Jeroen:
Was able to confirm first patent was rejected - i.e.
http://nl.ecodoc.mineco.fgov.be/BASIS/BREV/web/brevwebdut11/DDW?W%3DTI+PH+IS+%27TECHNOLOGIE+EN+BUSINESSMODEL+INZAKE%27%26M%3D2%26K%3D004/0623%26R%3DY%26U%3D1
but what about the second one?
http://nl.ecodoc.mineco.fgov.be/BASIS/BREV/web/brevwebdut11/DDW?W%3DTI+PH+IS+%27TECHNOLOGIE+EN+BUSINESSMODEL+INZAKE%27%26M%3D1%26K%3D005/0340%26R%3DY%26U%3D1
does not look like that one was rejected. any advise Jeroen?
thanks
joe baptista
On Thu, 13 Oct 2005, Joe Baptista wrote:
On Thu, 13 Oct 2005, Jeroen Massar wrote:
Just a little clarification for the archives as this is of course again
mis-propaganda etc....
Not mispropaganda sureley. Its more to the point to say we dont speaken
the dutch.
Your report that both applications were rejected pleases me. I myself
considered the attempt ridiculous. I'm not sure the process of adding a
label to a database can be patented. If it can alot of people are in
trouble.
TLDs do have intellectual property value - but that is in the database
copyright, not in the technical administrative proceedure.
Cheers
joe baptista
On Wed, 2005-10-12 at 15:58 -0400, Joe Baptista wrote:
Yes - both patents attempt to take control of the adding of tlds to a root
zone file. The second patent recorded on 6 July 2005 is an attempt to
further recognize the proceedure as being commercial. Will need some
native speakers to make out the exact wording on the original patents.
<SNIP>
http://nl.ecodoc.mineco.fgov.be/BASIS/BREV/web/brevwebdut11/DDW?W%3DTI+PH+IS+%27TECHNOLOGIE+EN+BUSINESSMODEL+INZAKE%27%26M%3D2%26K%3D004/0623%26R%3DY%26U%3D1
http://nl.ecodoc.mineco.fgov.be/BASIS/BREV/web/brevwebdut11/DDW?W%3DTI+PH+IS+%27TECHNOLOGIE+EN+BUSINESSMODEL+INZAKE%27%26M%3D1%26K%3D005/0340%26R%3DY%26U%3D1
For Non Dutch Speaking people, these two URL's both contain a very
important part:
8<----------------
Beperkingen: 4. GEWEIGERD / AFGEWEZEN 20050404
---------------->8
Which translates to:
8<----------------
Limitations: 4. REJECTED 20050404
---------------->8
In other words, nobody is getting any patent.
There would be a lot of prior art anyway ;)
Now back to your normal IETF schedule....
Greets,
Jeroen
_______________________________________________
Pr-plan mailing list
Pr-plan(_at_)LAIR(_dot_)LIONPOST(_dot_)NET
http://LAIR.LIONPOST.NET/mailman/listinfo/pr-plan
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf