hi... i've been following the issue of patents (software/internet related) for awhile. the governing body(s) of the internet W3C/ICANN/Etc.. have been wary about "any" technology getting into the net which contains IP that can be "owned" by a given group.. Hence their "obsessiveness" with standards.... this is a situation that has been waiting to occur. the fact that a small company has successfully sued for patent infringement is part of the game.. the issue msoft has is that they got nailed... the issue the larger community has, is that this effects a huge number of people, both as developers, and consumers.... the hastily created conference is an indication that a number of people are scared... this combined with the accacia (sp?) patent issue is simply an indication that there are still rules/structure to be created for dealing with technology on the internet... as for now.. there is no really 100% solid way to ensure that a piece of technology is not infringing upon someone else's patent. the solutions proposed by msoft may/may not stand up upon examination... things may indeed have to be rewritten to work... or.. msoft/sun/ibm/etc... may get together.. throw in a bunch of cash... and buy up relevant patents, and place them in the public domain.. or the US gov might step in and start to revise the process for issuing patents.. trust me, the last two suggestions are not going to occur!!! because as much as msoft screams right now, they would rather cease to live than stop the patent process.. msoft plays this game as hard as anyone... they just got smacked this time, and developers are feeling the pain... peace... -bruce -----Original Message----- From: thelist-bounces at lists.evolt.org [mailto:thelist-bounces at lists.evolt.org]On Behalf Of Jeff Howden Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2003 4:39 PM To: thelist at lists.evolt.org Subject: RE: [thelist] IE update ppk, ><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>< > From: Peter-Paul Koch > > > The patent says that the executing plug-in shall be > > started via embedded elements in a hypertext document. > > If you use document.write from an external script to > > print the needed tags you get around the patent since > > the tags aren't embedded in the hypertext document any > > more. > > OK, I'm prepared to believe that. > > However, the solution needs two script tags, which are > embedded in the document. They don't count? (Could be, > of course, but it sounds kind of silly) ><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>< technically, the scripting *must* be in an external js file. this is immune from the patent claim as the plug-in isn't being "embedded" into the same documents that contains the tags for that purpose. .jeff Jeff Howden - Web Application Specialist Résumé - http://jeffhowden.com/about/resume/ Code Library - http://evolt.jeffhowden.com/jeff/code/ -- * * Please support the community that supports you. * * http://evolt.org/help_support_evolt/ For unsubscribe and other options, including the Tip Harvester and archives of thelist go to: http://lists.evolt.org Workers of the Web, evolt !