Appeal No. 2003-1329
Application No. 09/131,386
page 3). Appellants further point to Column 11, lines 32-44 of
Stefik and assert that the usage rights for a digital work may
require that a repository be prohibited from further loaning out
the work, although the permanently attached usage rights may
permit the repository to grant access request upon certain
conditions and/or restrictions (brief, page 11; reply brief, page
3). Appellants further point out that upon distribution of the
digital work repositories, the permanently attached usage rights
define a “next set of rights” that is at least more restrictive
than the previous set of rights (brief, page 11; reply brief,
page 4). Additionally, Appellants argue that the sections of
Stefik which are relied upon by the Examiner as the suggestion
for modifying the reference, merely refer to “unauthorized
attempts to use the licensed product” and fail to teach or
suggest the claimed generating logic conversion software (reply
brief, page 5).
In response to Appellants’ arguments, the Examiner merely
equates the way the “usage rights language” and “software” may be
used to invoke a license check in Stefik with the claimed logic
conversion software generator (answer, page 34). The Examiner
further relies on the license control system of Stefik denying
usage in the event a request goes unanswered which indicates
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007