Re: Color Navigator 4.1 - L*
Re: Color Navigator 4.1 - L*
- Subject: Re: Color Navigator 4.1 - L*
- From: Ken Fleisher <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 09:55:33 -0400
On Oct 25, 2005, at 9:38 AM, Graeme Gill wrote:
No, because like all patents, they can claim all they want, but
what is actually patented, is their claims minus all the prior
art, which they often don't bother to specify.
I wasn't making any comment one way or another about the validity of
their claim. Only trying to identify the patent that they are claiming
their software is based on (since that is the question that was
raised--"Exactly what it is they think they have a patent for is never
specified."). The patent office thought their method was novel enough
to actually issue the patent (this is not just an application) and yes,
whether you believe their claims to be valid or not, the patents are
still searchable on the internet.
I'm not trying to make a fight. I only hoped to reduce some of the
ambiguity about the L* patent claim. I smell a long, drawn out, and
off-topic battle brewing, so I'll now respectfully withdraw from this
thread. If I don't respond to any further posts on the subject, don't
take it personally. :-)
Cheers,
Ken Fleisher
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Colorsync-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden