Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

SBC Patents Links, Dynamic Pages

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the you-can't-make-this-stuff-up dept.

Oculus Habent writes "Robert Cringley has an article on a patent that SBC aquired. Patented in 1996 is the concept of linking to dynamic content with a static element of a page. First approaching museumtour.com, a small site, and asking them to obtain a revenue-based license, SBC appears to be trying to set precedent. He goes on to note that SBC is not a villian for doing this - it is after all a valid patent, and that what is needed now is prior art."

13 of 444 comments (clear)

  1. Ridiculous by Sh0t · · Score: 4, Funny

    Wow of all the things. Static content ona dynamic page. Soon peole will be asking for patents on text because they had the idea of symbols and letters representing words.

    1. Re:Ridiculous by baryon351 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Sooner or later these silly patents will have to run out... won't they?

      *rushes off to patent the concept of links to other pages on either the right or left side of a page*

    2. Re:Ridiculous by andih8u · · Score: 3, Funny

      I hope the Romans sue for us using latin words for the base of most of our language

      --


      slashdot, news for crazed liberal socialist zealots
    3. Re:Ridiculous by Oliver+Wendell+Jones · · Score: 3, Funny

      Sure, but if you add the word "internet" to it, it automatically qualifies for a new patent... or at least that's what a lot of the current stupid patents would lead you to believe.

      --
      A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing -- Emo Phillips
  2. What the fuck by cscx · · Score: 3, Funny

    I guess you have to sue Slashdot too, cause of the preferences page too, right?

  3. I win by andih8u · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm patenting 1 and 0's

    --


    slashdot, news for crazed liberal socialist zealots
    1. Re:I win by the_Bionic_lemming · · Score: 5, Funny

      Too late.

      Microsoft beat you to it.

      --
      _ _ _ Go for the eyes Boo! GO FOR THE EYES!
  4. Villianous? by Anonymous+Coward++1 · · Score: 5, Funny

    SBC isn't a villian for trying to bully small companies with a horde of lawyers, any more than a dog is a villian for humping your leg. It's the expected nature of the beast.

    Nevertheless, when the dog starts humping people's legs, we cut his balls off. SBC will need similar treatment to stop their anti-social behaviour.

    --
    Karma: Bad (mostly affected by being such an asshole)
  5. That does it. by Gordonjcp · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'm going to patent the use of an absorbant cellulose polymer material for cleaning the defecatory organs. Then you'll all be shitting yourselves...

  6. The US Patent Office website violate this patent.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    http://www.uspto.gov/ appears to violate this patent itself !

  7. No Villains? What? by wobblie · · Score: 5, Funny
    As I said, there are no villains here. SBC probably came across this patent and realized that it could be the basis of an Internet tax, that the company had a good chance of getting license revenues from millions of web site owners and it is hard to blame them for that.

    What? Not hard to blame them for patenting some twiddling thing and then charging other people for those people's creations? They're fucking assholes. What's sad and absurd is that it never occurs to anyone just how sleazy, reprehensible and disgusting practices like this are.

    We don't need prior art. We need firebombs.

  8. Re:Beat this!!! I am the winner!! by CoolVibe · · Score: 3, Funny
    I'm patenting the patent system... There, I win...

    Pissing contest over? :-)

  9. Re:Prior use by Brobock · · Score: 5, Funny

    As you can see, this person did not pay his royalties and thus, his link displays as text.