<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The History of Software Patents</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2009/01/24/the-history-of-software-patents/id=1772/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2009/01/24/the-history-of-software-patents/id=1772/</link>
	<description>Patents, Patent Applications, Patent Law</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 Mar 2010 13:20:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: JamesD</title>
		<link>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2009/01/24/the-history-of-software-patents/id=1772/#comment-5204</link>
		<dc:creator>JamesD</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2009 17:46:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=1772#comment-5204</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the useful info. It&#039;s so interesting</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the useful info. It&#8217;s so interesting</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: 6</title>
		<link>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2009/01/24/the-history-of-software-patents/id=1772/#comment-660</link>
		<dc:creator>6</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Mar 2009 05:06:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=1772#comment-660</guid>
		<description>Gene man what happened to the second posting?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Gene man what happened to the second posting?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gene Quinn</title>
		<link>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2009/01/24/the-history-of-software-patents/id=1772/#comment-332</link>
		<dc:creator>Gene Quinn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Jan 2009 04:33:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=1772#comment-332</guid>
		<description>breadcrumbs-

Thanks for the link.  I will take a look at it as I write the follow on pieces.  I have a lot already written and ready to launch this week.  I can assure you that my Federal Circuit article will definitely mention Alappat.  In my opinion that is one of the most important cases in the development.  That is the case that ultimately made it possible for software to come out of the closet and actually be treated like... well... software.  

Thanks for reading.

-Gene</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>breadcrumbs-</p>
<p>Thanks for the link.  I will take a look at it as I write the follow on pieces.  I have a lot already written and ready to launch this week.  I can assure you that my Federal Circuit article will definitely mention Alappat.  In my opinion that is one of the most important cases in the development.  That is the case that ultimately made it possible for software to come out of the closet and actually be treated like&#8230; well&#8230; software.  </p>
<p>Thanks for reading.</p>
<p>-Gene</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: breadcrumbs</title>
		<link>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2009/01/24/the-history-of-software-patents/id=1772/#comment-331</link>
		<dc:creator>breadcrumbs</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Jan 2009 03:06:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=1772#comment-331</guid>
		<description>Gene,

It may be of interest to specifically highlight differences in the history you present with the history presented by our friends at Groklaw (specifically, Groklaw links to the following software history article: http://www.bitlaw.com/software-patent/history.html).  Surprisingly (or not), the article seems a little thin on the actual development of legal thought, for example, entirely omitting Alappat.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Gene,</p>
<p>It may be of interest to specifically highlight differences in the history you present with the history presented by our friends at Groklaw (specifically, Groklaw links to the following software history article: <a href="http://www.bitlaw.com/software-patent/history.html)" rel="nofollow">http://www.bitlaw.com/software-patent/history.html)</a>.  Surprisingly (or not), the article seems a little thin on the actual development of legal thought, for example, entirely omitting Alappat.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
