Post a comment

Story: Patent loss creates pro-Microsoft alliances

Give the patent to the W3C.

In my honest opinion, Doyle should give up the lawsuit and GIVE the patent to the W3C.

The reality is that he's not just hurting Microsoft - he's hurting all the companies that develop rich interactive content, and therefore all the users of the internet.

As for his claim that he is righting the wrongs against Netscape... sorry, but I have no sympathy there.

As a user of the internet, I really don't want to have to buy a browser to go surf (and just think of all the costs that would have been necessary to buy browser upgrades each time a new innovation in the technology came along).

And as a web developer, I really don't like having to jump through the hoops of developing content that works properly on all browsers. The fact that IE has more or less become a standard makes my life easier.

The truth is that Netscape missed one very basic important fact. The business model that works in this case shows that the 'cash cow' isn't the browser - the money is in the tools that are used to develop the content, and also in some cases, the content itself.

Other examples can be cited to demonstrate this model in action: Microsoft Word is used to create rich word-processed documents, and as such you have to pay for it, BUT, you can get (for free) the MS Word Viewer to look at documents. And I'm sure that everyone can think of other examples.

As for the patent itself - I'm actually amazed that it was granted in the first place; after all, displaying the output of an application in a viewport of another application is not a new idea (and wasn't then). Here's a thought - what about when you embed a browser window in a Word Document :-)

So come on Doyle... give us a break and don't hurt the innovation and development of the Internet. Undo your unjust action and give the patent to the W3C.

Full Talkback thread