Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Wins Summary Judgement in Smart Tag Case

dan2bit writes "Business Week reports that a judge in Wisconsin handed down a summary judgement today in favor of Microsoft, defending itself from a patent infringement suit brought by small fish Hyperphrase over the embedding of 'Smart Tags' in Microsoft Office. The suit also produced some amusing minutiae."

156 comments

  1. Oh no the summary wasn't late by gatesh8r · · Score: 1, Funny

    The machine just was set off by a few minutes.... yeah that's it. :)

    It is very nice for the courts to be oh-so-forgiving of MS...

    --
    Karma whorin' since 1999
    1. Re:Oh no the summary wasn't late by El · · Score: 1

      Isn't Redmond in a different time zone than Wisconsin? Maybe they thought it the deadline was midnight PDT.

      --

      "Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney

    2. Re:Oh no the summary wasn't late by boinger · · Score: 1

      No lawyer is that stupid. It's the times zone the court is in.

      --
      Send your friends messages of love at fuck-you.org
    3. Re:Oh no the summary wasn't late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      Read the damned fucking article. God, does your deep-seated hatred of Microsoft come naturally or does it come from reading slashdot all day?

      To be fair, the court said that in the future, it would forgive Hyperphrase of filing past deadline, up to a maximum of four minutes and THIRTY seconds, which is several seconds more than the court allowed MIcrosoft.

      But then, it's a joke, see? It's funny! Ha ha ha!

    4. Re:Oh no the summary wasn't late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      I'm a lawyer and I'm that stupid!

    5. Re:Oh no the summary wasn't late by ewhac · · Score: 1

      A likely explanation is that, since Micros~1 thinks the world revolves around them, they filed the briefs before midnight in Redmond. Wisconsin is two hours ahead.

      Schwab

    6. Re:Oh no the summary wasn't late by Bull999999 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I thought that many slashdotters want MS to win this case? I guess there's no way to stop slashdotters from bitching.

      If MS loses, they will bitch about stupid patent laws.

      IF MS wins, they will bitch about how courts always go for big businesses.

      --
      1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d
    7. Re:Oh no the summary wasn't late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, that's flamebait alright! I'm toasting marshmallows over them as I type this.

    8. Re:Oh no the summary wasn't late by NanoGator · · Score: 4, Informative

      "If MS loses, they will bitch about stupid patent laws."

      Microsoft has quite the double standard here on Slashdot. Everybody wants MS punished. They want to see MS hurt. Unfortunately, it is rare that anybody puts any thought into the consequences of punishing Microsoft. Just like you brought up here, it was probably better for Microsoft to win instead of lose. When the Blaster worm made its rounds, people here were saying "Why isn't Microsoft being held liable?" Sounds great, doesn't it? Make Microsoft pay for their 'negligence'. Never mind that somebody was getting away with being a malicious asshole and Microsoft was being punished for it, no no no, Microsoft should be punished for not being pyschic and predicting that an exploit would be.. uh. exploited. If Microsoft were to be liable for defects like that, then in all fairness, individuals of the OSS Community would risk being liable for somebody else's malicious use. So, in short, Linux could find itself vulernable to whatever punishment is dealt to Microsoft in a case like that.

      Be careful about what you wish for. If you want Microsoft to be punished, that's perfectly okay, just be careful that they don't get punished in a way that burns you.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    9. Re:Oh no the summary wasn't late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As I and others have stated before, software liability should be under the same realm as any other product liability: if you sell it, you're much more liable for defects than if you give it away. Without a defect, no amount of assholeness would have produced a quickly spreading worm. Just because you arrest an accomplice doesn't mean you don't arrest the robber too.

    10. Re:Oh no the summary wasn't late by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      "if you sell it, you're much more liable for defects than if you give it away."

      Linux is sold...

      "Without a defect, no amount of assholeness would have produced a quickly spreading worm."

      Bullshit. You can take anything and misuse it. Take Slashdot, for example. People can post offensive things. I can crapflood. I can trick you into going to Goatse. Is Slashdot defective, or am I a malicious asshole?

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    11. Re:Oh no the summary wasn't late by zangdesign · · Score: 1

      Are you sure you're in the right forum? I'm smelling sarcasm here.

      --
      To celebrate the occasion of my 1000th post, I will post no more forever on Slashdot. Goodbye.
    12. Re:Oh no the summary wasn't late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >>"if you sell it, you're much more liable for >>defects than if you give it away."

      >Linux is sold...

      And those who sell Linux should be liable. I never stated otherwise.

      >>"Without a defect, no amount of assholeness >>would have produced a quickly spreading worm."

      >Bullshit. You can take anything and misuse it. >Take Slashdot, for example. People can post >offensive things. I can crapflood. I can trick >you into going to Goatse. Is Slashdot >defective, or am I a malicious asshole?

      I never said you couldn't misuse the system. I said clearly that a *quickly spreading* worm wouldn't work. Why? Misuse would be guessing passwords and that shouldn't be fast (if it is fast, it's time to take a cluestick to a lot of system admins). DoS isn't a worm. Being offensive isn't a worm. A worm requires an exploit or extensive time/computation to misuse a service in a feature based way. If a manufacturer sets an easily guessed default password which allows remote exploitation, that's partially a bug and partially system admin error.

      Your final comment about tricking me into going into Goatse.cx would be a virus, not a worm. A virus requires at least some human interaction to spread. If I'm careless and the virus spreads, it's my fault. If I'm careful and the software I use intentional hides information from me anyways, the software is partially at fault. I think it'd be a lot harder to support any liability claims against a manufacturer for misuse than a defect, as human interaction will always lay some blame on the human end. No amount of action can protect against a defective device short of not using the device. Since using the device is almost always necessary for most people to apply a patch to fix the defect, they shouldn't be accountable if they attempt a swift closure to solving a defect. Any vulnerability exploited before they could reasonably be expected to patch the defect (for closed source, this means any time prior to a patch release is available; for open source, this means the same for most people) is a fault of the software not the user.

    13. Re:Oh no the summary wasn't late by Tim+C · · Score: 1

      if you sell it, you're much more liable for defects than if you give it away

      Now, I'm not saying that that isn't the case, but I really don't think that it should be, especially with software. If I run Linux on mission-critical machines, and an exploit leads to those machines getting rooted and all my data trashed (or worse), I'm not going to think "Oh well, at least it was free!". Cost of the OS, in that case, is going to be utterly irrelevant.

      Just because you arrest an accomplice doesn't mean you don't arrest the robber too.

      For that analogy to hold, you'd have to prove that Microsoft purposefully introduced the security holes in order to allow people to exploit them. A better analogy would be that of a security guard who forgot to lock a door or window, which a robber then used to gain access. He'd probably be fired, but certainly wouldn't be arrested, unless you could prove that he was in cahoots with the robber.

      In this case, the very most you can reasonably argue is that Microsoft is complicit; they are most certainly not the 'most guilty' party.

    14. Re:Oh no the summary wasn't late by God!+Awful+2 · · Score: 1

      God!Awful's 3rd rule of Slashdot: /. readers aren't against people making a profit in principle. They are merely against any way of making a profit in practice.

      -a

    15. Re:Oh no the summary wasn't late by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      "And those who sell Linux should be liable. I never stated otherwise."

      I apologize. I've had this debate before and thought you were going that direction.

      "If a manufacturer sets an easily guessed default password which allows remote exploitation, that's partially a bug and partially system admin error."

      Hmm maybe I'm misinterpreting you here, but doesn't any password a manufacture sets qualify? I'll leave it at that because I don't think I'm understanding you.

      "If I'm careless and the virus spreads, it's my fault. If I'm careful and the software I use intentional hides information from me anyways, the software is partially at fault. I think it'd be a lot harder to support any liability claims against a manufacturer for misuse than a defect, as human interaction will always lay some blame on the human end."

      Great. Now ya done it, now ya got me reconsidering my view. I appreciate the tactful rebuttal.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    16. Re:Oh no the summary wasn't late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >>"If a manufacturer sets an easily guessed default password which allows remote exploitation, that's partially a bug and partially system admin error."

      >Hmm maybe I'm misinterpreting you here, but doesn't any password a manufacture sets qualify? I'll leave it at that because I don't think I'm understanding you.

      Yes, any password a manufacturer sets is a default and therefore easily guessable (a very, very small dictionary attack). Anything that requires a password to login should require a person to set it and forbid remote access until one is set (Windows XP's password-less user does the latter right but the former isn't done, which is a shame).

    17. Re:Oh no the summary wasn't late by Wolfrider · · Score: 1

      --There can be a difference between stupid and arrogance. I can *easily* see MS's lawyers being arrogant.

      --
      .
      == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
    18. Re:Oh no the summary wasn't late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Now, I'm not saying that that isn't the case, but I really don't think that it should be, especially with software. If I run Linux on mission-critical machines, and an exploit leads to those machines getting rooted and all my data trashed (or worse), I'm not going to think "Oh well, at least it was free!". Cost of the OS, in that case, is going to be utterly irrelevant.

      Why do you think people pay for Linux distros? The service (aka quickly finding vulnerability reports and issuing patches). You can of course do all the auditting yourself, but that's a cost too. It's still the case that the software itself is free. If you're not willing to buy "insurance" in the form of a service fee for mission critical systems, then don't be surprised if you're the one who has to spend time in place of it since I know of no modern system that doesn't suffer from vulnerabilities.

      > A better analogy would be that of a security guard who forgot to lock a door or window, which a robber then used to gain access.

      I agree that's a better analogy, but that's not a perfect analogy either. The best analogy would be that of a company which constructs and sells buildings in which their doors and/or windows have defective locks which allow people to easily (ie, even easier than breaking the window) enter. If a company repeatively kept making locks that were defective, in any other business they'd stop being hired. But since you can't buy the building without the locks and they're the major building supplier, there's little choice in the matter. Maybe Microsoft shouldn't be "arrested" for their complacency in "lock" design, but they should be held liable (ie, people should be able to sue them).

    19. Re:Oh no the summary wasn't late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It never ceases to amaze me when someone expects
      a diverse user base of hundreds of thousands to have
      a common viewpoint on a particular subject.

      If you truly believe that then you are a bigger
      idiot than your post indicates.

  2. ugh... by zapp · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Legal humor. I didn' think it could get any worse than "in Soviet Russia...", but I guess it has.

    I tried reading one of the "funny" rulings.. but after about a paragraph i fell asleep.

    --
    no comment
    1. Re:ugh... by mvanhorn · · Score: 2, Funny

      Maybe the judge should've used tags? I thought it was pretty funny, (maybe because I could imagine the opinion being read by one of John Cleese's characters.)

    2. Re:ugh... by ideut · · Score: 0, Flamebait
      Maybe the judge should've used <sarcasm> tags?

      Maybe not, fuckface.

      --

      --

  3. Remove the scurge from your webpages too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    />

    1. Re:Remove the scurge from your webpages too by AchmedHabib · · Score: 1

      naah, I just think I will let the websurfing expirence be a very confusing matter to the poor first-time PC owner who has no concept of whats going on.

    2. Re:Remove the scurge from your webpages too by Rick+and+Roll · · Score: 1

      or you could just misspell the words to prevent parsing ;)

    3. Re:Remove the scurge from your webpages too by RzUpAnmsCwrds · · Score: 2, Informative

      There are *NO* smart tags in Microsoft IE 6. They were stripped from the beta because of public outcry.

      Thus, that statement does absolutely nothing.

  4. A different perspective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Our company has a close partnership with Microsoft and the main concern that our executive board has, is that Microsoft does not appear to take privacy concerns too seriously. We are a manufacturer of electronic devices and thereby are always under intense scrutiny by the FCC and the Homeland Security Office.

    We have proposed a twenty-page plan to Microsoft in which we describe that education is the key. Get your client's permission before you take certain liberties. Their response has been positive and we look forward in adding more value in our products with this direction.

    Which is nice.

    1. Re:A different perspective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And this ties in to the original article....um, how?

    2. Re:A different perspective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I was playing golf with Bill the other day and he mentioned it.

      BTW, nice to meet you, I'm Anonymous BraveHeart.

  5. *snoooore* by l1_wulf · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    No wonder there aren't any posts on this article, everyone has fallen asleep reading the long-winded crap that was linked. I saved myself with a quick click on the back button.

    1. Re:*snoooore* by neonprimetime · · Score: 0

      apparently you didn't click the back button fast enough

      because i still had to suffer through reading your post

      ------------
      debian rules

    2. Re:*snoooore* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dumbass. I had to read through his post AND your post.

  6. Blame Unix by gulfan · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'm sure that Microsoft will blame the delay on Unix Mailservers, while at the same time promote Exchange.

  7. Filing not late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Pursuant to the modified scheduling order, the parties in this case had until June 25, 2003 to file summary judgment motions. Any electronic document may be e-filed until midnight on the due date. In a scandalous affront to this court's deadlines, Microsoft did not file its summary judgment motion until 12:04:27 a.m. on June 26, 2003, with some supporting documents trickling in as late as 1:11:15 a.m.

    The message WAS actually sent June 23, but the exchange server was down until the 25th.

  8. ... But was the courts clock accurate? by mdvolm · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Unless the clock on the court's server was using NTP or equivalant, it probably was not completely accurate. Of course there is no mention of the clock's accuracy, but how can you make a judgement without this information?

    And anyway, it's four minutes and 27 seconds, c'mon!

    1. Re:... But was the courts clock accurate? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe you should think about how long 4.5 min. mean
      to an innocent person on death row. This is the same reason why 56 Mph could get you a speeding ticket in a 55 Mph zone.

    2. Re:... But was the courts clock accurate? by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1
      Frankly, the judge is generous enough to allow filing off-business hours. I typically find that when I wait to pay a ticket till to close to "closing" time, that the court has their clocks 5 minutes faster than the "time Lady". In addition, they always seem to close 10 minutes early on a friday afternoon when I have an important citation due.

      You'll get no sympathy from me!

    3. Re:... But was the courts clock accurate? by broken.data · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I have been burned by banks clocks and the CCRA (Canadian Customs and Revenue Service) for filing my income tax 27 seconds late since their server was slow as hell.

      Tell me that 2% interest on $18,000 owing for that space of time is not going to piss you off. ($360 for the math impaired)

    4. Re:... But was the courts clock accurate? by ArsSineArtificio · · Score: 1
      Frankly, the judge is generous enough to allow filing off-business hours.

      Actually, the federal courts are moving to electronic filing, which renders the particular time of day irrelevant.

      --
      All employees must wash hands before seeking equitable relief.
    5. Re:... But was the courts clock accurate? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What do you want, sympathy? Fuck you... if you wait until the last few seconds, what the hell do you expect?

      Get your shit sorted out with plenty of time, and you won't look like a jackass.

    6. Re:... But was the courts clock accurate? by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > This is the same reason why 56 Mph could get you a speeding ticket in a 55 Mph zone.

      But you won't get one (unless you're swerving or look "suspicious"... or driving a sports car).

    7. Re:... But was the courts clock accurate? by bobaferret · · Score: 1

      I'm right in the midlle of writing an e-filing system and our approach is to only allow the document to be processed during court hours. Sure it can be delivered at 11 PM. but the court filing date will be for 8 AM the next day. We will show that it was dilivered at 11 pm though. Some of the courts close at different times depending on day of the week etc. And this seems to be the only way to address that. As for the clock being accurate, NTP is most definatly our protocal of choice, I've met the architect for the federal e-filing systems (which I belive this uses) and he's an older UNIX guru type who belives firmly in well built software so I would bet that they were using NTP.

      god I need coffee...

    8. Re:... But was the courts clock accurate? by hesiod · · Score: 1

      I agree, albeit less offensively.

    9. Re:... But was the courts clock accurate? by sorak · · Score: 1

      the real irony of the 4 minute 27 second "offense" was that the judge was at home asleep at the time, and the only way he knew it was late was when he checked the e-mail the next morning.

  9. Jokey Judge by Atario · · Score: 3, Funny
    Counsel used bolded italics to make their point, a clear sign of grievous iniquity by one's foe.


    "Now that's...COMEDY."
    --Slappy Squirrel
    --
    "A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy." --Theodore Roosevelt
    1. Re:Jokey Judge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um how is this offtopic?????

      Direct quote from the linked article....oh wait what was I thinking, why would the mods read the article....idiots

    2. Re:Jokey Judge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Offtopic? How, please tell? That was not only on-topic, but it was a funny comment to boot. Are the mods on crack again today?

  10. In case of slashdotting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Copy of article: Pursuant to the modified scheduling order, the parties in this case had until June 25, 2003 to file summary judgment motions. Any electronic document may be e-filed until midnight on the due date. In a scandalous affront to this court's deadlines, Microsoft did not file its summary judgment motion until 12:04:27 a.m. on June 26, 2003, with some supporting documents trickling in as late as 1:11:15 a.m. I don't know this personally because I was home sleeping, but that's what the court's computer docketing program says, so I'll accept..........Zzzzzzz.......Zzzzzzzz Zzzzzzzzz Yawn. Not Funny

  11. Obviously... by Bodrius · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The problem is that the court has not upgraded to MS Time.

    In any case, good for the court on putting the ridiculousness of the situation in writing. I mean, if the litigators are going to disrespect the court by wasting its time with ridiculous motions, they may be obligated to follow along, but they can at least put their own disrespect for the litigants in evidence.

    --
    Freedom is the freedom to say 2+2=4, everything else follows...
  12. Prior art by bouvin · · Score: 5, Informative

    The concept behind SmartTags is hardly new - one well-known (at least in hypermedia research, which happens to be my area) example would be 'generic link' found in the Microcosm open hypermedia system, which was first published in Andrew M. Fountain, Wendy Hall, Ian Heath, Hugh C. Davis: MICROCOSM: An Open Model for Hypermedia with Dynamic Linking. ECHT 1990: 298-311.

    The generic link designates a link with a selection as source (this would in the simplest case be a string, but could be e.g. a image) and a specific destination. Thus, whereever the selection is encountered, there is a link to the destination. This functionality has been reimplemented a number of times in various open hypermedia systems.

    --
    --- In omnibus requiem quaesivi, et nusquam inveni nisi in angulo cum libro
    1. Re:Prior art by inertia187 · · Score: 1

      ...generic link designates a link with a selection as source...

      I wonder if the quote of the day at the bottom of every /. screen could be construed as a SmartTag. Prior art indeed.

      --
      A programmer is a machine for converting coffee into code.
    2. Re:Prior art by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please read the claims before citing prior art, I can garuntee that you did not bother to do so before writing your post.

    3. Re:Prior art by ZoneGray · · Score: 2, Funny

      Prior art? Maybe, but why admit to it? I mean, I undertsand that suing Microsoft could be worth a bundle to a small company. Still, the idea that Microsoft got ideas for Office features from you... I mean, is that something you really want people to know about?

  13. Haha.. haha by EdMack · · Score: 2, Funny
    This really tore me up:
    four minutes and thirty seconds late
    I guess the litigator really should cut down on the caffine in the mornings

    On a more on-topic ms note, I just saw an add on /. by MS saying 'Find out how much easier we've made licensing our communications protocols'..
    We now have to pay to use a protocol? yuwah?
    Heres ya' link to it: http://m3.doubleclick.net/790463/mrs03124_ha_728x9 0_10.gif
    --
    puts ("Python r0cks\n");
  14. After some by sodre · · Score: 2, Funny

    five minutes and twenty-seven seconds of my life wasted reading that stuff. I move to strike Hyperphrase's lawyers in the head for being so damn annoying.

  15. Isn't MS pro-software patent? by 91degrees · · Score: 1

    Bizarre really considering they keep losing patent cases, and tend not to be particulalrly aggressive when it comes to their own patents.

    1. Re:Isn't MS pro-software patent? by s20451 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Software patents are like nuclear weapons, their scare value is far superior to their actual use.

      --
      Toronto-area transit rider? Rate your ride.
    2. Re:Isn't MS pro-software patent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Bill has gone on record as being against software patents, though I don't know what MS's offical stance is.

  16. In other news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    SCO files for patents on "Dumb Tags". "This will help improve our company logo and overall our company business model. We can con investors now with a click of a mouse! Because you know what?! We OWN THEM!!!!", a sco corporate fuck said today in a press release.

    1. Re:In other news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You aren't funny.

  17. The judge left an extra surprise for them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Notice that the court listed the names of all the lawyers on the team that submitted that motion, so that any time someone does a lexus-type search for any one of those lawyers, that filing will come up, thus embarassing them for years to come. The court put some thought into that one.

    1. Re:The judge left an extra surprise for them by the_archivist · · Score: 1

      everybody link to it to improve its google ranking

      --
      while(karma less_than enough_karma){karma++}
  18. AT LEAST THEY DIDN'T USE ALL CAPS by LeBain · · Score: 3, Funny

    From Hyperphrase's motion to strike the summary judgment motion as untimely: Counsel used bolded italics to make their point, a clear sign of grievous iniquity by one's foe. AT LEAST THEY DIDN'T COMPAIN IN ALL CAPS!!!!! THAT REALLY WOULD HAVE GOTTEN THE JUDGE'S ATTENTION!!!!

    --
    Give serendipity a chance.
    1. Re:AT LEAST THEY DIDN'T USE ALL CAPS by cant_get_a_good_nick · · Score: 1

      ALL CAPS WAS USED IN AOL'S COUNTERSUIT, BECAUSE M$ TOTALLY SUXX0R5!

      (this text added to get around lameness filter. You know there's so much text up there I have to add a lot to balance the lameness filter)

    2. Re:AT LEAST THEY DIDN'T USE ALL CAPS by FreeLinux · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Lawyers love all caps and they use them frequently on most legal documents. For some reason the law seems to think that being all caps makes the document even more binding than if they used lower case.

    3. Re:AT LEAST THEY DIDN'T USE ALL CAPS by odin53 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Lawyers use all caps in certain parts of legal documents because they believe that caps emphasizes whatever they capitalize. However, it's not random -- 99.9% of the time, the text that's capitalized is required or strongly suggested to be included in such a document by law or caselaw. It has little to do with making the document "binding."

      For those that argue that people just skip over the text because it's hard to read or it's like yelling, well, that's a silly argument, and no court would accept that as an excuse for avoiding the results of whatever the text said. The point is that the text is set off from the rest of the document -- if you skip it, you still noticed it, and it's your fault for skipping it.

      Think about it this way: you wouldn't argue that a warning siren is useless because it sounds really harsh, and naturally you put your hands over your ears to avoid hearing it, and therefore the warning siren doesn't actually do what it's supposed to do.

    4. Re:AT LEAST THEY DIDN'T USE ALL CAPS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All caps ARE unreadable, when we are talking about more than a few words, and that is exactly the reason why lawyers prefer to write in all caps. Everybody heard about writing in small print, and they will check for that. Writing in all caps works the other way around, everybody can see that it's there, so they don't expect it to contain hidden stuff, but as it is unreadable (unless you read it like a first-grader does: L-A La W-Y wy E-R er Lawyer), people don't bother the trouble.

    5. Re:AT LEAST THEY DIDN'T USE ALL CAPS by bm_luethke · · Score: 1

      I suspect, but am not sure, that a lot of it is because old documents were handwritten. The only legal documents I have been around that were old and handwritten were property deeds, so it may not be universal.

      In land surveying everything handwritten is written in capital leters for readability. People tend to take more time with capitals than with lower case. It is amusing trying to get my father to type surveying documents any other way than all caps (and all the other surveyors I used to have to deal with), though normal documents he types in normal mixed case.

      --
      ------- Sorry about the spelling, I suffer from two problems. Dyslexia makes it difficult to spell well, lazy makes it
    6. Re:AT LEAST THEY DIDN'T USE ALL CAPS by feed_those_kitties · · Score: 1
      Lawyers love all caps and they use them frequently on most legal documents. For some reason the law seems to think that being all caps makes the document even more binding than if they used lower case.

      All caps is also used whenever you want to make something more difficult to read. Check out the 'disclaimer' on a pack of cigarettes sometime - it's puposely written in sans-serif narrow spaced ALL CAPS in order to make it more difficult to read.

      Legalize through obfuscation!

  19. Nothing to do with legality of software patent law by fredistheking · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "Crabb agreed with Microsoft's argument that XML-based Smart Tags operate differently from Hyperphrase's methods and therefore aren't covered by the patents."

    When this issue originally came up many people were hoping that Microsoft might argue against the legality of software patents in general. They completely side stepped the issue. What's going to happen when Ogg gets sued by Fraunhofer and company?

  20. Please explain... by fuqqer · · Score: 1

    I tried to read the minutiae link and was thoroughly confused. Granted IANAL. Could someone who IAL please put up a post in english of what is so interesting/funny about the "minutiae".

    There is something interesting about this artice/post to me though. It's the number of posts saying this is boring/confusing/not funny when just about everyone on slashdot in general is willing to give legal advice/suggestions/jokes regarding the topics at hand.

    Bow to your overlords without sigs.

    1. Re:Please explain... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The minutia is that MS had until midnight to file a motion to have the suit thrown out of court, but MS was tardy -- by less than five minutes -- in getting its papers in.

      The Hyperphrase lawyers then tried to get the court to ignore MS's motion for being late.

      The court in effect just slapped Hyperphrase's lawyers and told them to get a clue -- MS being 5 minutes late didn't hurt Hyperphrase at all, and nit-picking and being Hypertechnical with deadlines was just sillyness that the court wouldn't tolerate.

      As a lawyer I'd say the court's remarks were in the "mildly amusing on a slow news day" category but hardly worth linking to in this story.

    2. Re:Please explain... by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 1

      It's "funny" because they are so impossibly petty. The judge (who wrote the full text the little blurbs came out of) obviously just wants to be playing golf and not listening to these two sets of morons arguing about something that should, in a just world, be sent to the fricking morons at the patent office to explain.

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    3. Re:Please explain... by leeward · · Score: 1

      Oh well, the humor was intended to be sardonic. Some people like sardonic humor (I thought the linked page was hilarious) and some don't. I guess that is the same thing as some people liking Monty Python, and some not.

  21. Go microsoft. by asscroft · · Score: 1, Insightful

    The enemy of the enemy is not the enemy. Software patents suck!. I hope MS wins. I also hope they get sick and tired of fighting software patent law suits and use their clout for good for a change and use it to help rid the world of software patents.

    --
    because I have been enjoined by this Holy Office to abandon the false opinion which maintains that the Sun is the centre
    1. Re:Go microsoft. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      dude, the case was dismissed. Microsoft can't win, there is no hearing. you should have read the Fin article.

      It's actually good that the case was dismissed, or anyone using embedded XML would have to pay these guys royalties.

      but still, it's funny how you got modded flamebait, and then a troll.

  22. Lawyer humor by PD · · Score: 1

    Yes, it can be really funny. Just the other day I overheard two lawyers talking, and it was so funny:

    Lawyer 1: ...and so I picked up this new client the other day. We see the judge on Tuesday.

    Lawyer 2: Did you get all the paperwork done yet?

    At this point, both of them fell over laughing. It was hilarious!

    I guess you had to be there.

    1. Re:Lawyer humor by NOLAChief · · Score: 3, Funny
      Finally, a profession with a worse sense of humor than we engineers are accused of. From a Tulane American Society of Mechanical Engineers t-shirt: "You wish you were as cool...AS-ME."

      Groan...I'm switching majors. Or shooting myself.

  23. It's there if you can bear the rest... by IthnkImParanoid · · Score: 4, Funny
    Granted, you have to wade through a lot of legal mumbo jumbo, but it was worth it for this:
    Before proceeding further, the Court notes that this case involves two extremely likable lawyers, who have together delivered some of the most amateurish pleadings ever to cross the hallowed causeway into Galveston, an effort which leads the Court to surmise but one plausible explanation. Both attorneys have obviously entered into a secret pact ? complete with hats, handshakes and cryptic words ? to draft their pleadings entirely in crayon on the back sides of gravy-stained paper place mats, in the hope that the Court would be so charmed by their child-like efforts that their utter dearth of legal authorities in their briefing would go unnoticed. Whatever actually occurred, the Court is now faced with the daunting task of deciphering their submissions.
    --
    It's nothing but crumpled porno and Ayn Rand.
    1. Re:It's there if you can bear the rest... by metroid+composite · · Score: 0

      So that's how Microsoft does it: Crayons. Maybe that's why Windows is so unstable....

    2. Re:It's there if you can bear the rest... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You ass-clown. That summation was from head to toe a work of comedic genius. It was completely laden with sarcastic wit.

      How is it the readers of slashdot can decipher a thousand and one technology acronyms a minute but need an hour to "wade through" a highly intelligible and well written legal document?

    3. Re:It's there if you can bear the rest... by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > need an hour to "wade through" a highly intelligible and well written legal document?

      Well written, yes. They have to be very exact, but if you seriously think most legal documents are easy to wade through, you are either a lawyer or a member of Mensa (the latter, of course, assumes that some member of Mensa can stop stroking his ego long enough to actually read one, which is unlikely).

  24. Just what I needed by dbavirt · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This was a chuckle and a half. I can't understand all you who think it was boring. Apparently the $5 and $10 words scared you off.

    I had never seen flyspeck used as a verb before...

  25. Microspect by McPLUR · · Score: 2, Funny

    Microsoft spokeswoman Stacy Drake hailed the ruling. "As an intellectual property company, we are committed to respecting the intellectual property of others, but we also invest heavily in R&D and we will defend our intellectual property when necessary,"

    She continued "We be payin props ta doz silly azz mofos intalectual propertiez, but they'ze disrespectin' ours. Whats up with that shiznat dogz?"

    ------

    --
    If you don't stop reading this right now you owe me $1,000. Send check or money order too...
  26. This means war! by chosen_my_foot · · Score: 2, Funny

    They used bold italics?!?! Screw diplomacy! This is a full-on war!

  27. Patents bad. Even worse than Microsoft. by Thinkit3 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Any defeat of a patent is good news.

    --
    -Libertarian secular transhumanist
  28. What we've become. by airrage · · Score: 1

    Counsel used bolded italics to make their point, a clear sign of grievous iniquity by one's foe.

    I love well-worded use of language. It just feels good to say well-written prose. One could divert into the technology here, but I would like to take another road.

    This, to me, seems to sum-up American life. We grow up, dream big dreams, educate ourselves, strive for betterment. In the end, we spend our lives making our point through formatting. Is it just me or has America become a bunch of pussies (I'm American)?

    --
    "This isn't a study in computer science, its a study in human behavior"
    1. Re:What we've become. by Steve+G+Swine · · Score: 1

      I simply worry that our local Natalie Portman Overlords In Soviet Russia will begin using this technique to point out every time a clear sign of grievous iniquity appears in a Slashdot comment.

