[access-uk] Re: Freedom Scientific suit against GW Micro
- From: "George Bell" <george@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <access-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 9 Aug 2008 20:40:20 +0100
I think it is also fair to point out that Patents can be
challenged before they are actually approved.
George.
From: access-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:access-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Brian Hartgen
Sent: 09 August 2008 20:36
To: access-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [access-uk] Re: Freedom Scientific suit against GW
Micro
Kevin, thank goodness someone is now talking some sense!
I thought I was on my own feeling this way but
obviously not.
----- Original Message -----
From: Kevin Lloyd <mailto:kevin.lloyd3@xxxxxxx>
To: access-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Saturday, August 09, 2008 8:23 PM
Subject: [access-uk] Re: Freedom Scientific suit
against GW Micro
Ray, if someone has patented bullshit then I'm
afraid you may find yourself
as the subject of a suit case after this mail.
You're absolutely right that Arthur C Clarke could
have made a fortune by
suing those who stole his ideas but the fact is that
he spent his time
writing fiction and not patenting ideas.
It is true that it's not a dignified way of going
about your business to sue
your competitors and somehow there's a view on this
list that we're talking
about a pair of charities here. We're not. These
are companies who are
both making a lot of profit from selling products to
a confined market.
There will always be screen reader camps supporting
their own particular
product's vendor and some strange kind of misplaced
loyalty. I'd suggest
you should put this aside and look at the facts.
Freedom Scientific were
the company that introduced place markers and
scripting. If they have
patented the place marker idea and any other company
infringes that patent,
they have every right to feel agrieved and sue.
Copyright and patent laws
are there to protect the companies that put in
funding to research and
develop ideas and technologies and prevent them
being ripped off by other
companies that come along and take those ideas at a
fraction of the price.
I think GW Micro can think themselves lucky that FS
didn't patent other
ideas such as the keyboard training functionality
that Window-eyes brought
in with version 6 that JAWS had in version 3.2 back
in 1999 or earlier and
I'm sure there are a few other examples.
Regards.
Kevin
E-mail: kevin.lloyd3@xxxxxxx
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rays Home" <rays-home@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <access-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, August 09, 2008 4:32 PM
Subject: [access-uk] Re: Freedom Scientific suit
against GW Micro
> Yes, OK colin the place markers scam and legal try
on!
>
> I've commented in passing on this one, but all
that could possibly be said
> has been said on the GW list and there blogg.
>
> My view - and I'm a Window-Eyes user - is that if
this sort of thing is
> upheld by the US courts, and it's going to a jury
hearing - the law is
> indeed an Ass! those who reckon to be well
informed assert you can sue in
> essence for pinching an idea - which I don't
believe GW was intentionally
> or otherwise doing. Just think how much money
Arthur C Clarke (could)
> have made from the idea of geo-stationary
satilites, which he thought of
> 20 years before one was actually put up.
>
> I say it is one thing to have an idea, quite
another to make it work
> propperly. GW, on the surface, is being sued for
doing it like it should
> have been done from the start, i.e. propperly!
>
> Not that I'm convinced that's wy FS is sueing.
The truth is more likely
> they cannot stomach a superior scripting model
which epens up a more
> powerful scripting capability allied to a much
more open method and
> co-ordination via SCript Central for the wider
production of scripts which
> should no longer be restricted to a tight cotarie
or priesthood of those
> working with a proprietory scripting language.
>
> This is just one ingrediant in the formula for
keeping the price of JFW
> and its gravy train milking more than is tryuly
justified from the sale
> and support of a product that has a bit less going
for it than is
> popularly believed.
>
> Well, that's my 2p - or 4 cents worth! (Note I
didn't do the mark up in
> the other direction, (smile).
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Colin Howard" <colin@xxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [access-uk] Freedom Scientific suit
against GW Micro
>
>
>> Greetings,
>>
>> From: Sun Sounds of Arizona
<bill.pasco@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 09:19:01 -0700
>>
>> Much of what you say is true, however, I have to
take issue with two
>> points.
>>
>> 1. You are correct that if it goes on long
enough, the courts will
>> eventually decide on the merits. However, this
type of law suit is
>> rarely
>> intended to go to conclusion by the plaintiff.
It is designed to
>> intimidate. The defendant must defend themselves
legally which is
>> expensive
>> even if they are totally innocent. Many out
matched companies will just
>> fold their tent and back down rather than stay
the course in court. This
>> is
>> how they stay in business, but they have to give
up the point, and then
>> spend money to redo the method or technology
which got them in hot water.
>> And this with no legal ruling on the merits.
Just as with Serotek, it's
>> bullying plain and simple.
>>
>> 2. You said that, if asked by the company
lawyers, we should refrain to
>> comment. I have a big problem with that
thinking. Sure, the principles,
>> FS
>> and GW have to refrain, however, we as free
citizens have every right to
>> say
>> what we think or believe. WE have the right as
consumers to either
>> support
>> GW Micro, or bitch to Freedom Scientific. WE
have the right to boycott,
>> write letters to the editor or what ever we want,
and nothing, as the
>> bill
>> of rights says, should be done to abridge this
basic right. WE may
>> choose
>> as individuals to be silent for fear, or because
we really don't know, or
>> we
>> may be very vocal, even if we are mistaken. WE
may help, we may hurt,
>> there
>> are far more examples of free citizens moving
things in a positive
>> direction
>> through being outspoken then there are of silence
leading to a desirable
>> outcome. As you say, what these two private
companies do effects a great
>> number of us, and we do have a right to weigh in.
>>
>> Bill
>>
>>
>> VICUG-L is the Visually Impaired Computer User
Group List.
>> Archived on the World Wide Web at
>>
http://listserv.icors.org/archives/vicug-l.html
>> Signoff:
vicug-l-unsubscribe-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>
> ** To leave the list, click on the
immediately-following link:-
> **
[mailto:access-uk-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe]
> ** If this link doesn't work then send a message
to:
> ** access-uk-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> ** and in the Subject line type
> ** unsubscribe
> ** For other list commands such as vacation mode,
click on the
> ** immediately-following link:-
> **
[mailto:access-uk-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=faq]
> ** or send a message, to
> ** access-uk-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the
Subject:- faq
>
** To leave the list, click on the
immediately-following link:-
**
[mailto:access-uk-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe]
** If this link doesn't work then send a message to:
** access-uk-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
** and in the Subject line type
** unsubscribe
** For other list commands such as vacation mode,
click on the
** immediately-following link:-
**
[mailto:access-uk-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=faq]
** or send a message, to
** access-uk-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the
Subject:- faq
Other related posts:
