Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Obama Taps IBM Open Source Advocate For USPTO

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 5 years ago | from the baby-steps dept.

Patents 88

langelgjm writes "President Obama has announced his intent to nominate David Kappos, a VP and general counsel at IBM, to head the US Patent and Trademark Office. This move is particularly notable not only because of IBM's much friendlier attitudes towards open source compared with some of their rivals, but also because Kappos himself is open source-friendly: 'We are now the biggest supporters of the open source development project,' explains David. 'Admittedly this policy is not easily reconcilable with our traditional IP strategy, but we are convinced that it is the way to go for the future.' Not just a lawyer, Kappos earned an engineering degree before working in the legal field. Kappos has been described as 'critical of the American approach to patent policy.' Given his background, could this mean a new era for US patent policy?"

cancel ×

88 comments

Some other points... (5, Interesting)

langelgjm (860756) | more than 5 years ago | (#28396807)

Really, my summary is hyped up a bit. I doubt that Kappos will usher in a new era on his own; so much of patent law depends on Congress and the courts anyway. However, given the views of his predecessor (Dudas is on record [doc.gov] as saying that "we must also actively educate the world that it [our patent system] is fundamentally the best system"), Kappos is on record [cpaglobal.com] as saying that in the U.S., "Trivial patents are being granted. By contrast, the system is better in Europe."

I think Kappos' background is also notable. He's really the first director of the computer generation: got an engineering degree, began working at IBM as an engineer, and then went over to law as a patent lawyer. By contrast, previous directors have either not had technical backgrounds, or have jumped around in the IP fields (Q. Todd Dickinson [wikipedia.org] began work at Baxter, a healthcare company). I think Kappos having been brought up in IBM will make him more open to (or at least less skeptical of) open source-type ideas than any of the other former directors, and his computer/engineering background will also make him more critical of our patent system, and not as focused on ratcheting protections up as far as they can go. Imagine, on the other hand, if the appointee had been someone from PhRMA.

It is not unusual that a patent lawyer would hold an engineering degree; in fact, to sit for the patent bar, one needs typically needs an engineering or science degree, and some patent lawyers have advanced degrees in their areas of specialty. However, I thought it worth mentioning given that the former director of the USPTO, Jon Dudas, did not have any engineering or science background, but rather a degree in finance. [archive.org]

One interesting thing (0, Offtopic)

vivaoporto (1064484) | more than 5 years ago | (#28396927)

One interesting trend I'm seeing here (as people flock to fight "their" revolution on the Iran story a couple of posts below), is that while the vocal minority that is the Internet connected America keeps worrying about other countries affairs, the government does what it is supposed to do: legislate on internal matters.

It is more positive for USA and the world when their government does its homework and clean up their house, much better than when they try to fix the world and accomplish neither the former nor the latter.

Re:Some other points... (5, Interesting)

sribe (304414) | more than 5 years ago | (#28397131)

Really, my summary is hyped up a bit. I doubt that Kappos will usher in a new era on his own; so much of patent law depends on Congress and the courts anyway.

A lot of what we think of as the really bad stuff, was undertaken by the patent office on its own with neither authorization from Congress nor truly applicable court ruling, but at the direction of an ambitiously expansive director.

Re:Some other points... (3, Informative)

Dachannien (617929) | more than 5 years ago | (#28397679)

A lot of what we think of as the really bad stuff, was undertaken by the patent office on its own with neither authorization from Congress nor truly applicable court ruling, but at the direction of an ambitiously expansive director.

Hey, who woulda thunk that Triantyfyllos Tafas was a Slashdotter?

Re:Some other points... (4, Informative)

Bobb9000 (796960) | more than 5 years ago | (#28398173)

A lot of what we think of as the really bad stuff, was undertaken by the patent office on its own with neither authorization from Congress nor truly applicable court ruling, but at the direction of an ambitiously expansive director.

Hey, who woulda thunk that Triantyfyllos Tafas was a Slashdotter?

My kingdom for some mod points, for someone who keeps up with patent law. For those who don't, Tafas is suing the USPTO because they tried to implement some policies that would have made it harder to get patents. While many of the problems of the current patent system can be traced to earlier policies implemented unilaterally by the USPTO, the office has been swinging quite the other way currently, and while not all of it is traceable to Congress and the courts, they (except for the courts, recently) have only made things worse.

Re:Some other points... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28399721)

"...Congress nor truly applicable court ruling, but at the direction of an ambitiously expansive director."

You mean bribed by the private sector.

Re:Some other points... (5, Funny)

Daniel Dvorkin (106857) | more than 5 years ago | (#28397461)

Kappos is on record as saying that in the U.S., "Trivial patents are being granted. By contrast, the system is better in Europe."

He's saying something in Europe is better than in the US? My God, what kind of monster is this guy? He must be a socialist atheist gay-marrying cheese-eating surrender monkey terrorist lover! The Senate should not only deny his confirmation, they should kick him out of the country!

America, love it or leave it! God's country! U-S-A! U-S-A!

Re:Some other points... (3, Insightful)

selven (1556643) | more than 5 years ago | (#28397919)

America, love it or leave it

If we're discussing de facto jurisdiction, the latter is currently pretty much impossible.

Re:Some other points... (1)

jonaskoelker (922170) | more than 5 years ago | (#28409351)

And for that reason (speaking as a non-american citizen) the first is somewhat difficult as well.

(goodbye karma?)

And now for some patriotic verse.... (0, Offtopic)

fm6 (162816) | more than 5 years ago | (#28398017)

O! say can you see by the dawn's early light
What so proudly we hailed at the twilight's last gleaming.
Whose broad stripes and bright stars through the perilous fight,
O'er the ramparts we watched were so gallantly streaming.
And the rockets' red glare, the bombs bursting in air,
Gave proof through the night that our flag was still there.
O! say does that star-spangled banner yet wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave?

On the shore, dimly seen through the mists of the deep,
Where the foe's haughty host in dread silence reposes,
What is that which the breeze, o'er the towering steep,
As it fitfully blows, half conceals, half discloses?
Now it catches the gleam of the morning's first beam,
In full glory reflected now shines in the stream:
'Tis the star-spangled banner! Oh long may it wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

And where is that band who so vauntingly swore
That the havoc of war and the battle's confusion,
A home and a country should leave us no more!
Their blood has washed out their foul footsteps' pollution.
No refuge could save the hireling and slave
From the terror of flight, or the gloom of the grave:

And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

O! thus be it ever, when freemen shall stand
Between their loved home and the war's desolation!
Blest with victory and peace, may the heav'n rescued land
Praise the Power that hath made and preserved us a nation.
Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just,
And this be our motto: 'In God is our trust.'
And the star-spangled banner in triumph shall wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!

Re:Some other points... (1)

Dragonslicer (991472) | more than 5 years ago | (#28398171)

He must be a socialist atheist gay-marrying cheese-eating surrender monkey terrorist lover!

Dude, Wisconsin is gonna be so pissed off at you for this.

Re:Some other points... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28398715)

To be honest, us Wisconsinites don't eat much cheese. It's more that we put it on things that we do eat.

Which part is the cheese? (4, Funny)

slashbart (316113) | more than 5 years ago | (#28400747)

As a European with a taste for good cheese, from Dutch Goudse or Leidse kaas, or pitjeskaas to French blue cheese or brie or goats cheese, I've always been confused with American Cheese:
First: it's not called cheese: its' called American Process Cheese Food (look on the Kraft bricks)
Second: which part are you supposed to eat? The thin crunchy transparent stuff that is around the square yellow substance, or the yellow plastic substance with no flavor or texture?

Re:Which part is the cheese? (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 5 years ago | (#28400861)

The textureless yellow plastic substance (it does have a flavor but it's not pleasant). Try it, it's, uh, non-toxic...

Re:Which part is the cheese? (1)

jbengt (874751) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401277)

The short answer: don't eat any of it.
The long answer: there's a difference between American Cheese, American Cheese Food, American Cheese Spread, and American Cheese Product

Traditionally, "Old Fashioned American Cheese" was American-made Cheddar (and/or mixed with Colby) and was real cheese. Various additives/emulsifiers were developed to make it melt evenly, without the separation of fat from the cheese. They started making it from scraps left over from making decent cheeses to save costs. Then Kraft developed the pre-packaged slices with no taste that are easy to manufacture by pouring the yellow goop into the plastic and letting it set, and started to sell them to people that don't don't like real cheese and/or don't read labels.

Shamelessly copied from wikipedia [wikipedia.org] :

The definitions include:
* Pasteurized process cheese (100% cheese which includes "American Cheese" and "Pasteurized process American cheese"),[1] (e.g., "Kraft Deli Deluxe American Cheese", "Land o Lakes American Cheese", "Laughing Cow").
* Pasteurized process cheese food, which contains at least 51% cheese.
* Pasteurized process cheese product which contain less than 51% cheese and cannot be advertised as cheese by the FDA (e.g. "Velveeta, "Kraft Singles")
* Pasteurized process cheese spread [similar to cheese product, but not quite solid, and often fluffed with air or propellant]

Re:Which part is the cheese? (1)

sdpuppy (898535) | more than 5 years ago | (#28402055)

Geez, you think the Kraft product is bad?

Try one of the "off brands".

Or for real thrills, try the "Imitation American Process Cheese"

(whose only ingredient comprehensible to the layman : "oil")

BTW - what do you think they put into McDonalds/Burger King/Wendys/White Castle cheeseburgers - ain't cheddar

Re:Which part is the cheese? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28428733)

Most supermarkets carry Sargento brand American cheese, which is good, assuming the mild flavor of American cheese is acceptable to you.

- T

Re:Which part is the cheese? (1)

guyminuslife (1349809) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401945)

Yeah, the Kraft cheese is terrible. Their parent company also makes cigarettes; I wonder how much industrial byproduct is in the former.

Try Vermont Cheddar sometime. (Definitely NOT made by Kraft) It compares favorably to English Cheddar, IMHO. One of the few cheeses this country does well.

***
Next time on 'Guyminuslife Defends American Foodstuffs`: American Beers That Don't Suck.

Re:Which part is the cheese? (1)

sdpuppy (898535) | more than 5 years ago | (#28402091)

Kraft also sells real cheddar. Not bad as far as cheddar goes, particularly the "extra sharp" variety.

Kraft also sells "Cracker Barrel" branded cheese, also pretty good. I've had better, I've also had worse.

Re:Which part is the cheese? (2, Funny)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | more than 5 years ago | (#28403239)

Goatse cheese? My God, I knew the French were weird.

Re:Some other points... (1)

guyminuslife (1349809) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401991)

I think they'd be cheesed, even.

NW is better than W but it still ain't true N. (1)

Wolfbone (668810) | more than 5 years ago | (#28398737)

One day maybe they'll get it right and appoint someone with a working compass but it seems to me (from reading the article you linked) that Kappos' thinking is just as devoid of the empirically informed economic theory necessary to navigate patent system issues rationally and ethically as any of his predecessors'. Ironically, Dudas was probably slightly better placed background-wise to grasp why it's so extremely dubious that software should be patent eligible subject matter at all. A further irony is that IBM once (in the 1960s) at least seemed to understand patent system economics well enough to have made it their policy "...to be sure that nobody bottled up software and algorithms by getting patents on them.": http://web.archive.org/web/20060426151241/http://www.siam.org/siamnews/mtc/mtc593.htm [archive.org]

I'm supposed to think this is a good thing? (4, Insightful)

jbn-o (555068) | more than 5 years ago | (#28399015)

I think Kappos having been brought up in IBM will make him more open to (or at least less skeptical of) open source-type ideas than any of the other former directors, and his computer/engineering background will also make him more critical of our patent system, and not as focused on ratcheting protections up as far as they can go.

I don't know what being "more open to open source-type ideas" means. Nor would I use the term "IP" as you did. Software patents hurt all developers except those at IBM because IBM holds the most patents. Holding the most patents means IBM can cross-license far more easily than any other patent holder. In fact, we know how valuable cross-licensing is to IBM because IBM has told us. IBM has told us cross-licensing outweighs the value of collecting patent license fees by an order of magnitude [progfree.org] . IBM got ten times the value of using patents held by others than licensing its own patents. This means IBM alone can skirt the trouble the patent system causes everyone else. IBM can completely undo the alleged advantage the patent system is supposed to give smaller organizations trying to commercially launch their work. You really should read Richard Stallman's examination of the US patent system as it applies to software development [gnu.org] for a fuller description of the details on how IBM's statement in 1990 reveals the harm done to all software developers under the USPTO's thumb.

The solution is to completely deny anyone software patents [swpat.org] so software developers can go back to relying on trademark and copyright law which is sufficient to avoid defrauding consumers and enforcing licenses, respectively. But I doubt the world's largest patent holder is in favor of disempowerment, and now that they have a man running the USPTO I doubt we'll see that office seeking to make software algorithms unpatentable.

I think what we're seeing here is just another instance of how corporate-friendly President Obama is. The more I read self-identified "open source" adherents saying how good this move is, the more I think that the open source movement is too corporate-friendly as well. Mere affiliation with a movement that isn't fighting for software freedom isn't doing you any favors; raise your critical standards and keep on fighting for the end of software patents.

Re:I'm supposed to think this is a good thing? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28400689)

Thank you. I was wondering how Slashdot could consider someone from IBM to hold a "pro-open source" position on patents. Then I remembered the editors and readers of this site are mostly mongoloid ABM chuds.

Afro-American Racism Against Whites and Asians (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28399073)

During the election, about 95% of African-Americans voted for Barack Hussein Obama due solely to the color of his skin. See the exit-polling data [cnn.com] by CNN.

Note the voting pattern of Hispanics, Asian-Americans, etc. These non-Black minorities serve as a measurement of African-American racism against non-Blacks. Neither Barack Hussein Obama nor John McCain is a non-Black minority. So, Hispanics and Asian-Americans used only non-racial criteria in selecting a candidate and, hence, serve as the reference by which we detect a racist voting pattern. Only about 65% of Hispanics and Asian-Americans supported Obama. In other words, a maximum of 65% support by any ethnic or racial group for either McCain or Obama is not racist and, hence, is acceptable.

If African-Americans were not racist, then at most 65% of them would have supported Obama. At that level of support, McCain would have won the presidential race.

At this point, African-American supremacists (and apologists) claim that African-Americans voted for Obama because he (1) is a member of the Democratic party and (2) supports its ideals. That claim is an outright lie. Look at the exit-polling data [cnn.com] for the Democratic primaries. Consider the case of North Carolina. Again, about 95% of African-Americans voted for him and against Hillary Clinton. Both Clinton and Obama are Democrats, and their official political positions on the campaign trail were nearly identical. Yet, 95% of African-Americans voted for Obama and against Hillary Clinton. Why? African-Americans supported Obama due solely to the color of his skin.

Here is the bottom line. Barack Hussein Obama does not represent mainstream America. He won the election due to the racist voting pattern exhibited by African-Americans.

African-Americans have established that expressing "racial pride" by voting on the basis of skin color is 100% acceptable. Neither the "Wall Street Journal" nor the "New York Times" complained about this racist behavior. Therefore, in future elections, please feel free to express your racial pride by voting on the basis of skin color. Feel free to vote for the non-Black candidates and against the Black candidates if you are not African-American. You need not defend your actions in any way. Voting on the basis of skin is quite acceptable by the standards of today's moral values.

Re:Some other points... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28407987)

It is not unusual that a patent lawyer would hold an engineering degree; in fact, to sit for the patent bar, one needs typically needs an engineering or science degree, and some patent lawyers have advanced degrees in their areas of specialty.

A point which most of Slashdot often forgets. "Oh, but what stupid attorney would write this? Any engineer would know better!" Earth to Slashdot -- the successful patent attorneys were successful engineers and scientists before they even thought of going to law school.

Re:Some other points... (1)

dave87656 (1179347) | more than 5 years ago | (#28408539)

Interesting points and very informative. Thanks.

By Neruos (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28396833)

The fact that IBM has applied for about every known patent over the past 9 years never came up either.

Re:By Neruos (1)

dimeglio (456244) | more than 5 years ago | (#28398265)

That's true but I'm unsure if it was done as an act of self preservation (if I don't do it someone else will) or with the intent to use them to sue everyone and make the legal department a profit center. According to their track record (I didn't check it but I've not heard of them in the news much as patent predators), I would tend to believe it is likely for self preservation.

But (1)

dernjg (1580879) | more than 5 years ago | (#28396835)

what will become of my patented karate chop to the face?

Come closer, grasshopper. (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28397431)

Boot to the head. [youtube.com]

I'm sure he'll be great... (2, Funny)

RobVB (1566105) | more than 5 years ago | (#28396843)

Obama's decisions never hurt a fly.

Re:I'm sure he'll be great... (1)

GaryOlson (737642) | more than 5 years ago | (#28398161)

Of course, because flies feed on the refuse left behind after the destruction, death, and resultant decay.

Re:I'm sure he'll be great... (1)

dimeglio (456244) | more than 5 years ago | (#28398323)

Of course, because flies feed on the refuse left behind after the destruction, death, and resultant decay.

Yeah but Gary, if there is total and complete destruction as you seem to imply, flies will die soon after as flies need loads and loads of crap to survive. No life, no crap. Which logically means that Obama's decisions will generate at least sufficient crap for flies to maintain their place in the circle of life.

I bet you thought he'd care only about the big issues.

Re:I'm sure he'll be great... (1)

guyminuslife (1349809) | more than 5 years ago | (#28402019)

Of course, because flies feed on the refuse left behind after the Bush administration.

FTFY

Isn't that required? (3, Informative)

Ungrounded Lightning (62228) | more than 5 years ago | (#28396845)

Not just a lawyer, Kappos earned an engineering degree before working in the legal field.

I thought an engineering degree, as well as passing the bar, was a requirement to practice patent law (at least in engineering-related branches if not in general).

So, given that he was a patent lawyer, that double degree is neither surprising nor unique.

Re:Isn't that required? (4, Informative)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 5 years ago | (#28396925)

> I thought an engineering degree, as well as passing the bar, was a requirement to
> practice patent law

No. One must pass the USPTO's exam and be admitted before the bar in at least one state. If you are not admitted before the bar but do pass the exam you can be a patent agent.
 

Re:Isn't that required? (4, Informative)

Ungrounded Lightning (62228) | more than 5 years ago | (#28396953)

I thought an engineering degree, as well as passing the bar, was a requirement to practice patent law (at least in engineering-related branches if not in general).

Ah, here we go. From the US section of the wikipedia article on patent attorneys [wikipedia.org] :

Both Patent Attorneys and Patent Agents are generally required to have a technical degree (such as engineering, chemistry or physics) and must take and pass the Examination for Registration to Practice in Patent Cases Before the United States Patent and Trademark Office.

Re:Isn't that required? (3, Informative)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 5 years ago | (#28397309)

Also from the wikipedia article on patent attorneys: [wikipedia.org] :

One can also meet the scientific and technical training requirement by qualifying under Category B[27] or Category C. Category B provides four distinct qualification options. Where each option sets a requisite number of semester hours in physics, biology, chemistry, computer science, and/or engineering. One can qualify under Category C through a showing that he or she has taken and passed the Fundamentals of Engineering (FE) examination.

Thus no degree is required.

Re:Isn't that required? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28404051)

Qualifying under Category C is very uncommon - I am a patent attorney, know hundreds of patent attorneys through my firm or other firms and conferences, and everyone of the them has a science degree.

Re:Isn't that required? (3, Informative)

geekoid (135745) | more than 5 years ago | (#28397591)

You don't need to have a degree. See section C on the qualifications document.

Re:Isn't that required? (4, Informative)

Gerocrack (979018) | more than 5 years ago | (#28396959)

Patent prosecution (writing patents) requires you pass the US patent bar, which is different from a state bar. To sit for the patent bar, you must have an engineering/science degree. Patent litigation, however, only requires you be certified by the bar of the state in which you are practicing; Patent Bar and technical degrees are not required. You can also take the patent bar w/o going to law school, and become a patent agent. Still need the technical background, though.

"could this mean a new era for US patent policy?" (4, Interesting)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 5 years ago | (#28396847)

Maybe. The USPTO must operate within the constraints set by Congress and the courts. Software patents were forced on them by the First Circuit: they opposed them initially.

Re:"could this mean a new era for US patent policy (1)

Gerocrack (979018) | more than 5 years ago | (#28396965)

They're not exactly thrilled about them now...

Re:"could this mean a new era for US patent policy (2, Informative)

Grond (15515) | more than 5 years ago | (#28399025)

Software patents were forced on them by the First Circuit

I think you mean either the Federal Circuit (e.g., In re Alappat and State Street) or the Supreme Court, depending on how broadly one reads Benson, Flook, and Diehr.

Omaha (1)

sexconker (1179573) | more than 5 years ago | (#28396889)

Now I KNOW I'm not the only one who read it as "Omaha".

Re:Omaha (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28397045)

Gordon Brown misread it the other way around. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgG8nX58gnA [youtube.com]

Morons. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28396933)

IBM is one of the worst trivial patent spammers out there.
Anyone who claims that this will mean any change in the USPTO policy is a clueless moron.

Only an era in u.s. policy ? hell. (1)

unity100 (970058) | more than 5 years ago | (#28397031)

it will be a new era for i.t. globally.

IBM (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28397089)

IBM:

I am
BASICALLY a
MORON

Re:IBM (1)

TinFoilMan (1371973) | more than 5 years ago | (#28397099)

I'm not sure about moron, but I bet they have a patent on tin foil hats.

It's Better Manually (1)

Fished (574624) | more than 5 years ago | (#28398607)

IBM: It's Better Manually

Tapped? (1)

CuteSteveJobs (1343851) | more than 5 years ago | (#28397161)

Tapped? What's with the Mainstream Media's latest buzzword?

"I was at the supermarket and I tapped the bottle of flavored milk. Then I decided to tap Checkout #6."

Last years MSM buzzword was "Lockdown."

"When I go to bed, I lockdown the house."

If the MSM wants to lift its flagging fortunes, it should work on the news rather than focusing on stupid buzzwords.

Re:Tapped? (1)

Spatial (1235392) | more than 5 years ago | (#28397251)

I was just wondering the same. Is there a liquid body of knowledge in the guy or something? Gonna put a well on his head?

Re:Tapped? (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 5 years ago | (#28397369)

They have been using tapped in this context for at least 40 years.

Re:Tapped? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28405845)

These day no one is ever 'chosen'. They're tapped. Tapped implies some element of subterfuge, and is now ridiculously overused. See 'announced' vs 'leaked.'

Re:Tapped? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28397525)

As in "Tapped on the shoulder"...

You probably have to be an old fart to have heard its common usage.

HTH

Re:Tapped? (2, Informative)

GaryOlson (737642) | more than 5 years ago | (#28398225)

Tapped is a mechanical term relating to the creation of screw threads in a [solid] material. In order to be properly tapped, material must be removed to create a cavity, the hole gets chamfered to provide a proper thread lead-in, and the threads created by forming or cutting.

So David Kappos has been properly drilled, edged, and rolled with precision.

Re:Tapped? (3, Funny)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 5 years ago | (#28399351)

So David Kappos has been properly drilled, edged, and rolled with precision.

So you are saying we're screwed?

Re:Tapped? (2, Informative)

fm6 (162816) | more than 5 years ago | (#28398263)

Tapped? What's with the Mainstream Media's latest buzzword?

