🚀 go-pugleaf

While I must agree that software concepts should not be patentable,
I do wish others would look at the reality of the current situation:

	It IS currently legal to request a patent on algorithms, and
	for the moment these patents do exist.

As long as this state of affairs continues to exist, please quit
complaining about those who HAVE patents and wish to protect them.
Complaining is just noise, do something about it (as many of you 
have/are) if you don't like it.

If Mark Williams owns the patent on byte ordering, so be it.  THEY
HAVE THE RIGHT to protect their patent which they appear to be doing.
(I'm not defending Mark Williams Co. as the originator of the concept,
just as the OWNER of the concept - the courts will have to decide..)

Remember that the best ideas are usually the most simple... and byte
ordering is one of those.  Wonderfully obvious in hindsight, simple,
but it took a while to become really 'wide spread' in practice.

Note that there really isn't anyway to draw an analogy to byte
ordering and a common language - it's more like sending a memo between
remote office locations - when the memo goes out the door it gets
translated into ENGLISH from JAPANESE, and when it comes in the door
it may get translated back into JAPANESE.  Not necesarily the most
efficient method - just useful for highly algorithmic systems
(computers).
--
                            +--------------------------
                            | Richard A. Sitze
                            | sitze@nmsu.edu,    phone: (505) 646-6228
                              SH 163