Typo Keyboard For iPhone Faces Sales Ban 205
time_lords_almanac (3527081) writes "BlackBerry is trying to put the kibosh on the Typo, a physical keyboard attachment for iPhone. And they've won the first round, in the form of a sales ban on the attachment. From the article: '"BlackBerry is pleased that its motion for a preliminary injunction against Typo Products LLC was granted. This ruling will help prevent further injury to BlackBerry from Typo's blatant theft of our patented keyboard technology," a spokeswoman for BlackBerry told the news agency in an email.'"
patented keyboard technology? (Score:3, Interesting)
Because, you know, physical keyboards are such an advancing field.... I can't imagine how awful keyboards would be with out BlackBerry's patented technology.
Re:patented keyboard technology? (Score:5, Funny)
Because, you know, physical keyboards are such an advancing field.... I can't imagine how awful keyboards would be with out BlackBerry's patented technology.
Advancing? Hardly, there are patents and so no advancement is possible.
Re: (Score:2)
Whoosh!
Re: (Score:2)
I think you were just whoooshed too.
Re: (Score:2)
Now here's a post that deserves a +5 funny.
Re:patented keyboard technology? (Score:5, Insightful)
What advancement? The typo keyboard is virtually a 1 for 1 copy of the Q10 keyboard. They didn't even bother changing the colour of the frets.
You guys would be pretty pissed if "6oo6le" copied Google to the point of even using the playskool colour theme on the letters, but it's A-OK to rip off BlackBerry 100% because you don't like them.
Hypocrites.
Re:patented keyboard technology? (Score:4, Informative)
What advancement? The typo keyboard is virtually a 1 for 1 copy of the Q10 keyboard. They didn't even bother changing the colour of the frets.
Just a illustrate how blatant a knock-off it is, here's the Typo keyboard [cnet.com] from the linked news story, and here's what Typo copied [blackberry.com] to create it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
My Apple Wireless Keyboard is almost identical to a Model M: the keys are in the same basic arrangement, they're squarish, each key's label contrasts with the plastic of the key itself, and they have many of the same non-alphanumeric keys (shift, delete, etc.). They are clearly infringing.
There are only so many ways you can make the thing and still have it usable by people who've practiced on others with similar features. In short: form follows function. This seems utterly obvious and doomed to be smacked d
Re: (Score:2)
Advancing? Hardly, there are patents and so no advancement is possible.
Is too. The latest version has a sarcasm detector.
Re: (Score:2)
Having used a lot of keyboards. There are a lot of subtitle thing with them that makes it a good keyboard vs a bad one.
For example the chicklet keyboard. Apple and Lenovo think pads work. HP doesn't.
If you want it on the cell phone there are more little details. Making a really good one is hard. And costs a fair amount of R&D to make. However after you make it it is too easy to copy. Hence the pattent protection on it.
Re: (Score:2)
A lot of the patents out there are ridiculous, but have you actually seen these keyboards? They are straight up copies down to the beveling. Its not a "whats the corner radius maybe they stole from apple" thing, its a "they very probably sent a photo of a blackberry keyboard over to manufacturing" scenario.
Aside from BES, keyboards definately were (are) the best things about blackberry; Id probably lose my crap too if I were RIM and someone straight up copied it.
Re: (Score:2)
Because, you know, physical keyboards are such an advancing field.... I can't imagine how awful keyboards would be with out BlackBerry's patented technology.
I hate to be a Devil's advocate here, but if physical keyboard technology is so straightforward, then why don't you buy yourself a keyboard of a different brand?
Re:patented keyboard technology? (Score:4, Insightful)
With the angle-topped keys and the particular choice of layout, I think that I actually agree with Blackberry on this one, though I'd think this would fall into trademark territory more than patent technology. Maybe the curved ridges on the keys somehow have a patent I guess...
Re: (Score:3)
Design patents, like (downmods coming in 3 ..2... 1) rectangles with rounded corners.
Re:patented keyboard technology? (Score:4, Insightful)
The shape and feel of the keyboards is basically everything there is to the keyboard, and its all basically a copy. Its not even remotely similar to the apple case.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:patented keyboard technology? (Score:4, Interesting)
BB did have a patent on the angled keys that they sued Palm over back in the late 90's. It actually is a fairly innovative design that optimizes the direction of the bevel on each key based on the kinematics of your thumbs so that the keys act much larger than they are (if they actually cloned it correctly). It has also become sort of a mark of BB (both because of the exclusivity and the general unpopularity of portrait QWERTY layouts), so I guess that might even be grounds after the patent expires (which has to be coming up soon ...).