Sigh. I guess anybody that reports actual news (as opposed to bloviating idiots) is "mainstream media." I've heard this use of "tap" for as long as I can remember. The OED says it goes back to the middle of the last century (that they can document):

1952 E. O'NEILL Moon for Misbegotten I. 55 He was tapped for an exclusive Senior Society at the Ivy university to which his father had given millions. 1972 J. MOSEDALE Football ii. 13 Sports Illustrated magazine tapped him..as its 'Sportsman of the Year'. 1977 Time 23 May 13/3 Britain's youthful Foreign Secretary David Owen announced last week that he had tapped Jay, at 40, to serve as Ambassador to Washington.

Re:Tapped? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28405935)

Bah smar. These day no one is ever 'chosen'. They're tapped. Tapped implies some element of subterfuge, and is now ridiculously overused. See 'announced' vs 'leaked.'

Re:Tapped? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28398473)

Hell, I'd tap that then put it in a lockbox and sell it for mad money my friend. I am not a criminal, knock down this wall!

Re:Tapped? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28400757)

And before that, it was "Price Point"

Re:Tapped? (1)

Ginger Unicorn (952287) | more than 5 years ago | (#28400867)

The question is, why didn't they summon a creature with vigilance, to avoid having to tap him in the first place.

Good choice (0, Offtopic)

nofactor (1053982) | more than 5 years ago | (#28397325)

If I were American, I think I would be a Democrat.

You will be modded down (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28397353)

It's not politically fashionable on Slashdot to say anything good about the Democrats.

IBM is the Record-Setter (3, Informative)

Bob9113 (14996) | more than 5 years ago | (#28397389)

From the linked article:

IBM has a worldwide portfolio of 40,000 patents. About half are lodged in the USA and the remainder split between Europe and Asia (where, of course, China is increasingly featuring). So far this year, IBM has filed 3,000 patents and is on target, says David, to maintain its record for the past 14 years of consistently filing more patents than anyone else.

So, if the definition of "new era for patent policy" is "more software patents", then yes (though I fail to see how that is "new" except that it is pressing harder on the accelerator down this destructive road). Granted, IBM is opposed to business method patents, but that is no surprise since their ability to innovate in business models is legendarily lackluster.

Nothing to see here. Same old moneyed interests using their monopoly-built position to buy more government access so they can create more monopoly rent opportunities for themselves.

Re:IBM is the Record-Setter (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28398155)

IBM is the #1 abuser of the patent system and invented the concept of patent trolling. Each year it is awarded thousands [blogspot.com] of garbage patents that cover nothing more than basic and very old ideas. IBM uses this portfolio of garbage patents to harass [ffii.org] smaller companies into paying licensing fees. It costs millions to defend yourself in court against IBM, but IBM is typically willing to "do business" (i.e., not file lawsuits) for only a few hundred thousand dollars up front.

It's too bad to see the slashdot crowd so eager to buy into IBM corporate propaganda. Just this week IBM was awarded a patent on an internet-connected dishwasher. What will IBM do with this patent? Harass dishwasher companies for licensing fees of course.

   

Re:IBM is the Record-Setter (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28407095)

From the linked article:

IBM has a worldwide portfolio of 40,000 patents. About half are lodged in the USA and the remainder split between Europe and Asia (where, of course, China is increasingly featuring). So far this year, IBM has filed 3,000 patents and is on target, says David, to maintain its record for the past 14 years of consistently filing more patents than anyone else.

So, if the definition of "new era for patent policy" is "more software patents", then yes (though I fail to see how that is "new" except that it is pressing harder on the accelerator down this destructive road). Granted, IBM is opposed to business method patents, but that is no surprise since their ability to innovate in business models is legendarily lackluster.

Nothing to see here. Same old moneyed interests using their monopoly-built position to buy more government access so they can create more monopoly rent opportunities for themselves.

I see "40,000 patents". What I don't see is "40,000 software patents". IBM is fundamentally a hardware company, after all.

Change (2, Insightful)

slimjim8094 (941042) | more than 5 years ago | (#28397413)

I sympathize for (but don't agree with) people who call out Obama's (admittedly many) poor decisions and shout "Is this the change you voted for? That was one hell of a marketing scheme"

Well I'm proud to say that, yes, this is the change I voted for. This is exactly the type of decision that makes me happy of my choice. Go Obama! I'm not thrilled about all of your decisions, but it's things like this that make me guardedly optimistic that the future of our country is in careful and intelligent

(Though I can't see at the moment how this will be spun as a negative, I'm sure it will be).

Re:Change (-1, Troll)

Daniel Dvorkin (106857) | more than 5 years ago | (#28397511)

It will be spun as a negative because:

(1) 0P3N 50R3Z 1Z F0R C0MMI3Z!!!

(2) He once said that the patent system is better in Europe than in the US. Why does this man hate America?!?

(3) He's an Obama nominee, and everything Obama does is evil, because Obama is a non-natural-born-citizen secret Muslim terrorist-loving socialist.

That about covers it. Of course, the "liberal MSM" will lap this shit up.

Re:Change (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28397519)

careful and intelligent

Some how those words sitting next to Obama seems like an oxymoron.

There I did it, that negative you were looking for.

Spare Change? (3, Interesting)

fm6 (162816) | more than 5 years ago | (#28398373)

Since you're the rare Obama critic who doesn't see Pure Evil in his every move (such as his choice of condiments [theweek.com] !) perhaps you could share some of your list of O's "many mistakes". I think he's actually done surprisingly well.

But more to the point, I crave an intelligent argument with a right-winger whose rhetoric goes beyond infantile insults and weird conspiracy mongering. When the conservatives were in charge, their abuse of logic and rhetoric would drive me up the wall. But now that they're out of power, their arguments are just a depressing sign of intellectual sloth. I guess they've had it too easy for too long.

People, get it together! It's your job as the opposition to keep us liberals honest! And it's a job you're not doing! Come one! Start pulling your weight! Isn't Personal Responsibility one of those Bennettish Virtues you keep harping on?

Shit (0)

Mr_eX9 (800448) | more than 5 years ago | (#28397439)

Now IBM is going to patent the USPTO itself!

