Mood:  don't ask

 Hey everybody! How about a big tepid bowl of ignorant soup?

Now that Microsoft is an ally in protecting the validity of patent 6826744, we can go back to the past and see what kinds of brilliant analysis the software industry had to rely on to protect them from stumbling into a bear trap.

The following comments are from a news blurb April 2007 announcing VCSY had sued Microsoft for infringement of 6826844. I am placing these here because someone on Raging Bull VCSY board posted the article and pointed out some material in one of the posts: http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=VCSY&read=226723

I attempted to post all this on Yahoo VCSY board, but the Yahoo board froze up when I tried to post the first segment, so, I thought I might leave this little bag of flaming poo here so everyone will have some idea what it's like to listen in on a gang of thugs disappointed they won't get a chance to break into your house and cart off everything you've worked hard to achieve.

Enjoy!

http://www.neowin.net/news/main/07/04/21/microsoft-hit-with-patent-suit-over-net 

>>  #1 Posted by Quick Reply on 21 Apr 2007 - 15:55
These definitions are way too vague! Been on notice since February 7? That's plenty of notice, even though .NET framework has been around since 2002! <<

And since the patent was applied for in 1999, plenty had the opportunity to build their own versions of the patent claims to see how they worked. Apparently, Microsoft liked what they saw. I wonder how many are now in the telescopic sights of Raymond Niro and Charles Wade?

>>#2 Posted by noroom on 21 Apr 2007 - 15:56
Booo! Down with software patents! <<

Hissss. Down with people who want to rip off pioneering IP. Give 'em the razzberry!

>>#3 Posted by superhuman on 21 Apr 2007 - 15:57
This is Funny. XML is an open specification. Everyone can use it to build their website. I am not sure why they let them patent it. <<

"Everyone can use XML to build their website." What's funny is you didn't have any idea what that patent said about processing XML. That's why you sound so ignorant now.

>>#4 Posted by ahhell on 21 Apr 2007 - 16:14
MS is going to eat that company for breakfast. <<

Want some bacon with that egg on your face?

>>#5 Posted by chaosblade on 21 Apr 2007 - 16:30
MS is going to buy that company for breakfast <<

Did they leave a tip? Yeah. Here's a tip. Don't talk about things you know nothing about.

>>#6 Posted by +ECEGatorTuro on 21 Apr 2007 - 17:06
MS is going to crap that company out a few hours after breakfast.<<

That was some dump, booboo. Sure you don't need a forklift to get you off that commode?

>>#7 Posted by XeonBuilder on 21 Apr 2007 - 17:12
Are they kidding me?

Everyone wants a piece of Bill pie... How he does buy them and sells them on eBay. <<

But Bill didn't buy them, did he? He settled with them. The day before the Markman Hearing... and you know what that means.

>>#8 Posted by +GreyWolfSC on 21 Apr 2007 - 17:33
What a load. They need to line up suits against the entire computer industry. AJAX is a framework, as is Java, Ruby, HTML, and almost every other programming environment ever used. I wish MS could countersue for harassment.

EDIT: Here's Vertical's company description:

"Vertical Computer Systems, Inc. (VCSY) is a provider of Internet core technologies, administrative software, and derivative software application products through its distribution network."

Now, everyone that their software is derived from can just steamroll right over them since they opened the door.

BONUS: http://www.vcsy.com/investor/stockactivity.php

Their stock is worth 2 cents! lol

Last edited by GreyWolfSC on 21 Apr 2007 - 17:58<<

That's right. The entire industry. It's what we had been warning you clinks for years before. Steamroll over VCSY? I don't think so, fat girl. That rolling sound is just you dropping your doughnut. I'm sure MSFT dearly wanted to be able to countersue VCSY for harrassment, but that's not how it went for Mister Softee. The judge signed off on the case and therefore cancelled any further discussion with extreme prejudice. Case closed. NEXT!

>>  #9 Posted by +azcodemonkey on 21 Apr 2007 - 17:56
LOL I'm completely certain that there is prior art. I worked with a company around the same time that was doing the same thing -- wrapping arbitrary objects or using "pointers" to objects/data for use in a web portal. Who wasn't doing this in 1999?

Everyone working with the current web tech at the time saw a need for this kind of thing and grew their own. I really don't know how they expect to win. The .NET Framework isn't really like Vertical's tech at all. Sharepoint/web parts, on the other hand, seems more like what Vertical has produced. .NET, you still have to do a lot of work to achieve what Vertical's patent covers. Besides, architecture is architecture. Using components in the web was a natural progression from classic ASP inline script or static html. I guess Vertical should sue Plumtree, Sun, BEA and the rest of the world for this one. <<

Everybody? 1999? Are you sure about that, doc? That's funny. There were only a select group of software pioneers aware of XML back in 1999 and you're saying "Everyone working with the current web tech at the time saw a need for this kind of thing and grew their own."?  Want a little XML history? http://www.w3.org/XML/hist2002
XML Development History - Historical events in and around the W3C XML Activity include Recommendations:

Want some more?
http://www.itwriting.com/xmlintro.php
Copyright Tim Anderson January 2004
Read the paragraph on Microsoft and XML. Microsoft thought they had VCSY wrapped up.

And, by the way, the aforementioned Charles Goldfarb was among those besides IBM touting VCSY's XML solutions back in the early years. Here's a sample:

SEC Info - Vertical Computer Systems Inc - 10KSB - For 12/31/01

"The .NET Framework isn't really like Vertical's tech at all. Sharepoint/web parts, on the other hand, seems more like what Vertical has produced. .NET, you still have to do a lot of work to achieve what Vertical's patent covers."

Uhhh, you see, the idea is, Microsoft wanted .Net to BECOME what VCSY Siteflash could do. Not the wrong way around as this numbnut saw it. I wonder how he sees it now?

And, yes Virginia. Sharepoint was somwhat like SiteFlash. Now, the idea is to make Sharepoint a whole lot like SiteFlash and become a living software ecology for Windows. Thus Windows 7's humble beginnings.

Keep reading, pilgrim. You'll learn by accident. 

