Lessig

Thank you for the link.

The English translation is not very clear either.

35 U.S.C. 301 states that:

"Any person at any time may cite to the Office in writing prior art consisting of patents or printed publications which that person believes to have a bearing on the patentability of any claim of a particular patent. If the person explains in writing the pertinency and manner of applying such prior art to at least one claim of the patent, the citation of such prior art and the explanation thereof will become a part of the official file of the patent. At the written request of the person citing the prior art, his or her identity will be excluded from the patent file and kept confidential. "

Thus it would appear that W3C is hoping to raise a "substantial" new question of validity such that Commissioner Rogan will call for a re-examination.

Mr. Berners-Lee's letter, however, is filled with irrelevant FUD (fear, uncertainty, and doubt) about the economic impact of the patent's validity which of course should be of absolutely no concern to the patent office. Issuing valid patents is the only concern of the patent office.

Interestingly, it's not clear if Mr. Berners-Lee is attempting to help Microsoft, or wound them further....

In his letter he states:

"This feature provides critical flexibility to Web browsers, and giving users seamless access to important features that extend the browsers' capabilities. Nearly every Web user today relies on plug-in applications that add services such as streaming audio and video, advanced graphics and a variety of special purpose tools."

If the patent is valid, it just became more valuable.

Commonly confused with European-style opposition, U.S. re-examination, even under the new rules, is very friendly to the patentee.

Unless the prior art is on point - and even if it is - the re-examination process allows the patentee the opportunity to amend his claims such that they are still infringed, yet avoid the prior art. A common result of US re-examination is a stronger US patent.

Had Mr. Berners-Lee seen fit to provide this prior art to Microsoft for use in their litigation, it would have probably been put to better use. Juries are more sympathetic to prior art than examiners... especially when in the hands of a skilled litigator.

You see, the thing is, unless it is your own patent, using prior art in a U.S. re-examination is like throwing it away.

And since this is considered obvious to most U.S. patent attorneys, one wonders what Mr. Berners-Lee is really up to....

eric stasik

well all the time we see patents,patents,patents, go i am sick of it.

another interesting projekt:

PureVision Toric