Oops. Distributed Confinement requires Discretion

[Kragen Sitaker]

On Fri, 18 Dec 1998, Mark S. Miller wrote:
> Fortunately, the patent is invalid anyway.

Why?  And in what jurisdiction?  Presumably you mean the US.

>  And even if it weren't, the
> worst case is that E would have to live with only single-machine
> confinement until 2003.  Not a big deal, but it would be a shame.

I'm intrigued.  What's E?

-- 
<kragen@pobox.com>       Kragen Sitaker     <http://www.pobox.com/~kragen/>
"Why are you withholding me?" -- name withheld  "Oh... And dig this:  I
am a fish.  'Nuff said." -- Joe Blaylock (no further explanation)
These are the denizens of the CLUG mailing list.  Their five-year mission: