Prior Art On SBC's Ridiculous Patent Claim
from the like-that-was-difficult dept
Last week we posted the story about SBC threatening to make use of a ridiculous patent on consistent navigation elements in a web page, such as frames or a navbar. Dan Gillmor asked readers for examples of prior art, and they came through. I imagine that shouldn’t surprise most people. Two interesting things mentioned in the article. (1) SBC owns Prodigy, which was sued by BT after BT thought they owned the patent on hyperlinks. Clearly, as Gillmor points out, SBC learned the wrong lesson out of that experience. (2) It is not hard to realize that a vast majority of websites out there violate this patent in some way or another. Included on that list, though, is the US Patent & Trademark Office’s own website. Think the patent system needs to be reformed?
Comments on “Prior Art On SBC's Ridiculous Patent Claim”
Link To 1994 Prior Art Mentioned In Article
Here’s a link to a figure from the 1994 IBM BookManager Library Reader User’s Manual that clearly shows the concepts of frames, icons, and menus all at work in one screen two years before the initial Ameritech patent filing.