did we already talk about this?
<http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?
Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%
2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=6411947.PN.&OS=PN/6411947&RS=PN/6411947>
United States Patent 6,411,947
Rice , et al. June 25, 2002
A method for automatically interpreting an electronic message,
including the steps of (a) receiving the electronic message from a
source; (b) interpreting the electronic message using a rule base
and case base knowledge engine; and (c) classifying the electronic
message as at least one of (i) being able to be responded to
automatically; and (ii) requiring assistance from a human operator.
The method for automatically interpreting an electronic message may
also include the step of retrieving one or more predetermined
responses corresponding to the interpretation of the electronic
message from a repository for automatic delivery to the source.
Anyway, the company holding this patent is suing a bunch of companies
now in Texas.
It occurs to me that there isn't anything in that Abstract that
procmail can't do.
Maybe we should send the output of man procmail to Texas?
--
Monique: He keeps putting his testicles all over me.
Lane: Excuse me?
____________________________________________________________
procmail mailing list Procmail homepage: http://www.procmail.org/
procmail(_at_)lists(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)DE
http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/procmail