This patent would appear to fall under the reverse doctrine of equivalents. Altavista's patent is EXTREMELY broad, and unless Mr. Renquiest is feeling particularly vindictive these days, there is no way he and his peers will find this patent enforceable. The doctrine above, which comes from Graver Tank & Manufacturing Company vs. Linde Air Products Co (1950), states that where a patented device is so far changed in principle from a patented article that it performs the same or a similar function in a substantially different way, but nonetheless falls withihn the literal words of the claim', there is no infringement. Sounds like Google's PageRank to me.
Well you know, I actually thought about that. The problem here is that Access is very specific about SQL constructs. For some reason (I think it's monopolism, but call it whatever) Microsoft's program doesn't allow you to use any MySQL functions or constructs (example: the if() function). So for anything but the most basic queries, Access dies. This is definitely a 'feature' of Access, not ODBC.
I produce the Tv show for my local high school, and have recently become the target of macrovision. Sony has saw it fit to cause all their video cameras to immediately self-destruct upon trying to record macrovisioned material. However, using copywritten material for the news is explicitly protected as fair use. Unfortunately sony does not provide a provision for legal fair use. I eventually managed to get around the problem, but I see now very clearly that non-circumvention limitations would severely limit protected speech in my high school publications.
Slashdot Mirror
the word you are after is "consideration"
This patent would appear to fall under the reverse doctrine of equivalents. Altavista's patent is EXTREMELY broad, and unless Mr. Renquiest is feeling particularly vindictive these days, there is no way he and his peers will find this patent enforceable. The doctrine above, which comes from Graver Tank & Manufacturing Company vs. Linde Air Products Co (1950), states that where a patented device is so far changed in principle from a patented article that it performs the same or a similar function in a substantially different way, but nonetheless falls withihn the literal words of the claim', there is no infringement. Sounds like Google's PageRank to me.
Yep, using a passthrough sure did the trick. Thanks a bunch. :)
Well you know, I actually thought about that. The problem here is that Access is very specific about SQL constructs. For some reason (I think it's monopolism, but call it whatever) Microsoft's program doesn't allow you to use any MySQL functions or constructs (example: the if() function). So for anything but the most basic queries, Access dies. This is definitely a 'feature' of Access, not ODBC.
I produce the Tv show for my local high school, and have recently become the target of macrovision. Sony has saw it fit to cause all their video cameras to immediately self-destruct upon trying to record macrovisioned material. However, using copywritten material for the news is explicitly protected as fair use. Unfortunately sony does not provide a provision for legal fair use. I eventually managed to get around the problem, but I see now very clearly that non-circumvention limitations would severely limit protected speech in my high school publications.
For those interested in a comprehensive crypto site with interactive tools, there's no better choice than...
http://library.advanced.org/28005/