Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!wuarchive!emory!att!linac!midway!gargoyle!chinet!laird
From: laird@chinet.chi.il.us (Laird J. Heal)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Hayes Microcomputer lawsuit???
Message-ID: <1991Feb05.115506.13471@chinet.chi.il.us>
Date: 5 Feb 91 11:55:06 GMT
References: <3759.27a62207@hayes.uucp> <83693@sgi.sgi.com> <1991Feb03.184636.16688@ddsw1.MCS.COM>
Organization: Chinet - Chicago Public Access UNIX
Lines: 33

In article <1991Feb03.184636.16688@ddsw1.MCS.COM> karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM (Karl Denninger) writes:
>In article <83693@sgi.sgi.com> vjs@rhyolite.wpd.sgi.com (Vernon Schryver) writes:
>>In article <3759.27a62207@hayes.uucp>, tnixon@hayes.uucp writes:
>>>   ...    One such 
>>> patent [...]relates to the guard time associated with the "+++" 
>>> escape sequence used to change the modem from online to command 
>>> state.
>>
>>>...
>>It is strange and unfortunate that such an obvious idea should have a
>>defendable patent.  Yes, the idea is obvious even before reading a Hayes
>>(compatible) manual.

>Yes, it is.

While the concept of claiming intellectual property rights in the escape
sequence seems trivial to me too, I have to say that 'obvious' ideas are
often so simple only after they have been (1) reduced to practice and (2)
explained to the masses.

I have not seen the patent or an abstract, but if the subject matter
were, for instance, storing a user-selectable value for the guard time
in an internal register, then that might cross the very fine line
between "methods" which are not patentable and "processes" which are.

There is nothing more abhorrent than a patent suit, but it serves to
reward the truly inventive among us (that is, if they teamed up with
the truly litigious).  On the whole, society benefits from such an
action, but I cannot help but hope that the defendants win reversal
on appeal in this case.
-- 
Laird J. Heal                           The Usenet is dead!
Here:  laird@chinet.chi.il.us		Long Live the Usenet!