Re: interesting patent
In a message dated 12/9/04 12:06:30 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: More to the point, was Pageflex's patent issued before or after the first release of Rev's Geometry Manager? If the latter, I'd say the Pageflex patent ought not have been granted, and should in fact be nullified, on the grounds of prior art. -- congrats, I thought others would see this connection by now, you did and why I posted the patent info; in lite of any improvements for styled text/formatting in flds with regard to geo managerie pagelayout tools via Rev... Andrew ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: interesting patent
U.S. Patent Awarded for Pageflex's Flexible Template Technology CAMBRIDGE, Mass.--(BUSINESS WIRE)Pageflex (NASDAQ:BITS) (www.pageflex.com), the leading provider of variable data publishing and Web-to-print technology, today announced that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has awarded a patent for Pageflex's flexible template technology. Pageflex template technology enables a document layout to flex, accommodating variable content within sophisticated designer-specified guidelines. The Pageflex XML-based composition engine handles page content (text and images) separate from page form (layout). When the length or size of custom content is different than the size of the box the content is flowing into, the box can expand in either the horizontal or vertical direction (or both), to accommodate the content. Designer-specified rules determine the maximum and minimum dimensions, as well as behavior of the surrounding elements on the page. The result is the ability to define sophisticated templates that accommodate a wide range of variable content by flexing the page layout. Pageflex's U.S. patent includes all of these capabilities as well as additional claims for related capabilities. Pageflex solutions are founded on our unique flexible template technology, said Anna Chagnon, Pageflex CEO. Receiving this patent is an important milestone as we accelerate on our growth plan, ensuring protection for our innovations that help our customers compete successfully. ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: interesting patent
Hmm.. sounds like something other programs have been doing for a long time already. Take FileMaker Pro, for example... I wonder if the patent is actually valid? On Dec 8, 2004, at 1:27 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: U.S. Patent Awarded for Pageflex's Flexible Template Technology CAMBRIDGE, Mass.--(BUSINESS WIRE)Pageflex (NASDAQ:BITS) (www.pageflex.com), the leading provider of variable data publishing and Web-to-print technology, today announced that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has awarded a patent for Pageflex's flexible template technology. Pageflex template technology enables a document layout to flex, accommodating variable content within sophisticated designer-specified guidelines. The Pageflex XML-based composition engine handles page content (text and images) separate from page form (layout). When the length or size of custom content is different than the size of the box the content is flowing into, the box can expand in either the horizontal or vertical direction (or both), to accommodate the content. Designer-specified rules determine the maximum and minimum dimensions, as well as behavior of the surrounding elements on the page. The result is the ability to define sophisticated templates that accommodate a wide range of variable content by flexing the page layout. Pageflex's U.S. patent includes all of these capabilities as well as additional claims for related capabilities. Pageflex solutions are founded on our unique flexible template technology, said Anna Chagnon, Pageflex CEO. Receiving this patent is an important milestone as we accelerate on our growth plan, ensuring protection for our innovations that help our customers compete successfully. ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution --- Frank D. Engel, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] $ ln -s /usr/share/kjvbible /usr/manual $ true | cat /usr/manual | grep John 3:16 John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. $ ___ $0 Web Hosting with up to 120MB web space, 1000 MB Transfer 10 Personalized POP and Web E-mail Accounts, and much more. Signup at www.doteasy.com ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: interesting patent
Dear Revolutionaries I have glanced over this patent at the USPTO's web site. The original filing seems to date back to November 1999 and the 74 claims describe a flexible document layout system that outwardly resembles the kind of sequential, nested, vertical and horizontal layout controls of the kind used by the GTK graphics interface. In addition to altering the geometry of the components on the page, there are dependent claims that also allow for alteration of the form and contents of each component. As examples of the scope of the patent, claims 1 8 are interesting - I have reproduced them below. NB: I am NOT an attorney NOR am I a patent agent so all opinions expressed herein are utterly worthless and are for entertainment purposes only (Yikes! I sound like one of those Psychic Hotlines - 1-800-YOUR-DESTINY) Best Gordon Here is claim 1: 1. A computerized method of laying out a document containing a combination of text and shape elements, said method comprising: providing a user interface with controls for enabling a user to: place a sequence box, which has a sequencing axis, in the document; cause one or more shape elements to be located in the sequence box; cause a shape element, including one in the sequence box having at least one text or shape element as contents, to have a minimize property in at least one dimension; and cause a shape element, including one in the sequence box, to have a maximize property in at least one dimension; and performing an automatic layout process in which elements of the document are laid out onto a 2-dimensional area in which each such element is given a precise position and size, including: arranging shape elements, if any, placed within the sequence box in a sequence along the sequence box's sequencing axis; minimizing the size given to any shape element which has the minimize property in a given dimension, including any shape element within the sequence box, by making the element as small as its contents, if any, will allow in the given dimension, over a given length range; and maximizing the size given to any shape element which has the maximize property in a given dimension by making the element expand to encompass space available in the given dimension, over a given length range, said maximizing including, if the maximized shape element is within the sequence box, expanding it to encompass space available within the sequence box. Here is the dependent claim 8: 8. A method as in claim 1 wherein: said interface is a WYSIWYG graphical user interface which allows a user to select the placement of said sequence box and the shape elements within it, including allowing a user to use a pointing device to create, position and size said shape elements; and said layout process is performed interactively in response to changes made to the document by the user with said graphical user interface, to enable the user to see a screen display of the layout of the document showing any changes the user has just made to the document. --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: U.S. Patent Awarded for Pageflex's Flexible Template Technology CAMBRIDGE, Mass.--(BUSINESS WIRE)Pageflex (NASDAQ:BITS) (www.pageflex.com), the leading provider of variable data publishing and Web-to-print technology, today announced that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has awarded a patent for Pageflex's flexible template technology. Pageflex template technology enables a document layout to flex, accommodating variable content within sophisticated designer-specified guidelines. The Pageflex XML-based composition engine handles page content (text and images) separate from page form (layout). When the length or size of custom content is different than the size of the box the content is flowing into, the box can expand in either the horizontal or vertical direction (or both), to accommodate the content. Designer-specified rules determine the maximum and minimum dimensions, as well as behavior of the surrounding elements on the page. The result is the ability to define sophisticated templates that accommodate a wide range of variable content by flexing the page layout. Pageflex's U.S. patent includes all of these capabilities as well as additional claims for related capabilities. Pageflex solutions are founded on our unique flexible template technology, said Anna Chagnon, Pageflex CEO. Receiving this patent is an important milestone as we accelerate on our growth plan, ensuring protection for our innovations that help our customers compete successfully. ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution = :: Gordon Webster :: ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: interesting patent
On Dec 8, 2004, at 11:37 AM, Frank D. Engel, Jr. wrote: Hmm.. sounds like something other programs have been doing for a long time already. Take FileMaker Pro, for example... I wonder if the patent is actually valid? if it is issued it is valid. Does someone who cares have prior art that would invalidate the patent and does someone who cares and has enough money to invalidate it know about that prior art. That's the big question. If issued, it is valid. Kee Nethery ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: interesting patent
Software patents hinder progress and favor large-caps which can afford the legal battles such patents beg for http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/ - Original Message - From: kee nethery [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: How to use Revolution [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 11:49 AM Subject: Re: interesting patent On Dec 8, 2004, at 11:37 AM, Frank D. Engel, Jr. wrote: Hmm.. sounds like something other programs have been doing for a long time already. Take FileMaker Pro, for example... I wonder if the patent is actually valid? if it is issued it is valid. Does someone who cares have prior art that would invalidate the patent and does someone who cares and has enough money to invalidate it know about that prior art. That's the big question. If issued, it is valid. Kee Nethery ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
RE: interesting patent
Is RunRev patented? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Kwinter Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 2:58 PM To: How to use Revolution Subject: Re: interesting patent Software patents hinder progress and favor large-caps which can afford the legal battles such patents beg for http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/ - Original Message - From: kee nethery [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: How to use Revolution [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 11:49 AM Subject: Re: interesting patent On Dec 8, 2004, at 11:37 AM, Frank D. Engel, Jr. wrote: Hmm.. sounds like something other programs have been doing for a long time already. Take FileMaker Pro, for example... I wonder if the patent is actually valid? if it is issued it is valid. Does someone who cares have prior art that would invalidate the patent and does someone who cares and has enough money to invalidate it know about that prior art. That's the big question. If issued, it is valid. Kee Nethery ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: interesting patent