>>#10 Posted by NightmarE D on 21 Apr 2007 - 20:25
It's a company that isn't worth a nickel whose desperate for money.

I hate companies like this. They can't make a name for themselves so they'll try to sue another company to make a few dollars.
 #10.1 Posted by Ideas Man on 22 Apr 2007 - 01:13
Are we talking about Real here

I absolutely agree. If this was such a big deal, why wasn't the suit done back in 2002? Why is it loosers like this, Real, Eolas and the like wait years before they sue? I reckon there should be some expirary date on these things, because they almost always ask for damages in the millions, and they always sue well after the product is used by the millions, seems wrong to me.<<

Uhhhh, hello dummy. The patent was not granted until 2004. VCSY gave Microsoft a long time to get their act together and negotiate for a settlement.

"and they always sue well after the product is used by the millions, seems wrong to me" That's right. Millions. Seems fair, equitable and right to me.

>>#11 Posted by Jugalator on 21 Apr 2007 - 20:52
Haha, "arbitrary object framework"?

So in other words, they try to enforce a patent about "building websites in a modern programming language"?

Wow, I hope they won't succeed in that... <<

Haha. Haha haha. Haha hahaha hahahahaha. Hahahahahahahahaaaaaahahahahaaaaa. I don't think I'll ever stop laughing at that one.

>>#12 Posted by black_death on 21 Apr 2007 - 21:06
roflmao! this has got to be my second favourite patent infringement suite next to the MP3 one of course. who the hell works at the US patent office, elementary school drop outs? <<

Blah blah blah. The stupid ones are the ones who shoot their clueless foot while it's in their clueless mouth. This has got to be my favorite patent infringement suit (not suite you idiot) next to none.

>><#13 Posted by Jelly2003 on 21 Apr 2007 - 21:16
Step 1) Lets found a company
Step 2) Lets have an idea and patient it
Step 3) Lets stick our head in the sand
... YEARS LATER ...
Step 4) Lets take our head out the sand

HOLY CRAP! Someone has been infringing our patient for over 5 years!
LETS SUE!!!

PS. How pathetic, this company doesn't even deserve the time of day.
What's their excuse? They're a "Global Web Services Provider", how could anyone who develops for the net not know about ASP.net?

Obviously what's happened is that the company has been bought out, and the new directors have suddenly realised that the company has these patients which can bail them out of trouble, because obviously they don't have a clue about the internet, they're not making money from it, so the only way that they can survive is by stealing from those who do know about the internet.<<

Isn't it amazing just how uninformed the loudmouths turn out to be? it's a fact of nature. Loudmouth dumbasses are made, not born.

>>#14 Posted by +Octol on 21 Apr 2007 - 21:20
Quote -
VCSY’s main administrative software product is emPath 6.3, which is developed and distributed by Now Solutions, Inc.. Vertical’s primary internet core technologies include SiteFlash™, ResponseFlash™ and the Emily XML Scripting Language, which can be used to build web services.

I can't wait for Adobe to nail these guys for trademark infringement:

SiteFlash™
ResponseFlash™

Using the "Flash" name, even as part of a compound term, would be no different than using SiteWindows™" or "ResponseWindows™", and we all know how long Microsoft would let them get away with that!<<

Well, now, isn’t THAT an interesting opinion? What’s up with Adobe? Are they deaf? Hard of reading? DO you think Adobe knew what they were doing when they codenamed AIR Apollo?

VCSY: At the Epicenter of the New Truly Global Internet Revolution
All the products sold on the sites will be able to be purchased by major credit card or VCSY'swebsites' Apollo Smart Card with enhanced security and ...
www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/04-23-2001/0001474662&EDATE= - 27k - Cached - Similar pages

Do you think they got the news yet. Do you think these guys commenting will ever get smart?

>>#15 Posted by water.hammer on 21 Apr 2007 - 21:48
Uber pwnage<<

I wonder if "water.hammer" pissed his leg off? Pure ownership on VCSY's behalf. The rest of you nitwits can line up and take a number. Do the peepee dance if you're in a hurry.

>>  #16 Posted by MaceX on 21 Apr 2007 - 22:16
You get 1000 people to solve a problem.

90% of them will solve the problem in some way that would infringe on a patent.

That's the problem with software patents. It stifles development in software because there is so much collusion. <<

Do you mean collusion by those in the software industry who tried to destroy VCSY? That must be what he means. Who else would VCSY collude with to have their patent granted?

>>#17 Posted by  neufuse on 22 Apr 2007 - 01:37
too bad the patent doesnt even match how the .NET framework works if you read it...... and they are "Vertical is asking for a jury trial." asking for a jury trial because they know a judge would throw it right out.. they just want to confuse people that dont understand the tech and make them think they are the same

Last edited by neufuse on 22 Apr 2007 - 01:44<<

Too bad neufuse doesn’t know a judge hears the Markman Hearing which determines by law which side of the litigation has rightful ownership of the patent claims language.The jury is just there to determine just how heinous the infringement is for the purpose of apportioning damages.

>>#18 Posted by theh0g on 22 Apr 2007 - 11:53
Don't software patents ever expire? <<

Sure. The Siteflash patent will expire around 2024. Are you going to hold it that long? You'll bust a kidney, you know...

>>#19 Posted by zivan56 on 22 Apr 2007 - 18:15
Wouldn't Java be violating this as well then?<<

Well now, it all depends on what you're doing with Java, Einstein. If you're imitating the claims of the 644 patent with Java then Yes. If not, then No.

(end selections)
-------------------

Posted by Portuno Diamo at 2:45 AM EDT

Updated: Sunday, 28 September 2008 12:20 PM EDT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Mood:  incredulous

How much ya wanna bet Windows 7 turns out to be Vista + Longhorn?

Ready for the pop quiz, class? Let's build a little formula so we can evaluate the future:

Where: (Longhorn - (6826744+ 7076521)) = 0 and (Vista - Longhorn) = funk

Then: 6826744 + Vista = Windows(7)

Windows 7 hits Milestone 3
Posted by Mary Jo Foley @ 11:50 am
September 16th, 2008

Home Groups — the functionality formerly known in “Longhorn”/Vista as “Castle” — is part of the new Windows 7 build.

Windows 7 does not look or feel like a major departure from Windows Vista.

(more at URL)
------

If you're going to try to follow all this, you first need to nail some thumbtacks to the wall with some yarn, some dates and some events (maybe even some dates of your own from what you've seen and heard - wouldn't THAT be exciting, kids? Kind of like Harry HomeDetective.) and start tracking this stuff like a big game hunter.

Why? Because it is a big game. A BIG game.

https://ajaxamine.tripod.com/index.blog?topic_id=1089847

Either that or sit back in the Buick and let the dynaflow transmission do the work. Just listen to the radidio.

Patent 744 is all about enclosing the operating arena in a life-long ecology where all is affiliated and known. This method in and of itself is inherently more secure as anyone not affiliated simply can't get in without affiliation credentials. When something like the security system VCSY has rights to (Tecsec and ImmuneApp ) envelopes the ecology, you have a virtual cocooned community for living software.

You juniors have a whole lot to learn since you've been ignorant for so long. Do some serious study instead of shaking your head at VCSY's small size. Size is in the bite, not the bark.

Posted by Portuno Diamo at 10:07 PM EDT

Updated: Tuesday, 16 September 2008 11:16 PM EDT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Mood:  lazy

I was asked to try to present what VCSy technology does as simply as possible. Well, I've been digging through some old files and I came upon a diagram I did last year and thought I might offer it for your viewing here.

I realize this is a very simplified schematic, but, that's what 744/521 does. It simplifies.

Let me know if you have any questions.

Posted by Portuno Diamo at 11:51 PM EDT

Updated: Tuesday, 16 September 2008 12:06 AM EDT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Mood:  chatty

To those agonizing over how a tiny company like VCSY can appear out of nowhere with technology that appears to supplant technologies over a decade old. I offer this discussion over the importance of Java and Javascript. See Java Smackdown below.

I tend to agree with the nerd in this discussion as I have dug through the history of Java as a smartcard effort in the mid 90''s and the ultimate use of VCSY Emily (VCSY's XML based scripting language) to build the Apollo/Transtar smartcardsystem using the latest generation smartcard technology of Jerome Svigals.

I believe an indepth analysis of events and efforts over the past 20 years would yield a not-so-pretty picture of Java in the hands of elitists attempting to kill off the advent of scripters such as resulted in Javascript adherents.

With that "compiled code is superior to script" elitism, as with all technolgical elitism, came a huge crippling of effective software development and use. Sun's Java press hit the wall some four or five years ago when their combined effort with IBM to build a complex telephony system in Germany failed to scale. That sobering event lead to a slow death of Java that continues today.

You might examine some of the things I've pointed out on this blog and elsewhere about SavaJe, a telephony effort that mysteriously vanished in 2006 only to be scooped up by Sun shortly before VCSY sued Microsoft in April 2007.

Please reference this timeline.

I commend your perusal of this timeline so you can get a stratified view of events over the span of the past few years. It can be enlightening once fleshed out with your own examples of "hey, I know an interesting coincidence". It's a great game to play with those who work in the industry. They have their own time points and event correlations that build a picture of desperate efforts and questionable strategies.

Anywho, here's the discussion for your own internal discussions. Do with it what you will.

http://jamesfallows.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/09/one_time_only_javascript_java.php

One time only: Java-Javascript smackdown

James Fallows// The Atlantic
13 Sep 2008 11:00 pm

James Fallows writes: Blah, blah, blah, dit da dit da dit, yada yada yada...

And then he offers two views of correspondents. First the Java proponent as pointed to by the James Fallows article above:

http://jamesfallows.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/09/about_chrome_next_in_the_serie.php
Ken Broomfield writes:

There's plenty of irony in Google's effort to create a robust client-side platform for web-based ("cloud") applications, mainly because Netscape and Sun tried and failed to do exactly this over ten years ago.  Part of this effort was led by a guy named Eric Schmidt, then at Sun, and used Java, a technology that's superior to the Javascript language that's now being used largely because Java never quite worked on the client (i.e., in the user's browser).

So, Google's effort to create a good Javascript environment in Chrome -- which is now sorely needed -- should have been unnecessary, and sophisticated web applications should have appeared a long time ago. Multiple efforts to create client-side web application platforms are now under way, with Balkanizing effect: Google with Chrome (Bosnia), Adobe with Flash/Flex/AIR (Croatia), and Microsoft with Silverlight (Serbia) [Microsoft had to be Serbia :)]. That all these platforms are inferior to what ought to have been achieved years ago with Java is a tragedy....

Little stuff:

-- On additional tabs using more and more memory, this is true in Firefox and IE, but iRider has sophisticated memory management to limit memory usage even with hundreds of pages open. Free memory is utilized to speed access to open pages, but released as other apps need it. (Everyone misses this, but it took a lot of effort.)

-- Firefox, IE and iRider can leak memory, though Firefox is notoriously worse than the others here. (Opera, another browser the press now ignores, does a great job in this department.) But often what seem to be leaks can also be mere memory fragmentation, as when a room seems full but is actually just cluttered. It's not clear that Chrome solves the fragmentation problem, which is trickier. (The paged virtual memory environment in modern OSes mitigates some of the problems of fragmentation, but also makes it trickier to solve completely.).

-- Entering search queries in the Address Bar has been possible in IE since version 5 and iRider from the start. And in iRider, to quickly run multiple searches, say "Palin moose", "Palin bridge to nowhere" and "Palin Alaska secession", hit Shift-Enter after each. 

The good news is that Chrome will be open source and may be very useful to us and others.

------------ separator between correspondent views ------------

And here, an anonymous nerd writes:

My correspondent writes:

... I am a nerd.  As such, I'm afraid I have to dispute a bit of what your friend Ken Broomfield, the founder of iRider (which I've downloaded and am evaluating now), wrote to you about the early days of web application development. 

From a developer's perspective, Java was far too complicated and the performance of the Java Virtual Machine far too poor to be useful for web applications in the early days of the internet. 

Broomfield refers to Java as a "technology that's superior to the Javascript language" and suggests that JavaScript "should have been unnecessary, and sophisticated web applications should have appeared a long time ago," but that's false.  As programming (or scripting) languages go, JavaScript has always been relatively easy to learn and has allowed developers (and businesses) to rapidly develop useful web applications. 

The same is not true of the strict and complex Java programming language.  Good Java programmers were (and still are) few and expensive; good web technology (JavaScript/CSS/HTML) developers were (and still are) abundant and less expensive and, again, the performance of JVMs in web browsers was crap until recently.

Web application development has evolved along with PC hardware and available consumer bandwidth.  YouTube was not possible 10 years ago; it is now thanks to Flash, faster machines and the fact that a great many people have broadband internet connections.  Flash, not Java.  Java is still far too complex, and Java developers far too expensive, for client-side web development.  Java is, more often than not, not the right tool for client-side web application development.  It is a "superior" technology in the same way that a jackhammer is superior to an ordinary hammer for driving a nail into a wall.

Additionally, the "Balkanizing effect" that Broomfield sees in the current competition between "inferior" client-side web technologies offered by Adobe, Microsoft and web browser developers (Google did not invent JavaScript; they have, however, developed Gears and their own JavaScript interpreter to improve JS performance and to mimic some of the functionality offered by desktop applications) is merely healthy competition between companies that would like to sell software tools (in the case of Adobe and Microsoft) or advertising (in the case of Google).  He seems to suggest that Sun's Java should have been accepted as the standard years ago and that Sun should be rewarded, in one way or another, for enabling the rest of us to develop "sophisticated" web applications now and forever.

Java failed as a client-side web application technology for good reasons and web applications are evolving at a reasonable and steady rate.  Like many nerds, I am excited by the possibilities presented by the current crop of web (and mobile; the line is getting blurry) technologies and am thankful that I don't have to spend my days coding in Java.
---------------- end of comparison------------

There is much that may be discussed and one day all of it will spill out, but, for now, remember this: Not everything you know is real. Not every thing that's real you know. I know it's a basic observation but sometimes you have to be dragged back to a basic to make sense of the world around you.

Oh, and one more thing, I commend this article offered by James Fallows to your reading so you can get an overview of Chrome. You'll need one to make sense out of what will happen over the next few years.

http://www.networkworld.com/news/2008/090808-google-chrome-under-the-hood.html

We are in the beginnings of the first public views of a disruption wave moving through the software industry. If you keep yourself educated (and it doesn't take any more effort than reading and learning by accident) you will be more equipped to profit from the disruption far more effectively than your more ignorant brethren and sisterns.

Posted by Portuno Diamo at 12:03 AM EDT

Updated: Sunday, 14 September 2008 1:05 AM EDT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Mood:  don't ask

Apparently my fanbase is of the cloistered variety.

http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=VCSY&read=225290

By: vcsyes 13 Sep 2008, 06:50 AM EDT Msg. 225290

So, maybe a stupid question but who is Portuno and why are all his past posts referenced upon? I mean, it seems like he know his stuff but how come I dont see any of his posts on a day-to-day besis? ...just wondering. Anyone? Go VCSY!! (Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long; ST Rating- Strong Buy; LT Rating- Strong Buy)

This must be what it's like when the kids are planning to put grandpaw in the home.

UHHH...I'M SITTING RIGHT HERE AND I CAN HEAR YOU TALKING

Posted by Portuno Diamo at 11:19 AM EDT

Updated: Saturday, 13 September 2008 10:11 PM EDT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Mood:  suave

Sorry for the intrusion but I noticed this post recently and decided to edit it a bit to make it more appealing to the masses general.

And now we return to our originally laid out program. Sorry for the interruption. If I had known I would have tidied up the p......

GET OFF THE STAGE!!!!

Oh. Right. Sorry. I'll just picl up and move me little bucket here and you folks have a nice knight. Ya'll hear? 

Well worth knowing and saving.

http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=VCSY&read=225271

By: lumster50 13 Sep 2008, 12:23 AM EDT Msg. 225271

Revised version: This is what we have:(By Lumster50) (Nice series of posts lump!) The USPTO granted the Company a patent (No. 6,826,744) for an invention for “System and Method for Generating Web Sites in an Arbitrary Object Framework” on November 30, 2004. The Company has filed for a Continuation in Part for this patent to pursue possible additional derivative patents. This patent is the foundation of the Company’s product, SiteFlash ™, and forms the basis of the ResponseFlash™, NewsFlash™ and AffiliateFlash™ products. The USPTO granted the Company a patent (No. 7,076,521) for an invention for a “Web-based collaborative data collection system” on July 11, 2006. This patent covers various aspects of the XML Enabler Agent. ------------------------------------------------- This was our concern about what we have: Although the Company intends to protect its rights as described above, there can be no assurance that these measures will be successful. Policing unauthorized use of the Company’s products and services is difficult and the steps taken may not prevent the misappropriation of its technology and intellectual property rights. --------------------------------------------------- This is the action we took when we noticed some infringement activity: On April 18, 2007, the Company filed suit for patent infringement against Microsoft Corp. in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The Company claims that the Microsoft .Net System infringes U.S. Patent No. 6,826,744. On July 13, 2007, Microsoft filed an answer to the Company’s complaint, alleging various defenses and counterclaims. On August 2, 2007, the Company filed a reply to Microsoft’s defenses and counterclaims. The court has set trial for March 2009. The parties are in the process of discovery. The court has set the claim construction hearing for July 10, 2007. ------------------------------------------------------- This is what we thought about the situation and posible outcome: In the opinion of management, the ultimate resolution of any pending matters may have a significant effect on the financial position, operations or cash flows of the Company. Also, the Company in the future may become involved in other legal actions that may have a significant effect on the financial position, operations or cash flows of the Company. ------------------------------------------------- This is what happened; Vertical Computer Systems, Inc. (the “Company”) has settled the patent infringement claim that the Company initiated in federal court against Microsoft Corporation. This matter has previously been disclosed under the heading “Legal Proceedings” in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007. Pursuant to the confidential settlement agreement, the Company has granted to Microsoft a non-exclusive, fully paid-up license under the patent which was the subject of the legal proceeding. ------------------------------------------------- NOW we wait for the 3rd qtr filing,...enjoy the wait! Lump (Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long; ST Rating- Strong Buy; LT Rating- Strong Buy)

http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=VCSY&read=225297

http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=VCSY&read=225329

By: RapidRobert2 13 Sep 2008, 03:41 PM EDT Msg. 225329

lumster: Here is the motion by VCSY to add 'sharepoint' to the infringement by MSFT: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION VERTICAL COMPUTER SYSTEMS, § INC., § § Plaintiff, § § Civil Action No. 2:07-CV-144 –DF-CE v. § § JURY TRIAL MICROSOFT CORPORATION § § Defendants. § UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR LEAVE TO SERVE AMENDED INFRINGEMENT CONTENTIONS Vertical Computer Systems, Inc. (“Vertical”), plaintiff in the above-entitled and numbered civil action, moves the Court for leave to serve amended infringement contentions. In support, Vertical will show the following. On November 30, 2007, the plaintiff served its infringement contents against the defendant. Subsequent to serving such contentions, the plaintiff determined that Microsoft’s SharePoint 200 should be accused of infringement in addition to the products originally accused. Thus, the plaintiff requests leave to serve such amended contentions pursuant to P.R. 3-6(b). The defendant does not oppose the plaintiff serving the amended infringement contentions. WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, the plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court grants this motion for leave to serve amended infringement contentions. Case 2:07-cv-00144-DF-CE Document 53 Filed 06/11/2008 Page 1 of 3 2 Respectfully submitted, ______________________________ Eric M. Albritton Texas State Bar No. 00790215 ALBRITTON LAW FIRM P.O. Box 2649 Longview, Texas 75606 Tel.: (903) 757-8449 Fax: (903) 758-7397 ema@emafirm.com Thomas John Ward, Jr. Texas Bar No. 00794818 Ward & Smith Law Firm P O Box 1231 Longview, TX 75606-1231 Telephone: (903) 757-6400 Facsimile: (903) 757-2323 jw@jwfirm.com Raymond P. Niro Vasilios D. Dossas Sally Wiggins Robert A. Conley Eric J. Mersmann NIRO, SCAVONE, HALLER & NIRO 181 West Madison Street, Suite 4600 Chicago, Illinois 60602 (312) 236-0733 Counsel for Plaintiff Vertical Computer Systems, Inc. CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE The undersigned discussed this motion with Dave Healey, counsel for the defendant who advised that the defendant agrees to the relief requested. ______________________________ Eric M. Albritton Case 2:07-cv-00144-DF-CE Document 53 Filed 06/11/2008 Page 2 of 3 3 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned certifies that the foregoing document was filed electronically in compliance with Local Rule CV-5(a). As such, this motion was served on all counsel who are deemed to have consented to electronic service. Local Rule CV-5(a)(3)(A). Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(d) and Local Rule CV-5(d) and (e), all other counsel of record not deemed to have consented to electronic service were served with a true and correct copy of the foregoing by email and/or fax, on this the 11th day of June, 2008. ______________________________ Eric M. Albritton Case 2:07-cv-00144-DF-CE Document 53 Filed 06/11/2008 Page 3 of 3

Posted by Portuno Diamo at 1:10 AM EDT

Updated: Wednesday, 14 October 2009 7:45 PM EDT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Mood:  hug me

Biztalk has long been a personal marker for me; Something I could always use to determine whether Microsoft was able to work around MLE.

http://clearstation.etrade.com/cgi-bin/bbs?post_id=1999468&usernm=Portuno_Diamo.

------------

Biztalk was .Net's chauffer to bring Microsoft into corporations to build large interoperational frameworks. The XML Web Services concept has been a major effort within Microsoft for over six years.

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2002/Apr02/04-10UmbrellaPR.mspx

------------

But Biztalk has long been considered a "failure" (note how few customers Microsoft Biztalk has even after such a long time:"over 7000 customers" http://www.microsoft.com/biztalk/en/us/default.aspx ) because it could not be interoperational across the board - across any platform on any network basis. Like I said, it's been a personal marker for me as it was the canary in the coal mine which would tell me immediately if Microsoft was able to develop something that would do what MLE/Emily (later to become patent 7076521) could do ... aka a "workaround".

http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=VCSY&read=113876

All this time and Microsoft is only now able to speak of Biztalk with some form of nascent, budding pride.

Read about Microsoft's Biztalk future now after the settlement with VCSY.

--------------

http://www.microsoft-watch.com/content/server/more_biztalk_coming_in_2009.html

September 8, 2008 2:05 PM

by Joe Wilcox

More BizTalk Coming in 2009

News Brief. I had wondered why Microsoft planned BizTalk Server 2006 R3. The renamed BizTalk Server 2009 makes more sense.

Microsoft revealed the renaming today. A 2006 product would have been out of place shipped in 2008 or 2009.

The change moves BizTalk from a minor release to new full version. Microsoft released BizTalk Server 2006 R2 a year ago this week, on Sept. 10, 2007. The new version is expected to ship during the first half of 2009. A public CTP, or Community Technology Preview, is planned for later this year.

The new nomenclature is about more than just versions: It reflects how BizTalk is growing up. There have been plenty of Microsoft server software changes that a new BizTalk version should support.

My eWEEK colleage Darryl Taft has the skinny on BizTalk Server 2009. But in brief, the new software will support:

Oslo modeling platform

Windows Server 2008

Hyper-V Server 2008

.NET Framework 3.5 Service Pack 1

SQL Server 2008

Visual Studio SP1

Team Foundation Server

Microsoft claims there are 8,200 BizTalk customers today.

Please read Darryl's story for full details. Microsoft also has posted a Q&A on its PressPass site.

