Newsgroups: comp.misc
Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca!mroussel
From: mroussel@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Marc Roussel)
Subject: Re: AT&T owns X-windows ??  (was Re: Software Patents)
Message-ID: <1991Mar2.232430.21510@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca>
Organization: Department of Chemistry, University of Toronto
References: <1804@pdxgate.UUCP> <1991Mar1.124740.26026@pmsmam.uucp> <1991Mar02.090410.24500@eecs.wsu.edu>
Date: Sat, 2 Mar 1991 23:24:30 GMT

In article <1991Mar02.090410.24500@eecs.wsu.edu> pcooper@yoda.UUCP
(Phil Cooper - CS495) writes:
>   Well, AT&T does not own X-Windows per se, but they do hold a patent on the
>back store method of refreshing windows in a GUI.  X-Windows (along with just
>about every other GUI system) uses back store techniques, and AT&T has
>recently decided to enforce that patent.  Sooo, it looks like a lot of 
>companies will be paying hefty licensing fees, which of course will be passed
>on to the consumers.  Screwed once again by the A-holes at AT&T.

I think that this is misdirected anger.  AT&T has a patent, which it is
well within its rights to attempt to enforce.  Instead, you should be
angry at

	  a) The idiots in the patent office who granted this patent.
	  b) The legislators whose patent laws allow such patents to
	     even be considered.

As to all of this costing us money, Phil is right, but only because
everybody is going to have to retain lawyers to fend off AT&T.  I can't
believe that the patent will in the end be upheld in court.

				Marc R. Roussel
                                mroussel@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca
