I'm confused. Article 1 sect 8 talks about the exclusive rights of authors and inventors. I assume that "exclusive" means "exclusive" and not "exclusive [except for rich stupid people who buy things]"
So, which is McBride suing someone about, something he created as an Inventor? Something he created as an Author? Or something that some other inventor or author has exclusive rights to?
Yes, it has been done before. Implementations go back to at least about 1998 when Jay Nickson at Ronin Software Group did Mouse-Menu and also entirely click free page interfaces based on javascript timing of x-y mouse position (& velocities) or lack thereof for click-free.
Perhaps someone did earlier imaginings and implementations of either, it is impossible to say with the current, broken, patent/IP "system".
In mouse-menu the user could use a loop or a cross to stimulate the menu popup. THe cross, like a cross of Ankh, or a rapid loop in any of eight directions N, NE, E, SE, S SW, W, NW executed a menu item. North was recommended to be reserved for "show menu"
It was not difficult to to distinguish such otherwise-not-usually-occurring mouse motions; the timing and error envelopes had designer settable, user tunable, stored in cookie levels for timing or error envelopes.
An eight-way menu degenerates cleanly into a four way menu by using only four items and starting out with a different error envelope specs.
Click-free(tm) was done at about the same time. Click-free detected hover over links and if the mouse was "still" for time t1, the image could be reversed or altered; after time, t2, the link would execute. Times t1 and t2 and the error envelope for determining "a still mouse" were designer specifiable and user modifiable, if the web designer wanted.
MouseMenu was done with a desire to widen web experiences and click-free was for those with difficulty clicking such as fibromyalgia or those with using alternative and awkward x-y pointers. Discussions were held with the NIH for funding & for a patent-into-public-domain but they did not go anywhere.
We may all pay dearly for mouse movement controls and hover-clicks in the near future if subsequently patented by SCO or the ilk.
I think this was 1998. Lawyer Donne (Dunne?) Esq. in Brattleboro VT handled some of the paper work with the NIH, pro-bono, according to recall.
Web research by Jay and others did not find any prior instances or discussions of similar efforts.
These were done just after multi-image changing rollovers were introduced (apparently) by Ronin. Multi-image rollovers were "adopted" within a few months at the IBM and BMW sites and then "taken" for use on the Netscape Developers site under "steal this script".
Slashdot Mirror
Dear Inditek,
"VotePact.com is a better alternative", NOT.
It doesn't work, or, VotePact would work fine if no one cheats. Snort.
e.g.
A Bush 'supporter' signs up and lies and votes for Bush.
A Kerry 'supporter' sings up and tells the truth and votes for Badnarik.
Net result, one less vote for Kerry. Ditto the reverse.
By keeping the focus on strategy VotePair avoids this downside (and did so from the beginning). VotePact has no answer to cheaters.
Workitout. An exercise for the reader.
So, which is McBride suing someone about, something he created as an Inventor? Something he created as an Author? Or something that some other inventor or author has exclusive rights to?
Perhaps someone did earlier imaginings and implementations of either, it is impossible to say with the current, broken, patent/IP "system".
In mouse-menu the user could use a loop or a cross to stimulate the menu popup. THe cross, like a cross of Ankh, or a rapid loop in any of eight directions N, NE, E, SE, S SW, W, NW executed a menu item. North was recommended to be reserved for "show menu"
It was not difficult to to distinguish such otherwise-not-usually-occurring mouse motions; the timing and error envelopes had designer settable, user tunable, stored in cookie levels for timing or error envelopes.
An eight-way menu degenerates cleanly into a four way menu by using only four items and starting out with a different error envelope specs.
Click-free(tm) was done at about the same time. Click-free detected hover over links and if the mouse was "still" for time t1, the image could be reversed or altered; after time, t2, the link would execute. Times t1 and t2 and the error envelope for determining "a still mouse" were designer specifiable and user modifiable, if the web designer wanted.
MouseMenu was done with a desire to widen web experiences and click-free was for those with difficulty clicking such as fibromyalgia or those with using alternative and awkward x-y pointers. Discussions were held with the NIH for funding & for a patent-into-public-domain but they did not go anywhere.
We may all pay dearly for mouse movement controls and hover-clicks in the near future if subsequently patented by SCO or the ilk.
I think this was 1998. Lawyer Donne (Dunne?) Esq. in Brattleboro VT handled some of the paper work with the NIH, pro-bono, according to recall.
Web research by Jay and others did not find any prior instances or discussions of similar efforts.
These were done just after multi-image changing rollovers were introduced (apparently) by Ronin. Multi-image rollovers were "adopted" within a few months at the IBM and BMW sites and then "taken" for use on the Netscape Developers site under "steal this script".
Jay Nickson
One of the better groups of people on this issue can be reached starting at http://www.eGovOs.org.
egovos for eGov Open Source, naturally.
The people at there are also responsive, like, if you ask them a question they answer this century.
Have a good talk.