Darryll's story: http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Enterprise-Applications/Microsoft-Announces-BizTalk-Server-2009/

Microsoft's Q&A: http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/features/2008/sep08/09-05BizTalk.mspx

Biztalk was a precursor to Sharepoint.

Biztalk history:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_BizTalk_Server

NOTE: "Architecture

The BizTalk Server runtime is built on a publish/subscribe architecture, sometimes called "content-based publish/subscribe". Messages are published into the system, and then received by one or more active subscribers."

Hmmm. Messaging affiliation. Sound like anything we know? Biztalk has always been a good idea poorly done. It's never been able to scale well and has always been kind of a "wanna be" in Microsoft products. As Hoe Wilcox (woops, typo!) notes Biztalk has 8200 Biztalk customers today. All that's about to change.

It's no longer IF VCSY technology is being used to advance Microsoft products beyond their crippled state to walk again. No miracle. No mystery. The only mystery is WHEN will VCSY release news about what's going on.

From the Wikipedia article:

"Adapters

BizTalk uses adapters for communications with different protocols, and specific software products such as Sharepoint. Some of the adapters that were included in Server 2006 product included the Base EDI (Covast), File, HTTP, FTP, SMTP, POP3, SOAP, SQL, MSMQT, Web Services Enhancements (WSE) 2.0, and the Windows SharePoint Service (WSS) adapters. Some are available through third parties."

"Adapters" are a Microsoft euphemism for middleware packages. Middleware connects data resources of one type with data resources of another type so the processing parts on either side may interoperate with each other. 521 is dynamic middleware which provides not only the ability to interconnect different data resources, it provides a pliable and granular processing method BETWEEN the disparate data resources... placing processing power precisely where it need be used.

------------

Here's a Biztalk discussion forum: http://www.biztalkgurus.com/

-------------

http://www.networkworld.com/news/2008/090808-microsoft-biztalk.html?fsrc=netflash-rss

Microsoft BizTalk gets surprise reprieve, new road map

Host of new features coming early next year in version upgrade

By John Fontana , Network World , 09/08/2008

Microsoft Friday reversed course on the fate of BizTalk Server, renaming the next version and setting a road map that calls for a major releases of the middleware every two years.

The decision to continue developing the Microsoft middleware came as a surprise to some, as BizTalk was to be a launching pad for Microsoft's forthcoming "Oslo" technologies that include messaging (Windows Communications Foundation), workflow (Windows Workflow Foundation) and modeling tools.

"It is pretty surprising and I have not seen this big a reversal from Microsoft in a while," says Rob Helm, an analyst with independent analyst firm Directions on Microsoft. "They might be reluctant to yank what is now a fairly successful product for an unproven technology platform."

Microsoft says what was supposed to be BizTalk Server 2006 R3 will now be called BizTalk Server 2009. The full release is slated to ship in the first half of next year. In addition, the company says it will provide details on another new version, code-named BizTalk 7, in the early part of next year.

----------------------------

Ahhhh... so now we get another hint at what "7" means to Microsoft.

------------------

http://star-techcentral.com/tech/story.asp?file=/2008/8/13/corpit/20080813111019&sec=corpit

Wednesday August 13, 2008

Booster for cloud computing

KUALA LUMPUR: Microsoft has developed the building blocks that software developers will need when writing cloud computing applications.

Currently in its beta stage, the product will only be detailed at the upcoming Microsoft Professional Developers Conference on Oct 27 in Los Angeles, an annual event organised by the software giant.

At Tech.Ed SEA 2008 here on Tuesday, Microsoft senior technical evangelist Nigel Watling said Microsoft has spent a year developing the product, tentatively named BizTalk Services.

------------------

So now the marker is become a foundation stone.

Congratulations, Microsoft. You finally figured out what you needed to build a next generation framework. It certainly took you long enough.

Posted by Portuno Diamo at 10:03 AM EDT

Updated: Wednesday, 10 September 2008 11:03 AM EDT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Mood:  bright

Just putting this here so you can find information others want to bury:

And here's the conversation on one order:

223697
http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=VCSY&read=223697&submit=Go&endat=223879&numposts=60

223837
http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=VCSY&read=223837&submit=Go

223839
http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=VCSY&read=223839+&submit=Go

223862
http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=VCSY&read=223862&submit=Go

223850
http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=VCSY&read=223850&submit=Go

or you can read it in the reverse order. Ain't computers wonderful?

http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=VCSY&read=223850&submit=Go

By: BIFT1 30 Aug 2008, 01:15 PM EDT Msg. 223850

How is this for the closing the deal. VSCY had their number and MSFT had theirs'. Deadlock...in comes the Sharepoint Motion along with Amber Hatfield Rovner and within 6 weeks an agreement was reached.

http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=VCSY&read=223862&submit=Go

By: BIFT1 30 Aug 2008, 01:27 PM EDT Msg. 223862

Also from Amber Hatfield Rovner's firm.

http://www.weil.com/practiceareas/detail.aspx?service=2536

Technology & IP Transactions

Acquired a tradition of excellence in complex licensing and technology transactions

Broad expertise includes a wide variety of transactions ranging from outsourcing, joint ventures, technology development and licensing, strategic alliances, professional services agreements and e-commerce agreements to intellectual property audits and due diligence

Represent clients in all stages of development, from start-ups to established companies, in technology fields as diverse as pharmaceuticals, software, hardware, semiconductors, and consumer electronics
 

http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=VCSY&read=223839+&submit=Go

By: BIFT1 30 Aug 2008, 01:00 PM EDT Msg. 223839

Why Amber Hatfield Rovner came on board for MSFT. (used by MSFT in the past)

To work the settlement agreement?

http://www.weil.com/practiceareas/detail.aspx?service=2542

Alternative Dispute Resolution
Partners and counsel ranked among the leaders in dispute resolution and international arbitration —Chambers Global

Involved in helping to resolve more than 200 major international disputes, including scores of arbitrations dealing with the laws of dozens of different nations

Vast experience in dealing with all the major ADR organizations, including American Arbitration Association and JAMS, among others

With alternative dispute resolution providing a faster, more cost-effective and confidential alternative to traditional litigation forums, it is not surprising that major corporations today often look to resolve their disputes outside of the courthouse, employing a variety of alternative dispute resolution strategies. From leading companies to government agencies, global organizations look to Weil Gotshal for counseling on a wide range of ADR issues. We have been engaged in disputes in virtually all major commercial and financial sectors and have appeared for major corporations and multinationals, governments and international non-governmental organizations.

