Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : CheckFree Holdings Corp. (CKFR), the next Dell, Intel? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Gregg Soster who wrote (5964)	6/3/1999 8:53:00 AM
From: Benny Baga	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 20297

>>>I have heard that this patent is not defensible. I agree.

To: Gregg Soster who wrote (5964)	6/3/1999 10:54:00 AM
From: jjbucci	Respond to of 20297

Gregg, <<Using our patented ATM network-based architecture I have heard that this patent is not defensible, too broad, general ect.. plus nobody I have talked to wants saddled with more ATM transaction fees. Probably why their still as small as they are after so many years.>> The job of a patent attorney is to seek the broadest possible claims in light of any prior art found during the searches. Now, if you are saying the patent is indefensible because of prior art, that's another story entirely. But, Too broad and general have nothing to do with whether it's defensible. I don't know anything about the patent in question, but am responding on a general basis only. jjbucci