Oh and I just remembered that in Year 10 I had a mandatory subject called "Problem Solving and Analysis" Which was all logic puzzles and freeform learning based. So it is tought somewhere.
Coming from Australia, I learnt all that you just mentioned and alot more.
What I find interesting is that I learnt more World History than American Children do. It seems that for the most part American learning is almost exclusively America-Centric.
That is how it seems when I talk to Americans about history.
I think the assumption that non-American's find those topics to be a 'Complete Mystery' is ridiculous. I know students from Australia, New Zealand, Canada, South America, England and Holland who all learnt about that sort of thing. Not only that but we had many many Asian exchange students to my school and in many cases their Maths and English was better than ours, and they easily kept up in Physics, Biology and Chemistry.
Where are these people that you mention who know nothing about these subjects?
Why do people post such things?
Those two patent applications are manufacturing applications based around the implementation of two pieces of apparatus and are therefore not, I repeat NOT, patents on recipes.
IANAL
Re-reading the patent application It would seem that there is no provision for e-commerce in it.
Actually paying attention to the claim statement indicates that the patent only specifies a system that assists in the selection of the data, not in returning the selected options to the server.
For Example: Lets say There are a group of drop-down boxes on my page, the first is the TYPE, second is SUB-TYPE, third is SUB-TYPE2, and the fourth is OPTIONS. below these drop down boxes is a field for the display of a price. What the patent claims as the invention is the following process:
My server sends the client all the potential TYPE's, SUB-TYPE's, SUB-TYPE2's, OPTIONS, all the resultant prices, and all the rules governing combinations of the above.
The client then works out for itself how the rules apply and what the price is, so it doesnt have to request the pricing information from the server every time a combination is selected.
Also it claims invention of automatically selecting the first valid TYPE, SUB-TYPE, SUB-TYPE2 or OPTION for any given TYPE, SUB-TYPE, SUB-TYPE2 or OPTION selcted. (IE, I Select OPTION A, so the system selects the first valid TYPE, SUB-TYPE and SUB-TYPE2 that will let me have OPTION A)
The Patent description ends there, it seems to lay no claim to using this 'invention' to return the options selected to the server, it is described often as an information device, not a transaction device.
Im not sure if using this within a transaction would violate patent law or not. Because you are using and extending the invention, it would make sense that it didn infringe. But like I said before...
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer and this does not constitute legal advice. Nor will I accept responsibility if you are caught infringing on this patent after reading what I have typed here.
1."Do you use drop-down menus, alphanumerical input boxes, check boxes, radio buttons or sliders to allow client side-processing of data?" Yes, but thats not what the patent covers. It involves the use of these things, but is not a patent on them or for them.
2."Utilize SQL, HTML, ActiveX, Java, Perl, JavaScript or JScript to do so" As above, none of these are being patented by microsoft
3."Employ arrays, stacks, queues, linked lists, or decision trees to organize things" Again this is not what is being patented here.
4."Microsoft's new patent for Dynamically adjusting data values and enforcing valid combinations of the data in response to remote user input Oooh, so close, but you missed again.
The patent refers to items 1, 2 and 3, imlicitly or explicitly in their patent as things that are used to achieve the 'invention' they have 'created' However number 4 is the opposite. They dont adjust data values and enforce valid combinations "in response" to remote user input. They use a process that causes the remote user to apply the rules themselves in an effort to decrease the load on the server to improve the speed of access to the page.
Also, although items 1, 2 and 3 are implicitly or explicitly mentioned in the patent, the use of them is only restricted by this patent if you do the following:
-Use them in such a way that the infrastructure of rules and options you are interacting with is WHOLLY RUN on the client side.
-Use them in a system that is used in relation to pricing for one or more items.
-Returns the result to the server After the client has validated it.
This is my interpretation of the patent after reading it. I assume that someone will soon read it even more carefully than I and debunk what I have said, but it would be nice to see the people posting articles read what they are posting about.
Dont get me wrong, its still too broad and overreaching, but its not as broad as it has been made out to be
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer and this does not constitute legal advice. Nor will I accept responsibility if you are caught infringing on this patent after reading what I have typed here.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh and I just remembered that in Year 10 I had a mandatory subject called "Problem Solving and Analysis" Which was all logic puzzles and freeform learning based. So it is tought somewhere.
