Alan Kay, Re: BountyQuest
>Might be worth a try. I think anyone that is actually concerned might
>try them and see what happens ....

Alan -

While we're certainly a concerned party, it seems that you, and people you
know, have the knowledge to strike down these patents, not us.  Without
your direct involvement, there's little we can do on our own.

Unlike many of the patents that BountyQuest is pursuing, I am of the
position that the Xerox Unistroke patent isn't inherently silly, but
rather, based on your comments, derivative of a substantial body of prior
art.

I'm willing to pursue the research to locate these patents, and backtrack
up the prior patents and set them up for your people to shoot down.  I
can't, however, afford to wave a red cape at these guys - we're too small.
I've been through an expensive suit with a big (toy) company where I was
right but couldn't afford to win - even the judge thought they were being
ridiculous but they had just enough meat to keep it from being tossed and
instead expended our meager resources.

Frankly, I think your vast knowledge of the history of this industry could
be a major resource to BountyQuest.

By the way, Perlin's patent is 5,764,794 - so see what you think about it:

http://www.delphion.com/details?pn=US05764794__

Delphion is quite flaky today so I'm still having trouble navigating the
reference tree - however, there is a patent referenced that was granted in
1965 regarding character recognition.  I can't find out more about it
without going through the PTO, since it's apparently not online.

-- Duane