[A2k] PATNEWS: Apple's new crappy patent on disabling cellphones

JotHal jozef.halbersztadt at gmail.com
Sat Sep 29 08:48:43 PDT 2012

2012/9/29 Erik Josefsson <erik.hjalmar.josefsson at gmail.com>:
> On 15/09/12 10:08, Erik Josefsson wrote:
>> Would then a regexp like this one be considered prior art?
>> ^((?>[a-zA-Z\d!#$%&'*+\-/=?^_`{|}~]+\x20*|"((?=[\x01-\x7f])[^"\\]|\\[\x01-\x7f])*"\x20*)*(?<angle><))?((?!\.)(?>\.?[a-zA-Z\d!#$%&'*+\-/=?^_`{|}~]+)+|"((?=[\x01-\x7f])[^"\\]|\\[\x01-\x7f])*")@(((?!-)[a-zA-Z\d\-]+(?<!-)\.)+[a-zA-Z]{2,}|\[(((?(?<!\[)\.)(25[0-5]|2[0-4]\d|[01]?\d?\d)){4}|[a-zA-Z\d\-]*[a-zA-Z\d]:((?=[\x01-\x7f])[^\\\[\]]|\\[\x01-\x7f])+)\])(?(angle)>)$
> I never got an answer to this question.
> Can a peer to patent proponent please step forward?
> In particular someone from Google would be nice since they are now
> apparently engaged in the lip service:
> http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/09/patent-busting-crowdsourced/
> And no, I will never forgive Beth Novak for saying killing software patents
> is not a political option only one year after we did it in the EU.

Berth Noveck
“There is some irony, of course, to creating open, peer review
processes to augment closed, proprietary patent grants. We are
applying techniques and lessons of open source programming to an arena
that is the anathema to most open source adherents. Arguably, we are
engaging the community in closing off innovation from the community.
This makes sense, first, because undoing patents altogether, including
software patents, is not politically in the offing.”

Consolidated version of the amended directive "on the patentability of
computer-aided inventions" which was about to result from the plenary
vote of July 2005.

'JotHal' jozef [dot] halbersztadt [at] gmail [dot] com
Internet Society Poland http://www.isoc.org.pl

More information about the A2k mailing list