The word valid is misleading here. If a patent has issued it is valid in the sense that its owners can drag you before a judge if they have a case that you are infringing the patent - but the real validity of the patent only becomes apparent at this point. Many valid issued patents turn out not to be worth the paper they are written on because they are so poorly crafted that they are indefensible under examination in a litigtaion process. Patent examiners are obliged to check the facts as far as they are able and if they find no impediment to the patent issuing (existence of prior art, obviousness, adequate disclosure to suport the claims etc. etc. etc.) they will issue the patent - but ultimately, the scope and effectiveness of the patent in assuring exclusivity for its inventors within a particular domain of activity, is never really known until it is challenged in court. BTW: I work in biotech, where valid issued patents fall like flies in the legal bugzapper. Best Gordon --- kee nethery [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Dec 8, 2004, at 11:37 AM, Frank D. Engel, Jr. wrote: Hmm.. sounds like something other programs have been doing for a long time already. Take FileMaker Pro, for example... I wonder if the patent is actually valid? if it is issued it is valid. Does someone who cares have prior art that would invalidate the patent and does someone who cares and has enough money to invalidate it know about that prior art. That's the big question. If issued, it is valid. Kee Nethery ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution = :: Gordon Webster :: ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
RE: interesting patent
My understanding is that for many, the point of getting a patent is not even to prevent others from using the technology - it may well be too broadly defined or have other problems. However, if you have a patent, it guarantees your right to use what you patented - so others cannot patent the idea later and (if they win in court) keep you from using it. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gordon Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 3:10 PM To: How to use Revolution Subject: Re: interesting patent The word valid is misleading here. If a patent has issued it is valid in the sense that its owners can drag you before a judge if they have a case that you are infringing the patent - but the real validity of the patent only becomes apparent at this point. Many valid issued patents turn out not to be worth the paper they are written on because they are so poorly crafted that they are indefensible under examination in a litigtaion process. Patent examiners are obliged to check the facts as far as they are able and if they find no impediment to the patent issuing (existence of prior art, obviousness, adequate disclosure to suport the claims etc. etc. etc.) they will issue the patent - but ultimately, the scope and effectiveness of the patent in assuring exclusivity for its inventors within a particular domain of activity, is never really known until it is challenged in court. BTW: I work in biotech, where valid issued patents fall like flies in the legal bugzapper. Best Gordon --- kee nethery [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Dec 8, 2004, at 11:37 AM, Frank D. Engel, Jr. wrote: Hmm.. sounds like something other programs have been doing for a long time already. Take FileMaker Pro, for example... I wonder if the patent is actually valid? if it is issued it is valid. Does someone who cares have prior art that would invalidate the patent and does someone who cares and has enough money to invalidate it know about that prior art. That's the big question. If issued, it is valid. Kee Nethery ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution = :: Gordon Webster :: ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: interesting patent
On Wednesday, December 8, 2004, at 12:12 PM, Lynch, Jonathan wrote: My understanding is that for many, the point of getting a patent is not even to prevent others from using the technology - it may well be too broadly defined or have other problems. However, if you have a patent, it guarantees your right to use what you patented - so others cannot patent the idea later and (if they win in court) keep you from using it. Prior art and © Copyright also give you freedom to protect yourself. This company is a member of W3 consortium and they are using SGML - XML which is a markup language. You can't patent a markup language. It's too late. It's been blown out of the water by prior art. I guess they have patented the process that occurs after parsing the markup language. It must be highly defendable as an application example with regards to copyright. Interesting idea though. my 2 cents Mark ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: interesting patent
There seem to be some misconceptions about what patents are for: A U.S. patent as defined in section 35 of the U.S. code does NOT assure the inventors of the right to practice. It guarantees their exclusivity to practice within the scope of the patent claims, for the lifetime of the patent. If that sounds confusing, here's a real-world example that I am personally familiar with: The use of a particular, naturally ocurring protein for treating a given disease is covered by someone else's patent, but I modify the protein (in some non-obvious way) such that in addition to treating the disease, it now has some new properties (perhaps it is less toxic or it tastes like strawberries). It is a new form of matter with novel properties and therefore patentable. However, I would still need to obtain a license for the original patent to use my own modified protein for treating the disease in question, since that utility falls under the scope of their claims. The original patent holders would in turn have to license my patent to be able to use my new protein to treat this same disease, so that their improved treatment could benefit from the properties of being less toxic or tasting like strawberries, which are covered under the scope of my claims. This actually happens all the time in the biotechnology sector. I hope this is helpful Best Gordon --- Mark Brownell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wednesday, December 8, 2004, at 12:12 PM, Lynch, Jonathan wrote: My understanding is that for many, the point of getting a patent is not even to prevent others from using the technology - it may well be too broadly defined or have other problems. However, if you have a patent, it guarantees your right to use what you patented - so others cannot patent the idea later and (if they win in court) keep you from using it. Prior art and © Copyright also give you freedom to protect yourself. This company is a member of W3 consortium and they are using SGML - XML which is a markup language. You can't patent a markup language. It's too late. It's been blown out of the water by prior art. I guess they have patented the process that occurs after parsing the markup language. It must be highly defendable as an application example with regards to copyright. Interesting idea though. my 2 cents Mark ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution = :: Gordon Webster :: ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
RE: interesting patent
way back in industrial economics we learned that all patents are contournable... and since their life is limited... What protection is there? - 1st comers get 35% of the market - barriers to entry (heavy duty investments in finacial or technogical terms) When I was writing my quantum codec algoritm I found out a worldwide patent is worth 100,000 $/EUs... who, here, can affort that? But if you get one client, it can be worth it... Besides, the method is restricted to xml and some obscure process. Just show prior art to save your ass and voila. Patents are however legally defendeable X -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gordon Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 22:05 To: How to use Revolution Subject: Re: interesting patent There seem to be some misconceptions about what patents are for: A U.S. patent as defined in section 35 of the U.S. code does NOT assure the inventors of the right to practice. It guarantees their exclusivity to practice within the scope of the patent claims, for the lifetime of the patent. If that sounds confusing, here's a real-world example that I am personally familiar with: The use of a particular, naturally ocurring protein for treating a given disease is covered by someone else's patent, but I modify the protein (in some non-obvious way) such that in addition to treating the disease, it now has some new properties (perhaps it is less toxic or it tastes like strawberries). It is a new form of matter with novel properties and therefore patentable. However, I would still need to obtain a license for the original patent to use my own modified protein for treating the disease in question, since that utility falls under the scope of their claims. The original patent holders would in turn have to license my patent to be able to use my new protein to treat this same disease, so that their improved treatment could benefit from the properties of being less toxic or tasting like strawberries, which are covered under the scope of my claims. This actually happens all the time in the biotechnology sector. I hope this is helpful Best Gordon --- Mark Brownell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wednesday, December 8, 2004, at 12:12 PM, Lynch, Jonathan wrote: My understanding is that for many, the point of getting a patent is not even to prevent others from using the technology - it may well be too broadly defined or have other problems. However, if you have a patent, it guarantees your right to use what you patented - so others cannot patent the idea later and (if they win in court) keep you from using it. Prior art and ) Copyright also give you freedom to protect yourself. This company is a member of W3 consortium and they are using SGML - XML which is a markup language. You can't patent a markup language. It's too late. It's been blown out of the water by prior art. I guess they have patented the process that occurs after parsing the markup language. It must be highly defendable as an application example with regards to copyright. Interesting idea though. my 2 cents Mark ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution = :: Gordon Webster :: ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: interesting patent
More to the point, was Pageflex's patent issued before or after the first release of Rev's Geometry Manager? If the latter, I'd say the Pageflex patent ought not have been granted, and should in fact be nullified, on the grounds of prior art. ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: interesting patent
First to invent rather than first to file is the rule in the U.S. If (and its a big if) the PageFlex patent does overlap with rev's geometry manager, it would be necessary to show that RR (or their hypercard ancestors), were actually using or selling such a thing publicly, prior to the priority date of PageFlex's patent (this would normally be the data of first filing of any provisional patent - looks to me like 1999 from the issued patent). --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: More to the point, was Pageflex's patent issued before or after the first release of Rev's Geometry Manager? If the latter, I'd say the Pageflex patent ought not have been granted, and should in fact be nullified, on the grounds of prior art. ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution = :: Gordon Webster :: ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
