Oops. Distributed Confinement requires Discretion

[Mark S. Miller]

Gotta run to catch a plane, so I'll be brief

At 10:20 AM 12/18/98 , Kragen Sitaker wrote:
>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.

See http://eros.cis.upenn.edu/~majordomo/e-lang/0402.html


>>  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?

See http://www.erights.org , especially
http://www.erights.org/doc/elang/e-book-toc.html and
http://www.erights.org/doc/elib/elibmanual.pdf