Moreover, the globalization of business has resulted in corporations increasingly deploying their assets and conducting their affairs in many different jurisdictions simultaneously, thereby exposing themselves to the laws and regulatory practices of unfamiliar countries, often with little choice as to how disputes, differences and claims might be resolved. In this environment, it is critically important that businesses with multinational exposures have available to them sophisticated and experienced lawyers to counsel, assist and, where necessary, intervene to resolve disputes. As one of the largest and most diversified law firms in the world, Weil Gotshal can provide such assistance through a truly impressive and international reach.

Our litigators have been involved in more than 200 international disputes, including scores of international arbitrations, dealing with the laws of dozens of different nations including Japan, Israel, Belgium, Poland, and the UK, as well as supranational laws such as UNIDROIT and the International Sale of Goods (CISG), and various bilateral and multilateral treaties, such as NAFTA.

Our attorneys have appeared before some of the major arbitral and trade institutions of the world, including the ICC, AAA, LCIA, WIPO, WTO, the US-Iranian Claims Tribunal, the International Arbitral Center of the Austrian Federal Economic Chamber, the Court of Arbitration of the Hungarian Chamber of Commerce, the Court of International Trade, the Netherlands Arbitration Institute and the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce. We have also advised and assisted in the enforcement of arbitral awards and judgments obtained in other jurisdictions and are experienced in obtaining evidence for use in foreign proceedings.

In addition, our litigators provide valuable strategic risk management advice during the course of our clients' business negotiations and transactions, so as to minimize both the risk and possible impact of any future litigation. This approach has earned high praise from clients and peers, with many Weil Gotshal partners and counsel ranked as leaders in international arbitration and dispute resolution according to Chambers Global.

As a further testament to the quality of our litigators, both past and present Weil Gotshal lawyers have served as judges and arbitrators, as well as being leading academics in their chosen fields. Overall, clients rely on Weil Gotshal's experience in ADR to achieve the best possible solution that meets their business objectives

http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=VCSY&read=223837&submit=Go

By: BIFT1 30 Aug 2008, 12:54 PM EDT Msg. 223837

I wonder how much VSCY was seeking?

http://www.weil.com/news/newsdetail.aspx?news=31231

(November 16, 2007, Weil Gotshal Press Release)


November 16, 2007, New York - Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP obtained a major patent victory for Microsoft yesterday in the Eastern District of Texas (Beaumont). Computer Acceleration Corp. (CAC), a subsidiary of well-known patent assertion company Acacia Research, claimed over $750M in damages, alleging that Microsoft's Windows XP infringed its patent.

After a two-week trial, the jury deliberated for two hours before delivering a complete verdict for Microsoft, finding no infringement and invalidating the patent at issue.

"The trial demonstrates that Microsoft will litigate cases to verdict, despite large damages claims against our flagship products," stated Isabella Fu, Microsoft's in-house counsel. "Microsoft values and respects intellectual property , but we will continue to fight suits that have no merit."

"This verdict is particularly significant and satisfying," commented Matt Powers, Weil Gotshal's first chair at the trial. "Even though technology companies are frequently sued for patent infringement in the Eastern District of Texas, this marks the first time a major defendant has taken a patent assertion company case to the jury and earned a total win."

The team included Microsoft in-house counsel Isabella Fu as well as Weil Gotshal partners Matt Powers, David Healey, Kevin Kudlac and Doug Lumish, counsel Amber Rovner, and associates Steve Carlson, John Halbleib, Ben Elacqua, Joseph Lee and Todd Patterson.

About Weil, Gotshal & Manges

Weil, Gotshal & Manges is an international law firm of over 1,200 lawyers, including approximately 300 partners. Weil Gotshal is headquartered in New York, with offices in Austin, Boston, Budapest, Dallas, Frankfurt, Hong Kong, Houston, London, Miami, Munich, Paris, Prague, Providence, Shanghai, Silicon Valley, Warsaw, Washington, DC and Wilmington.

http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=VCSY&read=223697&submit=Go&endat=223879&numposts=60

By: morrie33 29 Aug 2008, 02:07 AM EDT Msg. 223697

"Too good to be true."

MSFT all along claimed "prior art." LONGS said for months that MSFT had no case.

Sharepoint was added to the infringement.

MSFT asked for a two week extension of the Markman hearing.

MSFT settled on the day of the Markman hearing. 15 months after the case was filed.

If MSFT believed their "prior art" case, why wouldn't they go through with the Markman hearing? Maybe because they were risking having the judge place an Injunction on .Net and Sharepoint. That's $7 billion dollars in annual sales for .Net and Sharepoint. That's a lot of customers that MSFT would have to "do some 'plainin' too" as Ricky Ricardo would say...

And VCSY, a little penny stock company, got the multi-billion dollar MSFT to settle. MSFT could've taken their chances with the Markman hearing. If no injunction, MSFT could've pushed this to court. But they didn't. They settled.

And lo and behold, days after settlement, MSFT and .Net start putting out PRs about their new "internet" prowess and power. No, that wasn't coincidental at all. Things that .Net and Sharepoint could not do the week before July 25th, snap, voila, magic, abrakadabra, now .Net and Sharepoint can accomplish. And users and developers are saying, "wow, Sharepoint's sure improved..."

But yes, this is "all too good to be true."

Niro, famed patent infringement lawyer, spent two years on a case on contingency and got $3 million dollars since some here say VCSY only got $10 million. And gee, VCSY which HAD a strong case, they just crumbled on the day of the MARKMAN HEARING which they probably would've heard "THE PATENT IS VALID." And then what, MSFT would've had an injunction placed on it...VCSY could've waited a few days and how many hundreds of millions or billions would've MSFT been FORCED to pay to VCSY to get that injunction lifted off its thousands and thousands of partners of .Net and Sharepoint...

