Paul Libbrecht-4 wrote: > > Robert, > > I believe, precisely, the objective of such a thread is to be helped by > knowledgeable techies into being able to do what you say. > > If Johnson gave only 3 lines of details, such as claimed patent URLs or > dates, we might easily be able to tell him the pointer of a publication > that would discourage such patent-trolling. > > paul >
I'm sorry. I assumed the information I provided would lead any resourceful techie to the details. At any rate here is some additional information: Patent Claim: http://www.google.com/patents?id=oFwIAAAAEBAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=6275821&hl=en&ei=57ZLTs7jHs3HsQKWvsjcCA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCkQ6AEwAA Background: http://www.ndcalblog.com/2011/07/ebay-prevails-in-limiting-patent.html Ebay/Microsoft suit: http://www.whda.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/2011.5.12-MO-Ebay-v.-Parts-River.pdf Adobe suit: http://news.priorsmart.com/adobe-systems-v-kelora-systems-l4in/ Consequently, they have been known to act on these threats. I don't think it would be prudent to ignore them. At any rate, lawyers will be involved and they aren't cheap. Until the suits have been played out with the likes of eBay, Microsoft, and Adobe, potentially anyone who uses faceted search systems could potentially be at risk. Take it for what it's worth. Don't shoot the messenger. -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Faceted-Search-Patent-Lawsuit-Please-Read-tp3259475p3261514.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
