[robinsoh]

> That is quite a jumble of overlapping / inter-locking patents. The goal is to prevent competition using similar technology. It looks effective. And to answer your next question, no I'm not in the display industry,

So you're not in the display industry, and yet you claim there's overlapping /inter-locking patents. Please tell the rest of us a bit more. What's inter-locking about them? So if I did: patents/search=ibm or search=microsoft does that also meet your claim? So let me guess, you believe IBM is blocking progress in the software industry?

[314]

You seem to be unaware of your communication style. It would work better if you took some time to work out why your comments come across as hostile and unproductive.

So tell me, how long have you been in the patent-lawyer industry?

See, that does not come across as a good faith attempt to communicate. It is similar to your posting style throughout this thread. Instead of interrogating people and demanding replies, how about you read the patents and explain if you think they are overlapping / inter-locking or not. Out of interest, which company in the display industry do you work for?

[robinsoh]

You made a claim that patents are blocking progress in the display industry. When I asked you for evidence of that, you've become hostile and turned the thread into an unproductive interaction. That's my genuine observation of this thread.