Re: Article on Microsoft patents and Caller ID

spf-discuss

Re: Article on Microsoft patents and Caller ID

2004-09-21 08:49:42

Paul Iadonisi said:

  So go ahead, Meng, answer if you want.  But personally, I think it's a
waste of time to bark up this tree.  Chuck Mead's got the right
approach, I think...just keep publishing what went on to bring on this
fiasco.


I will continue to do just that. Look for another article late this
evening. I have some more reporting and assessment I want to do.

--
csm(_at_)moongroup(_dot_)com
Chief Tech and Bottle Washer

[More with this subject...]

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
Article on Microsoft patents and Caller ID, william(at)elan.net RE: Article on Microsoft patents and Caller ID, guy Re: Article on Microsoft patents and Caller ID, Rodolfo Sikora Re: Article on Microsoft patents and Caller ID, Paul Iadonisi Re: Article on Microsoft patents and Caller ID, Chuck Mead <= RE: Article on Microsoft patents and Caller ID, william(at)elan.net Re: Article on Microsoft patents and Caller ID, Meng Weng Wong Re: Article on Microsoft patents and Caller ID, Meng Weng Wong Re: Article on Microsoft patents and Caller ID, Chuck Mead Re: Article on Microsoft patents and Caller ID, Meng Weng Wong Re: Article on Microsoft patents and Caller ID, Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. <amitchell(_at_)isipp(_dot_)com> Re: Article on Microsoft patents and Caller ID, David Re: Article on Microsoft patents and Caller ID, Frank Ellermann RE: Article on Microsoft patents and Caller ID, Hallam-Baker, Phillip Re: Article on Microsoft patents and Caller ID, Rodolfo Sikora

Previous by Date:	Re: Article on Microsoft patents and Caller ID, Paul Iadonisi
Next by Date:	Re: Is SPF Authenication or Authorization?, Meng Weng Wong
Previous by Thread:	Re: Article on Microsoft patents and Caller ID, Paul Iadonisi
Next by Thread:	RE: Article on Microsoft patents and Caller ID, william(at)elan.net
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]