Eolas browser plugin patent upheld
The US Patent Office has upheld the Eolas patent on browser plugins. This is only the latest stage in what will be a long, drawn-out process, and it’s being appealed to the Supreme Court, so it might all change again. From my perspective, though, it’s a good thing. “Plugins” in browsers are bad. Java applets, embedded movies, all bad. I never watch movies embedded in the browser; I get the URL and load it into a proper movie player. I don’t have the Java applet plugin installed. None of this affects my use of the web. The web is, true enough, a marvellous delivery system for all kinds of interesting multimedia content. The browser, though, is not. Browser plugins have non-standard interfaces, are confusing, and break a lot. The only plugin that I use even remotely often is Flash, and I wouldn’t miss it if it went away. I say support Eolas, and let’s keep the web HTML.
That is, assuming that the patent doesn’t cover things like images or JavaScript in web pages. If it does then I’ll be less supportive…
[...] Stuart Langridge writes, “I say support Eolas, and let’s keep the web HTML.” [...]
98 minutes later
I’m assuming you’re not being a troll …
The fact _you_ don’t like plugins is an awfully selfish and silly justification for forbidding anyone’s use of Applets, Flash, etc.
The Eolas patent is a piece of excrement and the ends do not justify the means. One day this precedent might be used to prohibit something you _do_ want, so don’t be so short-sighted.
8 hours later
Joe: I don’t agree with you. The Eolas patent is no better and no worse than any other patents. If you think it’s unreasonable that someone who thinks up a software idea first should get to exploit it and lock others out (a view with which I have a great deal of sympathy), then your argument is with software patents, not with Eolas. I think that the web is for delivering web pages, and something that isn’t a web page should open up in an application on your machine, not a noddy cut-down version of that application embedded in a webpage. I don’t troll, and I don’t see how the web would be impoverished by not allowing browser plugins. As I mentioned, the only one that would be missed is Flash, and I think (as do others) that Flash is bad for the web.
10 hours later
*handwavy mode on*
It does stop things like the Adobe SVG plugin, which allows non supporting browsers to get into the world of cool new things.
Also, where does the line between the bit of the browser that you download to support the latest version of MathML and the bit of the browser you use to view XHTML come? If XHTML is going to support various module formats, they’re going to need to come in some modulized form.
13 hours later
I’m with Joe and Aq on this, sil. It seems very short-sighted to see this as a good thing, particularly when it comes to support for things like MathML and other new specs (HTML 5.0?). And yes, I’m against software patents for being far not being anywhere near specific enough.
30 hours later
I use embeddable flash gadgets like chatango.com for instant messaging and youtube.com for putting flash videos in my web pages. I have seen a lot of pages in Myspace with these.
Because of the creedy crook from Eolas, a comany with 1 person, 3 lawyers and 100 investors, who have never made any working product, we might be unable to use these and other Flash products…
If you do not see why flash plugins are good for the web, look at 18+ million of myspace.com users, and look at how many profiles there contain flash plugins- milions. Same goes for blogs, who use Flickr flash plugins to display their picture gallery.
39 hours later
As a web developer for 7 years now, I can honestly say this is one of the worst rulings I’ve ever had to deal with. For once I’m siding with MS. Try making 300+ websites over the past 5 years all having some sort of multimedia (mainly flash) in them. Now imagine that your clients are all calling you all at once wanting to know what this extra click and pop-up message is about. Have sympathy for developers now? Thought so. Plug-ins allow for fast and efficient media to be displayed. Like it or not, the future of the internet is multimedia and plug-ins will lead this wave.
29 weeks later
Jim: no, I don’t have sympathy. Flash is proprietary software. Plugins are bad. There is no reason, none, to use them. If I want to watch a movie or listen to music then I want it to open in my choice of player, thankyou very much, and I don’t want it in some tiny window in the browser. Reap what you sow; if you’d provided links to your content rather than embedding it, and if you’d used open standards rather than proprietary technology, then you wouldn’t be in this mess.
29 weeks later
I disagree with all these views - none of you have stopped and thought of the implication of this. The patent is bogus, that’s true. the reason they done it was for money, and Eolas have a poor record to go by (hurricane katrina victims scam, anyone?).
You don’t like plugins. thats ok. I do. You and I should both have the choice to do whatever we want on the web, hence the ideals of a freemarket.
To “stop plugins” opens a floodgate of other patents potentially getting through, and its possible they could effect your webbrowsing.
heck, what if the RIAA or whatnot got their piece, and locked down the web by forcing drm into the websites themselves to prevent “copyrighted songs distribution”
63 weeks later
I dont like this surf control nonsence……..its bogus if you ask m3!They blocked everything,things that shouldent be blocked! Its not gonna keep us out of trouble if thats what they think & what they fail to realize is that we as the student body find proxys…& every
time they block them we find a new 1….so basicaly its just a waist
of time to block them….so why dont we just git rid of SurfControl!?………
75 weeks later