Posted by Grant Robertson on 04/02/07 20:33

In article <%z1Qh.28891$5u5.13967@reader1.news.saunalahti.fi>,
jkorpela@cs.tut.fi says...
> since constructive discussion never started.

Constructive discussion never started because you chose to insult me
early on.

> The real question, or part thereof, was revealed all too late,

Who are you to decide what my real question is?


> The OP now has the answer to the question he originally asked
> (and still appears on the Subject line), though 1) it is completely useless
> for his purposes,

It was not completely useless. I have now learned that neither HTML nor
XML have original patents. I can now compare that with the number of
submarine and bogus patents that are cropping up in attempts to cash in
on both. I now have more information to help me decide whether I should
go to the trouble of patenting my standard.

Interestingly, no one in comp.text.xml chose to insult me so I got my
information quickly and efficiently.


> 2) he could have found a more reliable answer by
> contacting the patent offices of the countries he is interested in.

I posted in the newsgroup after searching for over an hour among various
patent search engines and on W3C.com. Not weeks, I know, but the types of
hits I was getting made it clear that searching for "HTML" and "patent"
was not going to be helpful. One can not simply call up the USPTO and ask
them if there is a patent on HTML. They will tell you to get a patent
lawyer and do patent search. Not an inexpensive proposition. In your
arrogance, you have again assumed something that is not true just to have
something to insult someone about. Perhaps you need to take a step back
and give people some breathing room.

I was hoping that someone could site a source somewhere that told me for
sure one way or another. Instead all I got was you taking the
"conversation" off on some tangent with your arrogance and patronizing
attitude.

[Back to original message]