I suppose I can't karma whore with (0, Troll)

Nautical Insanity (1190003) | more than 5 years ago | (#28397441)

saying "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss," and expect the automatic stamp of +5 insightful on this story can I.

Re:I suppose I can't karma whore with (0, Flamebait)

geekoid (135745) | more than 5 years ago | (#28397607)

Sure you can, because those zealots aren't exactly critical thinkers. I mean, of all the tools in the shed, there the ones lying outside in the rain.

Actually . . . (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28397887)

You could say that, and be modded way up. Slashdotters will come up with all kinds of spurious reasons why this is just terrible and why it means Obama is "OMG against our freedoms!" The actual truth doesn't matter to them.

Re:Actually . . . (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28397957)

The actual truth doesn't matter to them.

Nor to the people who can't help but praise him every time he farts. Be at least half honest and admit that there are two sides to this zealotry.

Re:Actually . . . (2, Insightful)

artor3 (1344997) | more than 5 years ago | (#28398029)

The actual truth doesn't matter to them.

Nor to the people who can't help but praise him every time he farts. Be at least half honest and admit that there are two sides to this zealotry.

Those "people" don't exist. They're strawmen created by people who are desperately afraid that the guy they voted against will turn out to be a good president.

During the election, the hardcore conservative nitwits were claiming that Obama's supporters thought he was the second coming. Did anyone actually believe that? No. But if you lie enough, people start to believe it. That's been the GOP's specialty for the past several years. I hope they get back to normal soon, but I suspect I have quite some time to wait.

Re:Actually . . . (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28401513)

The actual truth doesn't matter to them.

Nor to the people who can't help but praise him every time he farts. Be at least half honest and admit that there are two sides to this zealotry.

Those "people" don't exist. They're strawmen created by people who are desperately afraid that the guy they voted against will turn out to be a good president.

During the election, the hardcore conservative nitwits were claiming that Obama's supporters thought he was the second coming. Did anyone actually believe that? No. But if you lie enough, people start to believe it. That's been the GOP's specialty for the past several years. I hope they get back to normal soon, but I suspect I have quite some time to wait.

Wish I had mod points for this. I voted for Obama, and I only expected him to "change" certain things. I was realistic about his power as president, and about his ties to private enterprise as well. EVERY POLITICIAN THAT'S ELECTABLE HAS THEM. I suspected that he would be a slightly better president than McCain, and a much better president than Palin if McCain died in office. These are the things that the voters were actually thinking about. I didn't think he was some savior.

Re:Actually . . . (1)

guyminuslife (1349809) | more than 5 years ago | (#28402077)

Trivial dispute: I think "normalcy" has changed and this is what is normal now. Demographic shifts and bad policy have played out poorly for the GOP, and as long as they're dealing with their current platform and the trend within the American public, "scare tactics" are pretty much an intrinsic part of the solution.

They'll hopefully get over it, but that will come with a change in policy as well. And that would be "change," not "normalcy."

Re:I suppose I can't karma whore with (1)

tsm_sf (545316) | more than 5 years ago | (#28398591)

saying "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss," and expect the automatic stamp of +5 insightful on this story can I.

We'll let the market sort that out.

new era for US patent policy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28397561)

"Given his background, could this mean a new era for US patent policy?"

I hope. But I doubt it...HE will become a politician and then forget about the common good to all citizens.....

Is this really good? (1)

dreemernj (859414) | more than 5 years ago | (#28398545)

He's vice president and assistant general counsel for intellectual property at the company that patents more than anybody else. And they've been patenting more than anybody else for a long time (20 years? 30 years?). Companies like Microsoft wish they were patenting as much stuff as IBM does and I firmly believe the drive to patent everything in sight that we see in so many companies is spurred on by the fact that they are all trying to catch up with IBM.

I don't automatically believe this will be bad, but its hard to ignore the possibility that this could be giving the fat kid the key to the candy store.

The pessimist in me can't stop thinking that the only reason people don't seem to be as critical of IBM's massive patenting efforts despite the gap between them and 2nd place (Samsung now I believe) in the patenting world is that they've done the good PR of supporting OSS publicly while grabbing up all the IP they can for themselves.

Very Short Answer (1)

mqduck (232646) | more than 5 years ago | (#28399493)

Given his background, could this mean a new era for US patent policy?

VERY SHORT ANSWER: No.
But it sounds like a nice development.

IBM in Trillion Dollar Patent Theft Lawsuit (1)

iviewit (1193391) | more than 5 years ago | (#28409985)

MADOFF + STANFORD + DREIER + SATYAM + FISERV + ALBERT HU + The 1031 Tax Group LLC - Edward H. Okun = PROSKAUER ROSE, FOLEY & LARDNER, IBM, INTEL, SGI and others. Can all these crimes be related to the theft of Intellectual Property by former IBM patent counsel and employees, could this be the reason Obama is tapping IBM executives and Foley & Lardner attorneys to key commerce positions, in effect to continue the cover up of the crimes against the United States Patent & Trademark Offices and inventors? At the heart of the matter are technologies that revolutionized the digital imaging and video content creation and distribution channels in almost every product that utilizes such technologies. The technologies opened the door for things like Internet and Cell Phone full screen, full frame rate video over low bandwidths. They solved for image pixel distortion on zoom of low resolution images and now are commonly found on all Digital Cameras, the Hubble, Space Simulators, Medical Imaging Devices, Televisions, Graphic Chips, Internet Video Players (i.e. Microsoft Media Player, Apple Quicktime, Real Player, etc.), Satellite and Military Imaging Applications. Coined the âoeHoly Grailâ of digital imaging and video by leading experts and engineers, from Intel, SGI and Lockheed, including Hassan Miah, the technologies were then alleged stolen by the very patent attorneys that were supposed to be patenting them, read on. I personally have been trying to notify regulators and authorities of a ONE TRILLION DOLLAR patent theft that is putting investors in certain tech companies at huge risk. Companies involved in the alleged crimes and now in a TRILLION dollar federal lawsuit include Intel, Lockheed, SGI and IBM. The companies involved in the fraud fail to acknowledge the risk exposing shareholders and citizens to impending liabilities as required by FASB accounting Rule 5, hiding the impending liabilities. A SEC complaint has been filed against Intel and Lockheed for failure to notify shareholders of liability @ http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20090325%20FINAL%20Intel%20SEC%20Complaint%20SIGNED2073.pdf [iviewit.tv] Investigators, courts and federal agents have been notified of the crimes and evidence, including a car-bombing attempt on my life and the US Patent Office has now suspended the Iviewit Intellectual Properties pending investigations by the USPTO, the attorney disciplinary of the USPTO the Office of Enrollment and Discipline and Federal Authorities. I know how Harry Markopolos felt trying to expose Madoff in a world without regulation and where government agencies have been infiltrated to subterfuge the crimes by the law firms involved. Many of todayâ(TM)s biggest crimes like Madoff, Allen Stanford and Marc Drier are alleged tied to the thefts, as money laundering vehicles for the stolen inventor royalties. Did I hear Proskauer Rose is involved in Madoff (involved many clients too) and acted as Allen Stanford's attorney. Investors who lost money in these scams should start looking at the law firms, like Proskauer's assets for recovery. First, Proskauer partner Gregg Mashberg claims Madoff is a financial 9/11 for their clients, if they directed you to Madoff sue them. Then, Proskauer partner Thomas Sjoblom former enforcement dude for SEC and Allen Stanford attorney, declares PARTY IS OVER to Stanford employees and advises them to PRAY, this two days before SEC hearings. Then at the SEC hearings, he lies with Holt to SEC saying she only prepared with him but fails to mention Miami meeting at airport hanger which witnesses state was held to mislead SEC investigators. Then Sjoblom resigns as Stanford counsel and sends an email to the SEC disaffirming all statements made by him and Proskauer, his butt on fire. If you were burned in Stanford sue Proskauer. The FBI has arrested Stanford and the indictment clearly points to Sjoblom and Proskauer as the legal counsel involved in committing Fraud on the SEC to derail their investigation. Proskauer Rose and Foley & Lardner are also in a TRILLION dollar FEDERAL LAWSUIT legally related to a WHISTLEBLOWER CASE, an insider of the New York Supreme Court Appellate Division First Department Departmental Disciplinary Committee, who claims Obstruction of attorney complaints, threats, physical assaults by her superiors and coercion in her case in FEDERAL COURT. That case now has been marked legally "related" to the Iviewit TRILLION dollar suit. Marc S. Dreier, another attorney Defendant in the Iviewit suit, was involved in Iviewit through patent attorney Raymond A. Joao of Meltzer Lippe who put 90+ patents in his own name! Proskauer Partner Kenneth Rubenstein brought in Joao. Rubenstein is the sole patent evaluator for the MPEGLA LLC patent pools and former Iviewit Patent Counsel. MPEG is now the largest infringer of the stolen Iviewit technology, Rubenstein in fact stealing the technologies for his client MPEGLA, that he helped form, perhaps to steal inventorsâ(TM) inventions, as patent pools in the past have done and why the DOJ has historically broken them up as anticompetitive monopolistic schemes. Of course, as the case with the SEC and other government agencies under Bush, the Antitrust Department regulatory body evaporated. Of special note, former IBM patent counsel William J. Dick, yes, Dick Dick, and IBM plant manager Brian G. Utley were intimately involved in the theft of the IP and were brought to Iviewit by Proskauer Rose. Dick was far eastern patent counsel for IBM and together with Utley and Christopher C. Wheeler of Proskauer were all involved in a previous patent theft attempt of a Florida Billionaire, Monte Friedkin. Perhaps the reason IBM is now infiltrating the US Patent Office, Obama and Holder have been notified about the crimes, making recent decisions to have members of Foley & Lardner and IBM assigned to key Commerce Departments hard to imagine, since they are involved with this case under state, federal and international investigations. The Trillion Dollar suit according to Judge Shira Scheindlin is one of PATENT THEFT, MURDER & A CAR BOMBING. For graphics on the car bombing of the main inventor of the technologies, Eliot I. Bernstein, please visit www.iviewit.tv. The Federal Court cases United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Docket 08-4873-cv - Bernstein, et al. v Appellate Division First Department Disciplinary Committee, et al. - TRILLION DOLLAR LAWSUIT Cases @ US District Court - Southern District NY (07cv09599) Anderson v The State of New York, et al. - WHISTLEBLOWER LAWSUIT (07cv11196) Bernstein, et al. v Appellate Division First Department Disciplinary Committee, et al. (07cv11612) Esposito v The State of New York, et al., (08cv00526) Capogrosso v New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct, et al., (08cv02391) McKeown v The State of New York, et al., (08cv02852) Galison v The State of New York, et al., (08cv03305) Carvel v The State of New York, et al., and, (08cv4053) Gizella Weisshaus v The State of New York, et al. (08cv4438) Suzanne McCormick v The State of New York, et al. ( ) John L. Petrec-Tolino v. The State of New York Eliot I. Bernstein Mad Inventor Iviewit Technologies, Inc, iviewit@iviewit.tv

Re:IBM in Trillion Dollar Patent Theft Lawsuit (1)

badkarmadayaccount (1346167) | more than 5 years ago | (#28445725)

MADOFF + STANFORD + DREIER + SATYAM + FISERV + ALBERT HU + The 1031 Tax Group LLC - Edward H. Okun = PROSKAUER ROSE, FOLEY & LARDNER, IBM, INTEL, SGI and others.

Can all these crimes be related to the theft of Intellectual Property by former IBM patent counsel and employees, could this be the reason Obama is tapping IBM executives and Foley & Lardner attorneys to key commerce positions, in effect to continue the cover up of the crimes against the United States Patent & Trademark Offices and inventors? At the heart of the matter are technologies that revolutionized the digital imaging and video content creation and distribution channels in almost every product that utilizes such technologies.
The technologies opened the door for things like Internet and Cell Phone full screen, full frame rate video over low bandwidths. They solved for image pixel distortion on zoom of low resolution images and now are commonly found on all Digital Cameras, the Hubble, Space Simulators, Medical Imaging Devices, Televisions, Graphic Chips, Internet Video Players (i.e. Microsoft Media Player, Apple Quicktime, Real Player, etc.), Satellite and Military Imaging Applications. Coined the âoeHoly Grailâ of digital imaging and video by leading experts and engineers, from Intel, SGI and Lockheed, including Hassan Miah, the technologies were then alleged stolen by the very patent attorneys that were supposed to be patenting them, read on.
I personally have been trying to notify regulators and authorities of a ONE TRILLION DOLLAR patent theft that is putting investors in certain tech companies at huge risk. Companies involved in the alleged crimes and now in a TRILLION dollar federal lawsuit include Intel, Lockheed, SGI and IBM. The companies involved in the fraud fail to acknowledge the risk exposing shareholders and citizens to impending liabilities as required by FASB accounting Rule 5, hiding the impending liabilities. A SEC complaint has been filed against Intel and Lockheed for failure to notify shareholders of liability @ http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20090325%20FINAL%20Intel%20SEC%20Complaint%20SIGNED2073.pdf [iviewit.tv]
Investigators, courts and federal agents have been notified of the crimes and evidence, including a car-bombing attempt on my life and the US Patent Office has now suspended the Iviewit Intellectual Properties pending investigations by the USPTO, the attorney disciplinary of the USPTO the Office of Enrollment and Discipline and Federal Authorities. I know how Harry Markopolos felt trying to expose Madoff in a world without regulation and where government agencies have been infiltrated to subterfuge the crimes by the law firms involved.
Many of todayâ(TM)s biggest crimes like Madoff, Allen Stanford and Marc Drier are alleged tied to the thefts, as money laundering vehicles for the stolen inventor royalties. Did I hear Proskauer Rose is involved in Madoff (involved many clients too) and acted as Allen Stanford's attorney. Investors who lost money in these scams should start looking at the law firms, like Proskauer's assets for recovery. First, Proskauer partner Gregg Mashberg claims Madoff is a financial 9/11 for their clients, if they directed you to Madoff sue them. Then, Proskauer partner Thomas Sjoblom former enforcement dude for SEC and Allen Stanford attorney, declares PARTY IS OVER to Stanford employees and advises them to PRAY, this two days before SEC hearings. Then at the SEC hearings, he lies with Holt to SEC saying she only prepared with him but fails to mention Miami meeting at airport hanger which witnesses state was held to mislead SEC investigators. Then Sjoblom resigns as Stanford counsel and sends an email to the SEC disaffirming all statements made by him and Proskauer, his butt on fire. If you were burned in Stanford sue Proskauer. The FBI has arrested Stanford and the indictment clearly points to Sjoblom and Proskauer as the legal counsel involved in committing Fraud on the SEC to derail their investigation.
Proskauer Rose and Foley & Lardner are also in a TRILLION dollar FEDERAL LAWSUIT legally related to a WHISTLEBLOWER CASE, an insider of the New York Supreme Court Appellate Division First Department Departmental Disciplinary Committee, who claims Obstruction of attorney complaints, threats, physical assaults by her superiors and coercion in her case in FEDERAL COURT. That case now has been marked legally "related" to the Iviewit TRILLION dollar suit. Marc S. Dreier, another attorney Defendant in the Iviewit suit, was involved in Iviewit through patent attorney Raymond A. Joao of Meltzer Lippe who put 90+ patents in his own name! Proskauer Partner Kenneth Rubenstein brought in Joao.
Rubenstein is the sole patent evaluator for the MPEGLA LLC patent pools and former Iviewit Patent Counsel. MPEG is now the largest infringer of the stolen Iviewit technology, Rubenstein in fact stealing the technologies for his client MPEGLA, that he helped form, perhaps to steal inventorsâ(TM) inventions, as patent pools in the past have done and why the DOJ has historically broken them up as anticompetitive monopolistic schemes. Of course, as the case with the SEC and other government agencies under Bush, the Antitrust Department regulatory body evaporated.
Of special note, former IBM patent counsel William J. Dick, yes, Dick Dick, and IBM plant manager Brian G. Utley were intimately involved in the theft of the IP and were brought to Iviewit by Proskauer Rose. Dick was far eastern patent counsel for IBM and together with Utley and Christopher C. Wheeler of Proskauer were all involved in a previous patent theft attempt of a Florida Billionaire, Monte Friedkin. Perhaps the reason IBM is now infiltrating the US Patent Office, Obama and Holder have been notified about the crimes, making recent decisions to have members of Foley & Lardner and IBM assigned to key Commerce Departments hard to imagine, since they are involved with this case under state, federal and international investigations.
The Trillion Dollar suit according to Judge Shira Scheindlin is one of PATENT THEFT, MURDER & A CAR BOMBING. For graphics on the car bombing of the main inventor of the technologies, Eliot I. Bernstein, please visit www.iviewit.tv. The Federal Court cases

  • United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Docket 08-4873-cv - Bernstein, et al. v Appellate Division First Department Disciplinary Committee, et al. - TRILLION DOLLAR LAWSUIT
  • Cases @ US District Court - Southern District NY (07cv09599) Anderson v The State of New York, et al. - WHISTLEBLOWER LAWSUIT
  • (07cv11196) Bernstein, et al. v Appellate Division First Department Disciplinary Committee, et al.
  • (07cv11612) Esposito v The State of New York, et al.,
  • (08cv00526) Capogrosso v New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct, et al.,
  • (08cv02391) McKeown v The State of New York, et al.,
  • (08cv02852) Galison v The State of New York, et al.,
  • (08cv03305) Carvel v The State of New York, et al., and,
  • (08cv4053) Gizella Weisshaus v The State of New York, et al.
  • (08cv4438) Suzanne McCormick v The State of New York, et al.
  • ( ) John L. Petrec-Tolino v. The State of New York

Eliot I. Bernstein
Mad Inventor
Iviewit Technologies, Inc,
iviewit@iviewit.tv

FTFY

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...