      OK, that actually might be kind of fun for a day or two, but still...

      --
      "Consider yourself a member of a virtual corporation with Mr. Torvalds as your Chief Executive Officer." - Linux Advocac
  29. Enemy of the enemy is a friend. by Thinkit3 · · Score: 1

    At least in this particular case.

    --
    -Libertarian secular transhumanist
  30. The funniest thing by DorkHead · · Score: 0

    was in the third comment:

    Prepare yourself for a Nerd invasion.
    We come with greasy hair, bulging bellys, unshaven faces and our virginity still intact.

    Posted by: Prophet at September 25, 2003 03:28 PM

    --
    Head of the Dorks
    1. Re:The funniest thing by No_Weak_Heart · · Score: 1

      Was how they disabled the comments. But that did not stop the Sporkinator!

  31. Lawyers and all their $10 words! by tstoneman · · Score: 1

    Holy crap!

    Insouciance?
    Temerity?
    Magnanimity?

    You think this guy got 750+ on his verbal SAT or LSAT?

    1. Re:Lawyers and all their $10 words! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Feh. Those are the 400 and 500 score words. Working the phrase "...amelioration of such verbal excoriation" might reach into the 700s (more likely mid- to high 600s).

      Unless they've really dropped the standards since I took them.

    2. Re:Lawyers and all their $10 words! by tstoneman · · Score: 1

      Ahhhhh... Hence my SAT and GRE scores.

  32. hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think the courts just forgot to turn on their XP auto-clock update. So they were running 4 minutes fast!

  33. Insightful? More like Irresponsible. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    If there is an important deadline, this should never become an issue. Why even risk a clock discrepency? Its 4:27s after the hours/days/weeks/whatever window they had to do it on time.

    If 4:27s becomes "ok", then what about 8:54s. Its "only" 4:27s after the new ok.

    Just adhere to the damn deadline.

    1. Re:Insightful? More like Irresponsible. by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > If 4:27s becomes "ok", then what about 8:54s

      Yes, it was highly irresponsible, but WHO FUCKING CARES if it was 4 minutes late? If they were to treat others differently W/R/T lateness, that's one thing, but most courts aren't gonna be dicks about it.

  34. complaining about moderation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that's a paddling

    1. Re:complaining about moderation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      that's a paddling

      So uhm, what are the chances that the paddling will be adminstered by a hot 19 year old girl in a Sailor Moon outfit?

    2. Re:complaining about moderation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      She called in sick, so Steve is going to fill in for her.

  35. I'm no MS fan but.... by c1ay · · Score: 1

    a glimpse at Hyperphase's patent looks like it was to narrowly defined to begin with. Me thinks their lawyer's should have known better.

    --

  36. Judge Kent's Pigs by werdna · · Score: 5, Funny

    Judge Kent is bar far one of the funniest judges on the federal bench. I strongly comment a quick read of his opinion in this case, which concerned a motion drafted in crayon.

    1. Re:Judge Kent's Pigs by ewhac · · Score: 1

      An excerpt from the parent's link:

      After this remarkably long walk on a short legal pier, having received no useful guidance whatever from either party, the Court has endeavored, primarily based upon its affection for both counsel, but also out of its own sense of morbid curiosity, to resolve what it perceived to be the legal issue presented. Despite the waste of perfectly good crayon seen in both parties' briefing (and the inexplicable odor of wet dog emanating from such) the Court believes it has satisfactorily resolved this matter. Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED.

      Internet flamers, take heed: This is the standard to which you should aspire. Would that all cutting discourse on the net were posessed of such wit.

      Schwab

    2. Re:Judge Kent's Pigs by jonblaze · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Actually, the briefs weren't drafted in crayon--that memorandum was just another example of Judge Kent bullying from the bench.

    3. Re:Judge Kent's Pigs by cyberwench · · Score: 1

      While I think that the Green Bag piece makes some good points, I have to say that I thoroughly enjoyed Judge Kent's writing - it rather reminded me of Mark Twain. It's nice to see a judge whose opinions are colourful and not so dull that you fall asleep while reading them.

      Issues of whether such chastisement from the bench is fair or not - perhaps that's something that the Bar Association should look into. I must admit that I have a hard time with the article's portrayal of lawyers as such helpless individuals.

      --
      ~ Leilah
    4. Re:Judge Kent's Pigs by Red+Pointy+Tail · · Score: 1

      Erm, that Microsoft judgment is NOT from Judge Kent, if you see the PDF of the order here it is clearly signed Magistrate Judge Stephen L. Crocker.

      But both judges are really funny in a caustic way :)

    5. Re:Judge Kent's Pigs by tealover · · Score: 1

      Exactly what is witty about making light of the plaintiff's injury in an attempt to excoriate the laywers?

      --
      -- You see, there would be these conclusions that you could jump to
    6. Re:Judge Kent's Pigs by Aceticon · · Score: 1

      In practice the Green Bag piece is attacking the judge for both publicly criticising the (admitedly not competent) counsel and for not being serious (there's quite a number of references in the article to "bad jokes").

      I came out of reading this article with a sense that a member of the "mainstream" judicial profession was criticizing another for not acting like the majority.

      Personally, even though i'm far removed from the judicial circles, i found Judge Kent's memorandum both original and refreshing. My (admitedly limited) contact with members of the judicial professions has mostly shown me a ritualized and self-effacing behaviour which i found most repelent.

    7. Re:Judge Kent's Pigs by werdna · · Score: 1

      Of course. I was referring to the article rather than the particular opinion, which had a number of Kent snippets. They are both a hoot, no doubt.

  37. All your base are still not funny. by Unknown+Kadath · · Score: 0, Troll

    I notice slashdotters are exercising their usual incisive wit in the comments section of the Corp Law Blog.

    Keep it up, guys. If the slashdot moderators don't find you funny, I'm sure the corporate lawyers will.

    -Carolyn

    --
    Like Daddy always said: if you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance, baffle 'em with bullshit.
    1. Re:All your base are still not funny. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WTF are you talking about troll?

  38. What momo modded this as offtopic? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How much more on topic can ya get than to link something in the actual document. :P

  39. Your court's clock may not be accurate! by BigRedFish · · Score: 5, Funny

    Would you like to download PrecisionTime from the Gator Corporation?