Coming from Australia, I learnt all that you just mentioned and alot more. What I find interesting is that I learnt more World History than American Children do. It seems that for the most part American learning is almost exclusively America-Centric. That is how it seems when I talk to Americans about history. I think the assumption that non-American's find those topics to be a 'Complete Mystery' is ridiculous. I know students from Australia, New Zealand, Canada, South America, England and Holland who all learnt about that sort of thing. Not only that but we had many many Asian exchange students to my school and in many cases their Maths and English was better than ours, and they easily kept up in Physics, Biology and Chemistry. Where are these people that you mention who know nothing about these subjects?
Why do people post such things? Those two patent applications are manufacturing applications based around the implementation of two pieces of apparatus and are therefore not, I repeat NOT, patents on recipes. IANAL
Im 18, I remember LORD, especially violet. How many hours I whiled away killing things and flirting with a digital barmaid :-p
And unless its all decided client side. No
Re-reading the patent application It would seem that there is no provision for e-commerce in it.
Actually paying attention to the claim statement indicates that the patent only specifies a system that assists in the selection of the data, not in returning the selected options to the server.
For Example:
Lets say There are a group of drop-down boxes on my page, the first is the TYPE, second is SUB-TYPE, third is SUB-TYPE2, and the fourth is OPTIONS. below these drop down boxes is a field for the display of a price. What the patent claims as the invention is the following process:
My server sends the client all the potential TYPE's, SUB-TYPE's, SUB-TYPE2's, OPTIONS, all the resultant prices, and all the rules governing combinations of the above.
The client then works out for itself how the rules apply and what the price is, so it doesnt have to request the pricing information from the server every time a combination is selected.
Also it claims invention of automatically selecting the first valid TYPE, SUB-TYPE, SUB-TYPE2 or OPTION for any given TYPE, SUB-TYPE, SUB-TYPE2 or OPTION selcted. (IE, I Select OPTION A, so the system selects the first valid TYPE, SUB-TYPE and SUB-TYPE2 that will let me have OPTION A)
The Patent description ends there, it seems to lay no claim to using this 'invention' to return the options selected to the server, it is described often as an information device, not a transaction device.
Im not sure if using this within a transaction would violate patent law or not. Because you are using and extending the invention, it would make sense that it didn infringe. But like I said before...
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer and this does not constitute legal advice. Nor will I accept responsibility if you are caught infringing on this patent after reading what I have typed here.
1."Do you use drop-down menus, alphanumerical input boxes, check boxes, radio buttons or sliders to allow client side-processing of data?" Yes, but thats not what the patent covers. It involves the use of these things, but is not a patent on them or for them.
2."Utilize SQL, HTML, ActiveX, Java, Perl, JavaScript or JScript to do so" As above, none of these are being patented by microsoft
3."Employ arrays, stacks, queues, linked lists, or decision trees to organize things" Again this is not what is being patented here.
4."Microsoft's new patent for Dynamically adjusting data values and enforcing valid combinations of the data in response to remote user input Oooh, so close, but you missed again.
The patent refers to items 1, 2 and 3, imlicitly or explicitly in their patent as things that are used to achieve the 'invention' they have 'created'
However number 4 is the opposite. They dont adjust data values and enforce valid combinations "in response" to remote user input. They use a process that causes the remote user to apply the rules themselves in an effort to decrease the load on the server to improve the speed of access to the page.
Also, although items 1, 2 and 3 are implicitly or explicitly mentioned in the patent, the use of them is only restricted by this patent if you do the following:
-Use them in such a way that the infrastructure of rules and options you are interacting with is WHOLLY RUN on the client side.
-Use them in a system that is used in relation to pricing for one or more items.
-Returns the result to the server After the client has validated it.
This is my interpretation of the patent after reading it. I assume that someone will soon read it even more carefully than I and debunk what I have said, but it would be nice to see the people posting articles read what they are posting about.
Dont get me wrong, its still too broad and overreaching, but its not as broad as it has been made out to be
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer and this does not constitute legal advice. Nor will I accept responsibility if you are caught infringing on this patent after reading what I have typed here.