Comment on Paul Allen Sues Apple, Others Over PatentsparentComments−dwynings16yPatents are referenced here: https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://online.wsj.com/pub...U.S. PATENT NO. 6,263,507 U.S. PATENT NO. 6,757,682 U.S. PATENT NO. 6,788,314 U.S. PATENT NO. 6,034,652−vrruiz16y- 6,263,507: Browser for use in navigating a body of information, with particular application to browsing information represented by audiovisual data http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sec...- 6,034,652: Attention manager for occupying the peripheral attention of a person in the vicinity of a display device http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect2=PTO1&Sec...- 6,788,314: Attention manager for occupying the peripheral attention of a person in the vicinity of a display device http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect2=PTO1&Sec...- 6,757,682: Alerting users to items of current interest http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect2=PTO1&Sec...−robryan16yJust going by titles it sounds like the NYTimes related article popup at the bottom of an article would be covered by these even more than some of the alleged companies.
Comments
Patents are referenced here: https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://online.wsj.com/pub...
U.S. PATENT NO. 6,263,507 U.S. PATENT NO. 6,757,682 U.S. PATENT NO. 6,788,314 U.S. PATENT NO. 6,034,652
- 6,263,507: Browser for use in navigating a body of information, with particular application to browsing information represented by audiovisual data http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sec...
- 6,034,652: Attention manager for occupying the peripheral attention of a person in the vicinity of a display device http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect2=PTO1&Sec...
- 6,788,314: Attention manager for occupying the peripheral attention of a person in the vicinity of a display device http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect2=PTO1&Sec...
- 6,757,682: Alerting users to items of current interest http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect2=PTO1&Sec...
Just going by titles it sounds like the NYTimes related article popup at the bottom of an article would be covered by these even more than some of the alleged companies.