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."

6 of 432 comments (clear)

  1. so use tables. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Tables nearly always work better than frames.

  2. Netscape by Pres.+Ronald+Reagan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Netscape Navigator 2.0 first implimented frames as we know them today. If Netscape infringed on SBC's patent when they "came up" with the idea for frames, then shouldn't they be the ones held responsible here?

    --

    Abortion is advocated only by persons who have themselves been born.
    --Ronald Reagan
  3. Not just frames by NukeIear · · Score: 5, Interesting

    From Museum Tour

    "The letter suggests that any website which has static, linked information (top banners, menus, bottom banners) which are displayed while other sections of the page are displayed as non-static (the area where products appear on most websites) infringes upon the patents they hold."

    And indeed, Museum Tour is being sued and does not use frames. Thus nearly any site that uses templates is subject to litigation.

  4. Re:Is this legal? by Billly+Gates · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Frames are an open standard by w3c.SBC does not own it since they did not develop it. Is this tactic that SBC is using legal?

    The whole point of the wc3 existance is to prevent this and encourage innovation and a level playing field on the web.

    Sbc claims sounds borderline fraudulant.

    Its like the equilivant of me pointing at your car, claiming ownership and then demanding you pay me to use it or i will sue. You can not claim something unless you developed it or bought it. No exceptions!

    Patents are designed to protect investments of bussinesses who do R&D as well as encourage arts and sciences of individuals. Since no R&D happened at SBC they should of not been granted a patent. If there is no law on this then we need to talk to our representatives on this. Because someone can claim anything they like and if they have big pockets then they legally (steal) it.

    SBC also is the assh*le who is corrupting our state governments for deregulation and screwing our tax dollars. The other baby bells are mostly silent. They are being paid for by the government and our tax dollars to install fiber under our streets and they will not turn it on unless the market is deregulated and all competition is wiped out. They are the Microsoft and the RIAA of the telecommunication industry.

    They are using our own tax dollars to screw us over and monopolize communication.

  5. Re:Browsers by satch89450 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Actually, it sounds like this patent description is describing the outline display used in Adobe Acrobat -- you have navigation on the left side that doesn't change (much) as you work your way through the document in the right-hand window.

    Now there would be a fight.

  6. The Patent Office site violates this patent by Snart+Barfunz · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Time for a little poetic justice?

    --
    --- Yx3 = Delilah ---