Igor Chudov wrote:
Read this jaw dropping article about how someone "patented" what has
been done by procmail for many, many years.
http://informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=201802746
``The method and system detailed in the patent describes a way "for
automatically interpreting an electronic message including the steps
of (a) receiving an electronic message from a source; (b) interpreting
the electronic message using a rule base and case base knowledge
engine; and (c) retrieving one or more predetermined responses
corresponding to the interpretation of the electronic message from a
repository for automatic delivery to the source."''
Let's see, spamassassin interprets electronics messages and uses a
rule base to retrieve predetermined responses such as "spam" or "ham".
I do not know if I should laugh or cry, any suggestions?
i
.
This is just another example of poor research for prior art.
The patent system is broken. If a company submits a patent and the
patent is accepted then the company can go around threatening to sue.
Okay we'll settle out of court for much less than it would cost me in
court. Until someone takes them to court and shows prior art.
Just my theory, but I think that unless they are idiots they would never
touch procmail.
Why? because there is a fanatical base for opensource, who probably
would throw in a lot of money just for the chance to take this to court.
Not only that they would also probably counter sue for negligence in
search for prior art. In either of these cases MS would probably step
in and tell the company with the patent to knock it off or pay them to quit.
Because if the company with the patent were to lose, it would seriously
undermine some of the FUD they are spewing out.
