On Friday, Jun 4, 2004, at 07:56 US/Pacific, Russell McMahon wrote:

> This is really sad - the prior art here is piled very deep - the
> examiner must not have looked very far to have let this one through.
>
So has anyone looked at the actual patent yet?  While the patent system
is quite flawed, the press has a lousy track record of accurately
reporting just what a "frivolous" patent is supposed to cover.  The FAT
filesystem patent being another good example of this...

No one has mentioned watches yet.  Or all the creative uses Apple got
out of their one-button mouse...

BillW

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
mailto:piclist-unsubscribe-request@mitvma.mit.edu