    [Yes] [OK] [Sure]

    1. Re:Your court's clock may not be accurate! by No_Weak_Heart · · Score: 1

      The 'OK' link in the above post is busted. I tried the 'Sure' one too - it doesn't seem to work either. What time is it? Wait, maybe if I click 'Yes' -- nope. Crap, how am I gonna know if the pizza guy is late?

    2. Re:Your court's clock may not be accurate! by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > how am I gonna know if the pizza guy is late?

      If you pass out/die of starvation while waiting, he might be late. Or you live in Columbus, OH.

  40. You missed the conclusion! by JediTrainer · · Score: 2, Funny

    After this remarkably long walk on a short legal pier, having received no useful guidance whatever from either party, the Court has endeavored, primarily based upon its affection for both counsel, but also out of its own sense of morbid curiosity, to resolve what it perceived to be the legal issue presented. Despite the waste of perfectly good crayon seen in both parties' briefing (and the inexplicable odor of wet dog emanating from such) the Court believes it has satisfactorily resolved this matter. Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED.

    At this juncture, Plaintiff retains, albeit seemingly to his befuddlement and/or consternation, a maritime law cause of action versus his alleged Jones Act employer, Defendant Unity Marine Corporation, Inc. However, it is well known around these parts that Unity Marine's lawyer is equally likable and has been writing crisply in ink since the second grade. Some old-timers even spin yarns of an ability to type. The Court cannot speak to the veracity of such loose talk, but out of caution, the Court suggests that Plaintiff's lovable counsel had best upgrade to a nice shiny No. 2 pencil or at least sharpen what's left of the stubs of his crayons for what remains of this heart-stopping, spine-tingling action.

    In either case, the Court cautions Plaintiff's counsel not to run with a sharpened writing utensil in hand -- he could put his eye out.

    IT IS SO ORDERED.

    --

    You can accomplish anything you set your mind to. The impossible just takes a little longer.
  41. Re:Nothing to do with legality of software patent by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1

    Ogg is patent based, but licenesed by a different company to the Ogg guys for GPL usage. The same company [sorry, I forgot the name] also does video codex which the Ogg guys are currently working on. It really doesn't hurt the company as they have several generations newer codex already being sold. I suppose in the Codex world, everyone creates one, and the MPEG group chooses one to use and everyone else pays them. Leaving the loosers to fend for themselfs...perfect canidates for OSS!

  42. !! MOD PARENT UP !! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Responsibility rules!

  43. Re:Obviously...Not ridiculous! by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1, Insightful
    This is Microsoft's MO for court proceedings. Come in late, file late, burden the other side with tons of meaningless paperwork and court apperances. This was totally about Microsoft being arrogant and showing everyone that GWB was looking out for them.

    This is exactly why Judge Jackson tounge-lashed them to the media! He picked up on this outright condecending attitude to the Law and meant to put the hurt to them.

    In my opinion, the court should have awarded the case to the other side, and made MS fight for it! Maybe even hold the Lawyers for Contempt of court. The MS lawyers gambeled on filing at the last possible second to tip the scale to their side and LOST! It's really that simple...too bad the judge won a battle because he thought it "silly", but put in another MS victory over the jucidal system.

  44. Well, DUH by NeoGeo64 · · Score: 0

    Micro$oft (almost) always wins court cases. These days, it's not about justice. It's about how deep your pockets are and who you know to make things happen.

    Who uses SmartTags, anyways? What *is* a SmartTag (Office XP user here)?

  45. midnight means midnight by penguin7of9 · · Score: 2, Informative

    I fail to see the reason for sarcasm. Yes, it sounds like in this case, punctuality may not have mattered. But in other cases, the difference between 11:59pm and 12:01am could be billions of dollars.

    When a court sets a deadline, people should be expected to stick to it. If, in this case, the court decided that it wanted to ignore its own deadline, that's its choice. But would have been perfectly acceptable and entirely reasonable for it to throw out any documents submitted even a second late.

    1. Re:midnight means midnight by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 1

      Agreed. One or two minutes can be explained by clock differences (not that you should be leaving it that close to the wire anyway) but an hour later?

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
  46. Re:Patents bad. Even worse than Microsoft. by NanoGator · · Score: 1

    "Any defeat of a patent is good news."

    Generalizations always suck.

    --
    "Derp de derp."
  47. RTFA!!! by Galvatron · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Yes, that is what the judge thought, too. Do you need reading comprehension lessons or something? Allow me to quote:

    Wounded though this court may be by Microsoft's four minute and twenty-seven second dereliction of duty, it will transcend the affront and forgive the tardiness. Indeed, to demonstrate the even-handedness of its magnanimity, the court will allow Hyperphrase on some future occasion in this case to e-file a motion four minutes and thirty seconds late, with supporting documents to follow up to seventy-two minutes later.

    The judge is forgiving Microsoft for filing late, and is basically telling Hyperphrase to stop being a pain in the ass.

    --
    "The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than that of whether a submarine can swim" -EWD
  48. Sarcasm alert by CalCudahy · · Score: 2, Informative
    Um, I don't think you get the joke. He was being sarcastic at the Hyperphase guys for throwing a hissy fit over Microsoft being four minutes late.

    Wounded though this court may be by Microsoft's four minute and twenty-seven second dereliction of duty, it will transcend the affront and forgive the tardiness. Indeed, to demonstrate the even-handedness of its magnanimity, the court will allow Hyperphrase on some future occasion in this case to e-file a motion four minutes and thirty seconds late, with supporting documents to follow up to seventy-two minutes later.

    Having spent more than that amount of time on Hyperphrase's motion, it is now time to move on to the other Gordian problems confronting this court. Plaintiff's motion to strike is denied.

    --
    "I think the U.N. is going to find that the blame lies with all the Sudanese rap music that glamorizes genocide."
    1. Re:Sarcasm alert by Kaiwen · · Score: 1
      He was being sarcastic at the Hyperphase guys for throwing a hissy fit

      Good lawyers all, the Hyperphase legal staff was just making sure they left no stone unthrown.

      Lee Kaiwen, Taiwan

  49. Defense against patent claims by blitz487 · · Score: 1

    I think Microsoft's approach to patents is simply acquiring a large portfolio of them they can use to defend themselves against other people filing patent claims against them. This works when cross-licensing is possible. It doesn't work if the plaintiff against them has only one patent.

    1. Re:Defense against patent claims by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      Probably. It's quite common to use patents defensively. I'm sure they came out in support of EU's proposal on patentability of computer programs though.

  50. I disagree by MagicBox · · Score: 1

    If you count them, MS has paid well over 1 billion in court settlements this year alone. With the unpopularity of MS at this time I actually think that the only reason to have deep pockets is so they can pay bigger lawsuit settlements. (Not to be in MS's defence), but I think that neither MS nor any other company should pay up anytime some unknown bunch of punks claim their technology was stolen, just so they can make some quick cash. XEROX's PARC made great technology that if it wasn't for Steve Jobs and BG(stealing it) a lot of it might have never seen the light of day or probbably arrived too late. You can say whatever, but I give them props for stealing. It was a much needed thing to do. Smart tags might not be useful to you(they are optional in Office XP, you can either enable them or disable them), but they are a neat feature which you can use if you like that's all.

    --

    The phaomnneil pweor of the hmuan mnid. Fcuknig amzanig eh!
  51. The judge's decision was outrageous. by ArsSineArtificio · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I've clerked for a federal magistrate, and written several orders granting or denying summary judgment, and I found the order extremely surprising. Microsoft was moving for summary judgment, which is a basically a legal determination that it is so obvious that Microsoft will win that the case shouldn't even bother to proceed. As makes sense, the burden of proof is on Microsoft to have a really good reason for claiming this, and the court should be reluctant to grant it.


    Generally speaking, any irregularity should make the court even more reluctant to grant summary judgment. The judge here granted summary judgment even after acknowledging that Microsoft was too late to file - and mocked the plaintiffs for objecting at all! I would expect that Hyperphrase is going to be filing their appeal to the district judge in the very near future.


    The judge is forgiving Microsoft for filing late, and is basically telling Hyperphrase to stop being a pain in the ass.


    Deadlines exist for a reason. If there weren't definite rules for when and in what order things needed to happen in litigation, the courts would be much more inefficient, and people in court would be denied their constitutional right to due process. Yeah, it's funny that Microsoft filed five minutes late - but there's a big difference between some prisoner struggling to represent himself who files five minutes late, and an enormous multinational corporation with gigantic legal resources doing the same thing. A wink and a nod is inappropriate here.

    --
    All employees must wash hands before seeking equitable relief.
    1. Re:The judge's decision was outrageous. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Apparently the judge had previously ordered the two companies not to screw around with picking at every minor infraction that the other side makes, primarily because it would likely cause the case to drag on and not get to the core of the matter.

    2. Re:The judge's decision was outrageous. by Galvatron · · Score: 1
      Well, frankly, I don't care one way or the other, it just drove me nuts seeing someone moderated up for saying "they shouldn't have been punished for filing 5 minutes late" when a simple reading of the article would have pointed out that, in fact, they were not punished.

      That aside, I'm generally inclined to agree with you, to some extent. Yes, they should have filed on time. If the deadline had been set at a specific time for a reason, I'd definately agree with you. If, for example, the deadline had been 5 pm on Friday so that the judge could read the document over the weekend, or noon on Wednesday so that a clerk could do whatever it is that clerks do with documents that afternoon (not meant as an attack, I'm merely admitting ignorance of the legal process), I'd agree with you 100%. In this case though, the deadline was clearly not set at midnight for any reason. It was totally arbitrary, and missing the deadline didn't delay anything. The court was closed, and no one was doing anything with the document until the next day anyway. So I think the judge was being entirely reasonable.

      As for mocking the plaintiff for even making the request, you've got a point there. This judge does have a history of bullying from the bench, someone else in this story has a link posted.

      --
      "The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than that of whether a submarine can swim" -EWD
  52. Re:Patents bad. Even worse than Microsoft. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes. God forbid that the patent process is changed so that you can actually only patent significantly complex software concepts that a company or individual has spent large amounts of money or time developing. God forbid that the US could have a patent process that encourages software companies to keep spending money on R&D. No, what we all want is a system where any idea can be stolen, err, used by anyone at anytime. It is clear that intellectual property and software don't mix because everyone on slashdot says so. It is clear that this problem has no shades of gray, but is instead all or nothing.

    I've run out of rhetoric. Someone tell me something else I can regurgitate verbatim.

  53. Ogg and patents by steveha · · Score: 2, Informative

    Ogg is a container format. As far as I know, no one is seriously claiming patent protection on the idea of a container format.

    Vorbis is a codec that does the same job as MP3 (only better). The Ogg guys worked very hard, with lawyers vetting the code at each stage of development, to make darn sure that no patents apply to anything in Vorbis. It would have been done a lot sooner if they hadn't had to do this.

    Theora is a video codec, based on a video codec called VP3. The guys who developed VP3, On2, have patents that cover VP3, and they signed a complete and irrevokable release to allow Theora to be completely free software. I think Theora is what you were thinking of.

    And the Ogg code is available under a BSD license, to speed the adoption by commercial entities. Originally they were using LGPL but enough people were worried about viral IP issues that they went to the BSD license.

    <pedantic>
    And it's codec or codecs, not codex. A codex is a book.
    </pedantic>

    Want to know more? Check out the Ogg page at xiph.org.

    steveha

    --
    lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
  54. Re:Obviously...Not ridiculous! by Wolfrider · · Score: 1

    ...If i had mod points I'd reverse that Troll ruling. I think you hit it right on the head.

    --
    .
    == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
  55. SmartTags Against Terrorism! Yeah! by webzombie · · Score: 1

    So M$ has the courts of the United States at it knees willing to suck or blow Bill or Ballmer whenever required as long as it appears that justice is being "presented ala Survivors" certainly not servered.

    Did we mention terrorism.. ok good.

  56. Fun with www.m-w.com by PurplePhase · · Score: 1

    The temerity of your statement leaves much to be desired.

    The magnanimity of your accepting mine own proposition in insouciance will establish the temperament with which I approbate your further articulations.

    You seemed to list them in least to most common usage - I've seen insouciance the least, but the others are fairly common. Especially when making fun of medieval/fantasy stories :) Unfortunately I didn't get 750+ on SAT :(

    8-PP