But no, VCSY crumbled and settled for peanuts. That's what the bashers want you to believe. It's "too good to be true."

VCSY had MSFT by the nuts. The MARKMAN hearing would've been a huge turning point in the case. VCSY would've heard "THE PATENT IS VALID" and they would've had hundreds and hundreds of millions. But, WADE who has waited 8.5 years couldn't wait 2 more days, so he said, "Just give me that $10 million..."

Sure. Believe that if you want.

The LONGS know this wasn't too good to be true. There are facts. The facts point us to the conclusion that this was VERY GOOD for VCSY. And gee, looks like MSFT got some good things from the deal too. That's called a compromise. A partnership. It was very good. It is very good.

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=VCSY&read=223967

By: morrie33 31 Aug 2008, 12:28 AM EDT Msg. 223967

pussim, it's curious that BIFT posted valuable info about MSFT's  past court cases in East Texas where MSFT said, "We will push patent infringement cases to the end of the Court process when we know we are right..." and MSFT won that case in the same court of VCSY's case. Yet instead of pushing the VCSY case, MSFT settles in 15 months with VCSY. Hmmmm. And why did they bring in a negotiator to settle with VCSY on the day of the Markman hearing? Hmmmm.

As I said I find it interesting that BIFT digs up very good news for LONGS and all of a sudden it's on the second page because people are posting about politics. Is it coincidental? Maybe. Or do people want all the good D&D buried?

Again, maybe it's coincidental. But, I was excited to read BIFT's finds. And when I left the computer for an hour, nobody had commented on them and instead they were buried on the 2nd page by off topic posts.

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

Posted by Portuno Diamo at 3:27 PM EDT

Updated: Sunday, 31 August 2008 1:22 AM EDT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Mood:  don't ask

Let's keep this stored here until we can set up a display case.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1039731/Secret-lovers-Hidden-bank-accounts-And-sign-plane-wreck-Did-Richard-Bransons-balloon-buddy-fake-death.html

Secret lovers. Hidden bank accounts. And still no sign of a plane wreck. Did Richard Branson's balloon buddy fake his death?

By Annette Witheridge
Last updated at 1:29 AM on 30th July 2008

When adventurer Steve Fossett seemingly disappeared off the face of the Earth last September, his many admirers couldn’t quite believe he had perished on something as mundane as a joyride in a light aircraft above the Nevada desert in the U.S.

The round-the-world flying legend had crashed hot-air balloons and planes across the globe but had always emerged unscathed. As far as his fans were concerned, the first man to fly solo around the world in a hot-air balloon was a survivor.

No body or wreckage has ever been found since Fossett failed to return from his last flight. And now — five months after a judge officially declared the 63-year-old financier dead — investigators have made the astonishing suggestion that he faked his own death.

(more at URL)
------------------

Posted by Portuno Diamo at 11:55 AM EDT

Updated: Wednesday, 30 July 2008 12:00 PM EDT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Mood:  smelly

I had a little problem posting on Yahoo tonight and I decided I would start posting on the blogs a bit more. Reading the message boards is a trashy habit. Some places you can get useful information, but, most places you're going to be juggled and scammed. So read the message boards with a watchful eye and watch every word. 

So, I wrote this as a post intended to go on the board. But, thanks for the goof, Yahoo. you've motivated me to start blogging again. I owe ya.

BEGIN: 

Me? I'm just enjoying the show. It costs a fortune to keep you guys in the field so whoever's throwing their money away on such poor representation should be allowed to get a full snoot of it.

VCSY longs bring announcements of a new age of computing in 2000 and Al and his guys bring nothing but insults and ridicule and fail to give any hint they know anything about the subject.

And we have Al dumping his previous incarnation out of the blue. Al claims it's because he used profanity but his entire post history is crammed full of as much profane abuse against VCSY and the scam he claims it to be, the VCSY shareholders and anyone stupid enough to be associated with them.

Al jettisoned his posting history and now kalafella announces he's tepe, the rabid anti-vcsy poster on Raging Bull VCSY. http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_%28A_to_Z%29/Stocks_V/threadview?m=tm&bn=33693&tid=6047&mid=6070&tof=3&frt=1

Tepe knows how to toe the legal line and there was always a day of reckoning where he had to announce he was the same poster here as at RB. Why did he decide to come clean so quickly and succinctly here? And more-over, why NOW?

Microsoft is making all kinds of noise about some amazing capabilities while articles are coming to the fore about the shortcomings and failures of sharepoint and .Net.

There are two specific pieces here:

From a selection of 200+ developers including MSFT MVP's and legends casting a vote of no confidence on ADO.Net Entity Framework: http://efvote.wufoo.com/forms/ado-net-entity-framework-vote-of-no-confidence/

and this critique on Sharepoint, Microsoft's new collaboration phenomena nobody knew.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc700347.aspx

The morons will tell you Microsoft builds crap on purpose. What they don't tell you is Microsoft builds crap because they are fielding their version of a minimal build of a set of technology claims they can get away with.

Figure it out.

Meanwhile, the basher action is heating up. The Markman Hearing date is still ahead the end of this month. A last minute delay by a Microsoft lawyer who suddenly discovered he had an appointment conflict on that original day; a day scheduled since last year in East Texas.

OK another couple weeks of wiggle room. Then Microsoft will have to face up to their weak case.

It is weak, isn't it Al? That Microsoft brief got shot full of holes by the article here: http://efvote.wufoo.com/forms/ado-net-entity-framework-vote-of-no-confidence/

but you won't acknowledge that because it gives you the sweats. I'll tell you what happened. Somebody in Microsoft scrood your little hedge fund pooch.

That's a shame. Nice to see you guys shaping up, though. Nothing like eyes on the back of your head to make you sit up straight and act civil.

Now, audience. Sit back and watch what a few million in hedge fund shenanigans can pull off.

Posted by Portuno Diamo at 12:38 AM EDT

Updated: Friday, 4 July 2008 12:51 AM EDT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink