. > > > So instead of being outraged because you have to add a few lines of > code to > work around a patent to make your project accessible to the majority > of your > customer base, you should take up the grievance with the patent office > and > government when they allow business method patents and other far more > damaging patents. > > > That's my 2 cents, hope this thread ends soon (filling my mail box up, > gonna > have to start a new folder for this thread alone hehe ) > > > > -Kevin Marino > -- > Webmaster - HealthObjects > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 410 895 0377 > > -----Original Message- > From: Matt Liotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, October 24, 2003 3:17 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news) > > > But Eolas is still only suing MS and that is precisely my issue with > > him. I don't think he has any intentions of suing Apple and AOL. > Which > > in my book are still pretty big fish. They have openly said they are > > trying to 'balance the internet browser war'. (ie. We're only going > to > > sue MS) > > > I don't know how many times I have to repeat myself. It is standard > practice to sue the biggest fish first and then to handle the rest > after that case is finished. This a legal strategy used in all > industries. Further, this strategy has the additional business benefit > of reducing overall legal expenses as the other companies will > generally settle if the first lawsuit is won. Eolas's decision to > pursue only Microsoft at this point is common and expected behavior. > > All of the reasons people keeping pointing out that make Eolas a bad > company in their eyes can be applied to most of the top companies in > existence. IMHO, web developers only seem to care about this > particular > patent issue because it affects them directly. Where is the outcry for > all the other stupid patents and the companies behind them? > > Matt Liotta > President & CEO > Montara Software, Inc. > http://www.MontaraSoftware.com > (888) 408-0900 x901 > > _ > > > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news)
It's been my experience that the patent system operates much like the old adage about: "The definition of a conservative is a liberal who's been mugged" and "The definition of a liberal is a conservative who's been arrested" Regular people, particularly programmers it seems, love the idea of everything being free and open, up until the time when it is *their* intellectual property which is being absconded. As the holder of several patents, I can attest to how my mindset changed once the first was issued :) Unfortunately, the average person on the street does not have enough knowledge to understand how a derivative patent can be issued and it often looks flippant or random when all the info is not present. Even having been through the experience of getting one, I *know* I don't understand how the nuances of patent law works -- so I'm pretty confident that anyone who doesn't have a patent law degree probably has nothing but opinion to contribute to the Eolas/MS discussion. I think it says a lot about how techies are often just out of the business loop in thinking that IP is a secondary topic. In an era based on information and what one knows, IP is the *only* currency that holds true value, and things are simply not as simple as "well Newton invented gravity so we all owe him a dime each time we drop a hammer". It is the application of an idea to a new process altogether that makes derivative patents worthwhile and worth protecting, even if it takes a patent-attorney to understand the difference. also someone had said: "Additionally, I believe that patent enforcement should not be allowed to be selective." That's just awful. Patents are about property. If I own a pool why should I not be allowed to let whoever I wish swim in it? If you have a guest room at your home, do I have the right to just walk in and use it on any given night? If you take away fundamental property rights you dissolve any meaning to achievement. I'll close on a funny note. I remember an old All In The Family episode where Archie Bunker says "think about this: equality is unfair!" "What?!?", says Mike (the Meathead). Archie responds "well what's the purpose of trying to get ahead all your life if all you're gonna do is end up equal?" Now that is humorous of course, but it underscores a similar issue here. Equality is about equal opportunity, not about equal achievement. Patents -- properly issued, that is, but that's a different question -- protect people who have achieved some intellectual creation which is otherwise not protected from theft except by the patent. That is why patents are based on process, not on concept. - Original Message ----- From: "Calvin Ward" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, October 24, 2003 2:37 PM Subject: Re: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news) > One can find both the system and the people who take advantage of the system to be less than honorable. And that opinion has no need to be influenced by the ethical level of target of the dishonorable behavior. > > It is my fervent hope that Eolas not only loses, but has to pay Microsoft's legal fees and additional damages to cover research for alternative solutions to an issue that shouldn't exist. > > Additionally, I believe that patent enforcement should not be allowed to be selective. > > - Calvin > - Original Message - > From: Matt Liotta > To: CF-Talk > Sent: Friday, October 24, 2003 1:52 PM > Subject: Re: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news) > > > > Since there's nothing we can do about it, we just have to use the > > workaround and hope that Eolas goes belly up. > > > Alternatively, you could get mad at the patent system instead and work > to change that instead of wasting time on the latest company exploiting > it. > > Matt Liotta > President & CEO > Montara Software, Inc. > http://www.MontaraSoftware.com > (888) 408-0900 x901 > > > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news), beat the horse dead
Matt, Agree. as developers purely technical situations as this are a nuisance for sure, but the patents you need to be outraged about center on business methods. Its these patents that make it almost impossible to say for example, build an ecommerce site. I can pretty much bet anybody on this list who has built an ecommerce site has for most intents and purposes probably infringed on a patent. So instead of being outraged because you have to add a few lines of code to work around a patent to make your project accessible to the majority of your customer base, you should take up the grievance with the patent office and government when they allow business method patents and other far more damaging patents. That's my 2 cents, hope this thread ends soon (filling my mail box up, gonna have to start a new folder for this thread alone hehe ) -Kevin Marino -- Webmaster - HealthObjects [EMAIL PROTECTED] 410 895 0377 -Original Message- From: Matt Liotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 24, 2003 3:17 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news) > But Eolas is still only suing MS and that is precisely my issue with > him. I don't think he has any intentions of suing Apple and AOL. Which > in my book are still pretty big fish. They have openly said they are > trying to 'balance the internet browser war'. (ie. We're only going to > sue MS) > I don't know how many times I have to repeat myself. It is standard practice to sue the biggest fish first and then to handle the rest after that case is finished. This a legal strategy used in all industries. Further, this strategy has the additional business benefit of reducing overall legal expenses as the other companies will generally settle if the first lawsuit is won. Eolas's decision to pursue only Microsoft at this point is common and expected behavior. All of the reasons people keeping pointing out that make Eolas a bad company in their eyes can be applied to most of the top companies in existence. IMHO, web developers only seem to care about this particular patent issue because it affects them directly. Where is the outcry for all the other stupid patents and the companies behind them? Matt Liotta President & CEO Montara Software, Inc. http://www.MontaraSoftware.com (888) 408-0900 x901 _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news)
> But Eolas is still only suing MS and that is precisely my issue with > him. I don't think he has any intentions of suing Apple and AOL. Which > in my book are still pretty big fish. They have openly said they are > trying to 'balance the internet browser war'. (ie. We're only going to > sue MS) > I don't know how many times I have to repeat myself. It is standard practice to sue the biggest fish first and then to handle the rest after that case is finished. This a legal strategy used in all industries. Further, this strategy has the additional business benefit of reducing overall legal expenses as the other companies will generally settle if the first lawsuit is won. Eolas's decision to pursue only Microsoft at this point is common and expected behavior. All of the reasons people keeping pointing out that make Eolas a bad company in their eyes can be applied to most of the top companies in existence. IMHO, web developers only seem to care about this particular patent issue because it affects them directly. Where is the outcry for all the other stupid patents and the companies behind them? Matt Liotta President & CEO Montara Software, Inc. http://www.MontaraSoftware.com (888) 408-0900 x901 [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news)
Matt, I definitely agree that the patent system has issue. Personally I don't think it's fair to own a patent on concepts. It just doesn't make sense. I didn't agree that Adobe should be allowed to own the 'toolbar' and I definitely don't think multimedia on a website is worthy of patent. So yeah, I agree he never should have been allowed to patent such a thing, but at the time the patent office was probably not the technologically savvy enough to realize how retarded this patent is. I think US patent laws need to be reformed for software. But Eolas is still only suing MS and that is precisely my issue with him. I don't think he has any intentions of suing Apple and AOL. Which in my book are still pretty big fish. They have openly said they are trying to 'balance the internet browser war'. (ie. We're only going to sue MS) Eolas _did_ offer to sell MS rights, but I have to side with MS's philosophy on this one. I wouldn't pay close to a billion dollars just so IE users can be saved a single click. It's just not cost effective. Adam Wayne Lehman Web Systems Developer Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Distance Education Division -Original Message- From: Matt Liotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 24, 2003 1:52 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news) > Since there's nothing we can do about it, we just have to use the > workaround and hope that Eolas goes belly up. > Alternatively, you could get mad at the patent system instead and work to change that instead of wasting time on the latest company exploiting it. Matt Liotta President & CEO Montara Software, Inc. http://www.MontaraSoftware.com (888) 408-0900 x901 _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news)
There are some things which are so fundemental that a society (and this is definately a society) that the enforcement of a patent is harmful and wrong. On another note, I believe that it was UCLA (probably some students) that actually thought of it. Doesn't UCLA receive State and Federal funds? You don't see Tim Berners-Lee sending out lawyers to companies that have networks saying "Hey that was our idea, now give me some money." This alone is a great eye-opener and worth a read. http://the-future-of-ideas.com/ P.S. I am certainly glad that Eddie Van Halen did not patent the "Hammer-On" I would have empty pockets. // Jaye Morris | Multimedia Applications Developer // [EMAIL PROTECTED] | www.navtrak.net ++ + Navtrak, Inc. | StreetSuite | New Rules For The Road + ++ -Original Message- From: Matt Liotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 24, 2003 12:49 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news) > If this was about "protecting intellectual property" all of the browser > vendors would be in the same boat, however they're not. Microsoft was > targeted because they have the deepest pockets and the lion's share of > the browser market. > Again, Eolas is following the standard patent litigation strategy used across this industry and many others. People should remember that Microsoft is poster child of unethical business practices when they cheer them on. Matt Liotta President & CEO Montara Software, Inc. http://www.MontaraSoftware.com (888) 408-0900 x901 _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news)
One can find both the system and the people who take advantage of the system to be less than honorable. And that opinion has no need to be influenced by the ethical level of target of the dishonorable behavior. It is my fervent hope that Eolas not only loses, but has to pay Microsoft's legal fees and additional damages to cover research for alternative solutions to an issue that shouldn't exist. Additionally, I believe that patent enforcement should not be allowed to be selective. - Calvin - Original Message - From: Matt Liotta To: CF-Talk Sent: Friday, October 24, 2003 1:52 PM Subject: Re: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news) > Since there's nothing we can do about it, we just have to use the > workaround and hope that Eolas goes belly up. > Alternatively, you could get mad at the patent system instead and work to change that instead of wasting time on the latest company exploiting it. Matt Liotta President & CEO Montara Software, Inc. http://www.MontaraSoftware.com (888) 408-0900 x901 [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news)
> Since there's nothing we can do about it, we just have to use the > workaround and hope that Eolas goes belly up. > Alternatively, you could get mad at the patent system instead and work to change that instead of wasting time on the latest company exploiting it. Matt Liotta President & CEO Montara Software, Inc. http://www.MontaraSoftware.com (888) 408-0900 x901 [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news)
At 12:22 PM 10/24/03 -0400, Matt Liotta wrote: >It is standard practice to sue the big fish first before suing any >other infringers. Again, Eolas is currently playing fair. Whether or >not we like, they did get the patent and are allowed to enforce it. I don't think that being an ass has anything to do with whether what you are doing is legal or not. The RCMP can fine you for going 1 km over the speed limit. That's legal without question. But it's generally considered mean. I would consider that officer an ass, because there's a difference between simply being a jerk, the legality of the action. In this case, we have something has been done in a specific way for years. Then a company buys the patent to this method and announces that they want money for it. Sure that's legal, but it's also sleazy, IMO. Since there's nothing we can do about it, we just have to use the workaround and hope that Eolas goes belly up. T Tired of your bookmarks/favourites being limited to one computer? Move them to the Net! www.stuffbythane.com/webfavourites makes it easy to keep all your favourites in one place and access them from any computer that's attached to the Internet. [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news)
Dave Watts wrote: > > Common business practices are often considered unethical (especially by > people who don't benefit from those practices); what people are allowed to > do by law is not necessarily the same as what they should do. > > Eolas doesn't actually produce anything. To the best of my knowledge, they > didn't ever implement their idea, they just thought it up and rushed to the > patent office with it. IIRC they bought it from the University of California. >>They have offered to license their patent to Microsoft, so >>they are certainly playing fair. > > I was under the impression that they did not offer to license their patent > to Microsoft. I agree that they are "playing fair" in the sense that their > actions are legal, and maximize shareholder benefits, but they will > certainly have a negative effect on lots of third parties who have done them > no harm. I am sure a Eolas lawyer would rephrase that as: Who have profited from Eolas intellectual property without compensation. Jochem [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news)
> If this was about "protecting intellectual property" all of the browser > vendors would be in the same boat, however they're not. Microsoft was > targeted because they have the deepest pockets and the lion's share of > the browser market. > Again, Eolas is following the standard patent litigation strategy used across this industry and many others. People should remember that Microsoft is poster child of unethical business practices when they cheer them on. Matt Liotta President & CEO Montara Software, Inc. http://www.MontaraSoftware.com (888) 408-0900 x901 [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news)
> Common business practices are often considered unethical (especially by > people who don't benefit from those practices); what people are > allowed to > do by law is not necessarily the same as what they should do. > While that may be true, it would seem to me then that it is actually the law that is considered unethical and not the company. The truth is that common business practices are just that; common. It is just that people only seem to get upset when one of those companies does something common that affects them. > Eolas doesn't actually produce anything. To the best of my knowledge, > they > didn't ever implement their idea, they just thought it up and rushed > to the > patent office with it. While this is perfectly legal, it strikes me > that > this behavior could be interpreted as parasitic, to say the least. I > can > certainly understand why so many people oppose software patents. > Is it then okay for a company that produces a product to patent other ideas they never implement? Because the practice of patenting ideas without implementing them into a product is quite common. I would even say that most companies engage in this practice, which by your logic would mean that most companies could be interpreted as parasitic. > I was under the impression that they did not offer to license their > patent > to Microsoft. I agree that they are "playing fair" in the sense that > their > actions are legal, and maximize shareholder benefits, but they will > certainly have a negative effect on lots of third parties who have > done them > no harm. > Eolas has offered Microsoft a license. Beware of Microsoft FUD! In regard to harming 3rd parties with legal actions, such is life. Most legal actions entered into for economic benefit harm 3rd parties. Matt Liotta President & CEO Montara Software, Inc. http://www.MontaraSoftware.com (888) 408-0900 x901 [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news)
Joshua Miller wrote: > > If this was about "protecting intellectual property" all of the browser > vendors would be in the same boat, however they're not. It is not and it was never about protecting intellectual property. It is about the exploitation of intellectual property to earn money. > Microsoft was > targeted because they have the deepest pockets and the lion's share of > the browser market. So if you can get them convicted throughout all appeals, the rest will not resist too much. Why do you think everybody always goes after Amazon, eBay, Google etc? Because they are market leaders with deep pockets to pay defence lawyers. So if they can't win in court, the small fry won't even try. > I personally appreciate the fact that Microsoft is not going to license > the technology I don't really care if they are going to license the technology or not, but continuing to sell products with that technology without licensing that technology does raise the stakes. Jochem [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news)
Ding, ding, ding! There's the correct answer! If this was about "protecting intellectual property" all of the browser vendors would be in the same boat, however they're not. Microsoft was targeted because they have the deepest pockets and the lion's share of the browser market. I personally appreciate the fact that Microsoft is not going to license the technology and I will help by taking steps to modify my code to see to it that Eolas receives as little money as possible for this. Eolas basically cut off the little toe of the plugin world, but we will all adapt and be running fast as ever in no time. On Fri, 2003-10-24 at 12:07, Adam Wayne Lehman wrote: > Matt, > > > If he was suing Netscape & Apple I'd think differently. However he's > only targeting MS. > > > Adam Wayne Lehman > Web Systems Developer > Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health > Distance Education Division > > > -Original Message- > From: Matt Liotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, October 24, 2003 11:38 AM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news) > > > > I still think Eolas is an ass. > > > This is now off topic, but I find it interesting that people consider > Eolas to some how be evil when every other software company has > patents > they enforce too. What specifically is your problem with Eolas? They > have offered to license their patent to Microsoft, so they are > certainly playing fair. > > Matt Liotta > President & CEO > Montara Software, Inc. > http://www.MontaraSoftware.com > (888) 408-0900 x901 > > _ > > > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news)
> If he was suing Netscape & Apple I'd think differently. However he's > only targeting MS. > It is standard practice to sue the big fish first before suing any other infringers. Again, Eolas is currently playing fair. Whether or not we like, they did get the patent and are allowed to enforce it. Matt Liotta President & CEO Montara Software, Inc. http://www.MontaraSoftware.com (888) 408-0900 x901 [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news)
> This is now off topic, but I find it interesting that people > consider Eolas to some how be evil when every other software > company has patents they enforce too. What specifically is > your problem with Eolas? Common business practices are often considered unethical (especially by people who don't benefit from those practices); what people are allowed to do by law is not necessarily the same as what they should do. Eolas doesn't actually produce anything. To the best of my knowledge, they didn't ever implement their idea, they just thought it up and rushed to the patent office with it. While this is perfectly legal, it strikes me that this behavior could be interpreted as parasitic, to say the least. I can certainly understand why so many people oppose software patents. > They have offered to license their patent to Microsoft, so > they are certainly playing fair. I was under the impression that they did not offer to license their patent to Microsoft. I agree that they are "playing fair" in the sense that their actions are legal, and maximize shareholder benefits, but they will certainly have a negative effect on lots of third parties who have done them no harm. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news)
Matt, If he was suing Netscape & Apple I'd think differently. However he's only targeting MS. Adam Wayne Lehman Web Systems Developer Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Distance Education Division -Original Message- From: Matt Liotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 24, 2003 11:38 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news) > I still think Eolas is an ass. > This is now off topic, but I find it interesting that people consider Eolas to some how be evil when every other software company has patents they enforce too. What specifically is your problem with Eolas? They have offered to license their patent to Microsoft, so they are certainly playing fair. Matt Liotta President & CEO Montara Software, Inc. http://www.MontaraSoftware.com (888) 408-0900 x901 _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news)
> If they were only concerned with their IP rights, they'd have sued > years ago, > and would currently be sueing more than just Microsoft. > As it is, it looks to me like a money grab. > Which is just plain good business currently. If you don't like it, talk to your representative about changing the laws. Remember, businesses exist to make money; they have no other purpose. Matt Liotta President & CEO Montara Software, Inc. http://www.MontaraSoftware.com (888) 408-0900 x901 [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news)
what an analogy... it is Friday. You win best email of the day. -Original Message- From: Tony Weeg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 24, 2003 10:42 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news) I think the problem is that we have all gone down a road, so far so long, and now they have dipped their finger in a still pool, one that we all loved to swim in, cause we thought we were swimming the right way, now we have to switch gears and adapt practices and methods that have been ingrained in our methodologies for quite some time now. had this happened 8 years ago or so, probably wouldn't be that big of a deal... like when a man marries a woman, and then 10 years later he decides to tell her he is gay, its just effed up. that's all. ...tony tony weeg senior web applications architect navtrak, inc. www.navtrak.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] 410.548.2337 -Original Message- From: Matt Liotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 24, 2003 11:38 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news) > I still think Eolas is an ass. > This is now off topic, but I find it interesting that people consider Eolas to some how be evil when every other software company has patents they enforce too. What specifically is your problem with Eolas? They have offered to license their patent to Microsoft, so they are certainly playing fair. Matt Liotta President & CEO Montara Software, Inc. http://www.MontaraSoftware.com (888) 408-0900 x901 _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news)
On Friday 24 Oct 2003 16:38 pm, Matt Liotta wrote: > certainly playing fair. If they were only concerned with their IP rights, they'd have sued years ago, and would currently be sueing more than just Microsoft. As it is, it looks to me like a money grab. -- Tom Chiverton Advanced ColdFusion Programmer Tel: +44(0)1749 834997 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] BlueFinger Limited Underwood Business Park Wookey Hole Road, WELLS. BA5 1AF Tel: +44 (0)1749 834900 Fax: +44 (0)1749 834901 web: www.bluefinger.com Company Reg No: 4209395 Registered Office: 2 Temple Back East, Temple Quay, BRISTOL. BS1 6EG. *** This E-mail contains confidential information for the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify us immediately. You should not use, disclose, distribute or copy this communication if received in error. No binding contract will result from this e-mail until such time as a written document is signed on behalf of the company. BlueFinger Limited cannot accept responsibility for the completeness or accuracy of this message as it has been transmitted over public networks.*** [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news)
hahahahahahahahahaaa... like the analogy! -Original Message- From: Tony Weeg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 24 October 2003 16:42 To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news) I think the problem is that we have all gone down a road, so far so long, and now they have dipped their finger in a still pool, one that we all loved to swim in, cause we thought we were swimming the right way, now we have to switch gears and adapt practices and methods that have been ingrained in our methodologies for quite some time now. had this happened 8 years ago or so, probably wouldn't be that big of a deal... like when a man marries a woman, and then 10 years later he decides to tell her he is gay, its just effed up. that's all. ...tony tony weeg senior web applications architect navtrak, inc. www.navtrak.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] 410.548.2337 -Original Message- From: Matt Liotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 24, 2003 11:38 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news) > I still think Eolas is an ass. > This is now off topic, but I find it interesting that people consider Eolas to some how be evil when every other software company has patents they enforce too. What specifically is your problem with Eolas? They have offered to license their patent to Microsoft, so they are certainly playing fair. Matt Liotta President & CEO Montara Software, Inc. http://www.MontaraSoftware.com (888) 408-0900 x901 _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news)
I think the problem is that we have all gone down a road, so far so long, and now they have dipped their finger in a still pool, one that we all loved to swim in, cause we thought we were swimming the right way, now we have to switch gears and adapt practices and methods that have been ingrained in our methodologies for quite some time now. had this happened 8 years ago or so, probably wouldn't be that big of a deal... like when a man marries a woman, and then 10 years later he decides to tell her he is gay, its just effed up. that's all. ...tony tony weeg senior web applications architect navtrak, inc. www.navtrak.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] 410.548.2337 -Original Message- From: Matt Liotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 24, 2003 11:38 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news) > I still think Eolas is an ass. > This is now off topic, but I find it interesting that people consider Eolas to some how be evil when every other software company has patents they enforce too. What specifically is your problem with Eolas? They have offered to license their patent to Microsoft, so they are certainly playing fair. Matt Liotta President & CEO Montara Software, Inc. http://www.MontaraSoftware.com (888) 408-0900 x901 [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
