Slashdot Mirror


SBC Getting Aggressive With Frames Patent

mpthompson writes "Aspects of the SBC patent shakedown were covered previously on SlashDot, but the following article has more details including the royalty fee schedules on the two patents that SBC is seeking to enforce against web sites that utilize frames in their design. In short, SBC has asserted that it is the exclusive owner of a technology for "structured document" browsing - the use of frames to provide hyperlinks to documents displayed by a browser. Apparently the strategy by SBC is to set precedent against small web sites that will presumably capitulate before going after the big guys. Based on the fee schedule, SBC seems to be pretty serious about this whole patent thing and may not go away so easily."

22 of 432 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Browsers by tomhudson · · Score: 5, Funny
    You shouldn't have posted this as an Ac. Their patent is defective specifically because of this.

    If they go after you, plead innocense - say "I've been framed!".

  2. Dare I say it? by otterpop378 · · Score: 5, Funny

    I didnt violate the patent.... I WAS FRAMED!!

  3. What's next... ? by bombkit · · Score: 4, Funny

    In other news, Microsoft patents the numbers 0 & 1, rendering all computer code their sole property..

    1. Re:What's next... ? by zulux · · Score: 4, Funny


      In other news, Microsoft patents the numbers 0 & 1, rendering all computer code their sole property..


      Yep! They alread did patent ones and zeros

      --

      Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.

  4. GO SBC! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    While I would generally complain about a company wielding its patents in this way, I can't help but think that SBC has nothing but honorable intentions. Their fee schedule clearly shows they don't want anyone to pay and merely want to rid the web of that evil known as "frames." GO SBC!

    1. Re:GO SBC! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      YEAH !!!!

      Gotta love SBC, that modern bastion of philantrophy...

  5. Re:so use tables. by Hayzeus · · Score: 5, Funny
    Tables nearly always work better than frames

    Yes -- and you'll find that MY royalty fee schedule is MUCH more reasonable than SBCs.

  6. Re:Browsers by NanoGator · · Score: 4, Funny

    "Web sites don't use frames. Web browsers use frames. Web site author doesn't know how it will be renderred. "

    Mp3 files don't use the MP3 codec, Mp3 players use the MP3 codec. The .MP3 author doesn't know how it will be played back.

    --
    "Derp de derp."
  7. a-HAH! by bravehamster · · Score: 4, Funny
    Now I know who to blame for that horrible frame nesting experience of 1997. 12 frames deep, with a blink tag and a java applet loading over a 14.4 baud connection from Japan. I've been scarred ever since. I think I have grounds for a lawsuit against SBC.

    --
    ---- El diablo esta en mis pantalones! Mire, mire!
  8. SBC...the real story by MisterMook · · Score: 4, Funny

    SBC actually stands for Syrian Biologicalweapons Command, a terrorist organization. They also have plotted to kill Ashcroft's dad, made deals to sell their nuclear frames technology to Osama Bin Laden, and are behind recent cat disappearances in Des Moines. Boy, I'm sure glad the Patriot Act is in effect. I bet in a few hours those guys will fall off the map forever without a trial.

    1. Re:SBC...the real story by Luckster7 · · Score: 2, Funny

      They [SBC] also have plotted to kill Ashcroft's dad

      Ashcroft's dad already has to live with the fact that his son wants to be the anti-christ. I'm sure that this will be just like installing DSL for SBC however; after a year and about 10 hitmen, Ashcroft's dad will be proclaiming "Just shoot me and get it over with".

      --
      Deuteronomy 13:06-9
  9. Re:Browsers by Randolpho · · Score: 2, Funny

    Too broad to stand up? Heh... you must not be overly familiar with the U.S. Patent system... :D

    --
    "Times have not become more violent. They have just become more televised."
    -Marilyn Manson
  10. Re:Browsers by haystor · · Score: 2, Funny

    Just out of curiousity, is "plurality" a required word in patents?

    --
    t
  11. You are soooooo fired. by BoomerSooner · · Score: 2, Funny

    Your pink slip is on your desk, you will see it tomorrow morning.

    SBC the company that even the devil couldn't love. Oh wait that's Verizon (BellSouth & GTE I think, god GTE sucked).

  12. In other news... by phillymjs · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...columnist Dave Barry has sued Robert Cringely for the unauthorized use of the sentence "I am not making this up" immediately following a statement whose content is patently unbelievable but is, in fact, true.

    ~Philly

  13. Re:Browsers by jonfelder · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'd be more worried about starting a "frame" war...snicker snicker

    (ducks)

  14. It's not new, and a SITE needs BROWSER for frames by Tsu+Dho+Nimh · · Score: 3, Funny
    There is prior art, in early mainframe systems ... help file or client record stayed in one frame (area of the screen) while navigation fields were in another. You had to tab to the field, but that's because mice had not been invented yet.

    If I look at a site with code for FRAMES with a browser that does not support them, I do not see the frames. It takes a combination of the various BROWSERS and the HTML CODE from the site to make this so-called infringing applicaiton show up.

    Maybe they should sue Microsoft forenableing the infringement by having MSIE support frames.

  15. Immoral Patent Mercenaries by blunte · · Score: 2, Funny

    God will roast their stomachs in hell...

    --
    .sigs are for post^Hers.
  16. Re:Browsers by whereiswaldo · · Score: 2, Funny

    Cases like this should get a vote from the people in the technical community. If over 90% say this case is bullshit, the plaintiff should be publicly humiliated, stripped of their assets, and forced to leave the country.

  17. Easy Fix by istartedi · · Score: 2, Funny

    I don't run my website anymore, but when I did I had framed navigation by default, and the option of not using frames. Just give the user two options: 1. pay royalties to these people and continue with frames. or 2. no frames. :)

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
  18. Re:Browsers by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 4, Funny
    Just out of curiousity, is "plurality" a required word in patents?

    Yes. I've been involved with several patent applications. The process basically consists of paying some attorneys $200/hr to read your design documents, reformat them in a monospaced courier font with line numbers added, edit your diagrams to replace all text labels with numbers, insert one of these index numbers after every noun in the document, and, most importantly, insert the phrase "a plurality of" in front of every plural noun.

  19. Breaking News by dtabraha · · Score: 2, Funny

    SBC Patents Letters S, B and C.

    mdrTao to pot new weite here:
    http://lahdot.org/

    New for Nerd. tuff that matter.

    ill Gate of Mirooft announe plan to patent letter M.