Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.basic.visual.misc > #267

Re: MS Word problem

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

David Kerber <dkerber@WarrenRogersAssociates.invalid> wrote
in
news:MPG.285ff465dfc7d37098972a@news.eternal-september.org: 

>> > There are almost no *truly* innovative ideas anymore,
>> > and some 
>> 
>> 
>>     I have thought for a very long time, that in any given
>>     language to 
>> address a specific problem, and the problem is addressed
>> many to the fourth or so, that exact source code
>> replication is inevitable, so in that context, when the
>> particular replicator comes up with the exact solution,
>> independent of the discovery or exposure to the
>> originating source code, how has he violated anything?
> 
> That's just the way patents work.  Even if you come up with
> something completely independently, if somebody else has
> already patented it, you're in violation; you don't have to
> have copied anything.  It's not the same as a trade secret,
> where somebody else is perfectly within their rights to
> re-invent the wheel. 



Here's an example.....

http://www.emailman.com/web/servers.html

...."PrivateMail's PMKey Server  installs as easily as an 
office application, and its configuration wizard helps you get 
your own mail server up & running in minutes. Features include 
patent-pending filtering technology, receipted messages, 
secure message delivery,"...........

What can be patented in an e-mail filtering system ?

IMO, nothing.....You have a list of items to look at in each 
e-mail....each item in the list has one or more 'blacklisted' 
data sets, or a fuzzy interpreter based on regex expresions.

That's certainly nothing innovative either. The e-mails are 
stored in a database format. The db engine then provides 
subsets of data that contain the criteria it's looking for, 
and the e-mail system either deletes it, or forwards it, or 
whatever it does.

Back to comp.lang.basic.visual.misc | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

MS Word problem "Mike Williams" <Mike@WhiskyAndCoke.com> - 2011-06-11 08:43 +0100
  Re: MS Word problem "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2011-06-11 08:39 -0400
  Re: MS Word problem "Auric__" <not.my.real@email.address> - 2011-06-11 15:10 +0000
    Re: MS Word problem "Access Developer" <accdevel@gmail.com> - 2011-06-12 12:41 -0500
      Re: MS Word problem Michael Cole <invalid@microsoft.com> - 2011-06-13 15:04 +1000
        Re: MS Word problem "mbyerley" <mbyerley@byerley.net> - 2011-06-13 09:52 -0400
          Re: MS Word problem Michael Cole <invalid@microsoft.com> - 2011-06-14 10:32 +1000
            Re: MS Word problem "mbyerley" <mbyerley@byerley.net> - 2011-06-13 23:00 -0400
  Re: MS Word problem "StrandElectric" <Strand@dummyspit> - 2011-06-12 05:18 +1000
  Re: MS Word problem "David Kaye" <sfdavidkaye2@yahoo.com> - 2011-06-11 12:54 -0700
  Re: MS Word problem DanS <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@r.o.a.d.r.u.n.n.e.r.c.o.m> - 2011-06-12 11:07 -0500
    Re: MS Word problem "mbyerley" <mbyerley@byerley.net> - 2011-06-12 16:43 -0400
      Re: MS Word problem "StrandElectric" <Strand@dummyspit> - 2011-06-13 07:07 +1000
      Re: MS Word problem David Kerber <dkerber@WarrenRogersAssociates.invalid> - 2011-06-13 11:18 -0400
        Re: MS Word problem DanS <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@r.o.a.d.r.u.n.n.e.r.c.o.m> - 2011-06-15 11:51 -0500
          Re: MS Word problem David Kerber <dkerber@WarrenRogersAssociates.invalid> - 2011-06-15 13:16 -0400
  Re: MS Word problem Dee Earley <dee.earley@icode.co.uk> - 2011-06-13 09:15 +0100

csiph-web