Re:patented keyboard technology? (Score:5, Informative)
I think that I actually agree with Blackberry on this one, though I'd think this would fall into trademark territory more than patent technology. Maybe the curved ridges on the keys somehow have a patent I guess...
Rule of thumb: IP law is so complicated that it's safe to assume that (1) TFA got it wrong, (2) the Slashdot summary and title got it wrong, (3) all slashdot posters (including me) got it wrong, with the sole exception of NewYorkCountryLawyer. I think the only way is to read what the actual filing said, and then look up patents, and then look up the claims section of those patents.
As far as I can tell, Blackberry complained that Typo Keyboard infringed one or more of:
* US Patent 7629964 [google.com] - a patent about the invention of a particular angling+placement of keys on a handheld mobile device where the keys are optimally placed and angled to allow two-thumb typing. It looks like there was thought and extensive user research into figuring out that particular angling and placement. While it was obvious that some kind of angling+placement would be good, I guess no one had done the inventive work to figure out that particular angling+placement.
* US Patent 8162552 [google.com] - a patent about the invention of a particular ramping of individual keys for the same end. I know that HP had beveled keys before. This patent is for a particular angling and beveling and crest and so on. Again it looks obvious that some kind of beveling is useful, but I guess no one had done the inventive work to pick out this particular angling and beveling. It looks like anyone who used a DIFFERENT angling and beveling wouldn't infringe on this patent.
* US Design Patent D685775 [google.com] - a design patent which is very specifically for Blackberry's design. Design patents are for the ornamental shape of a functional item, and only apply when the design is novel and not the obvious shape for devices. I guess we didn't have the particular Blackberry proportions or layout on other devices before.
* Blackberry's trade dress. Trade dress is about the recognizable look of a product, that would let consumers readily recognize whether something is distinctively a Blackberry from its distinctive shape, colors etc.
I don't know on the basis of which of these the temporary sales ban was enacted. But I do know that Blackberry keyboards are indeed nicer to type on than any other phone keyboards I've used, and it really does suggest there was something non-obvious about their research into key placement and contours and their particular results. And I do think that Blackberry keyboards have a distinctive recognizable look. From photos, that Typo keyboard really did look a heck of a lot like a Blackberry in both its overall form. If indeed it also copied the particulars of Blackberry placement/beveling, rather than using any of the INFINITE other possible placement/beveling, then it seems like a slam dunk for Blackberry.
Re: (Score:2)
Rule of thumb: IP law is so complicated that it's safe to assume that (1) TFA got it wrong, (2) the Slashdot summary and title got it wrong, (3) all slashdot posters (including me) got it wrong [...]
In other words, IP law is so complicated, only judges and lawyers are capable of understanding it.
Errr, somehow this sentence feels wrong.
Re: patented keyboard technology? (Score:3)
IP law is so complex that only people who have studyed it for years can understand nontrivial cases? That seems right. I wish it were not so, but them I wish I could understand particle physics and molecular biochemistry without years of study too.
The anti-vaxxers and the anti-AGW folks show the hilarity that results when people assume that they know more than the experts.
Re: (Score:3)
So we are living in a society where only a select bunch of "experts" know the laws.
Seems like a terrific idea!
Re: (Score:2)
With the angle-topped keys and the particular choice of layout, I think that I actually agree with Blackberry on this one, though I'd think this would fall into trademark territory more than patent technology. Maybe the curved ridges on the keys somehow have a patent I guess...
Neither patent nor trademark, but "design patent". US law unfortunately decided to call legally protected designs "design patents", which then every time someone sues over a design patent provokes an outcry of idiots on slashdot and elsewhere that don't understand the difference between a "utility patent" and a "design patent".
Re: (Score:2)
Neither patent nor trademark, but "design patent". US law unfortunately decided to call legally protected designs "design patents", which then every time someone sues over a design patent provokes an outcry of idiots on slashdot and elsewhere that don't understand the difference between a "utility patent" and a "design patent".
I don't think they're confused, so much as every time they hear about design patent enforcement, they don't think that's the sort of thing that should be patentable.
Re: (Score:2)
Trademark, umm yes, people who bought the iPhone snap on keyboard were actually intending to buy a blackberry phone, yeah right. I think you missed the whole point of trademarks.
Reasonable consumer: "Huh, Blackberry came out with a hard keyboard add-on for the iPhone? I guess that's a smart idea since their own phones weren't selling well. This way, they can still remain a player, at least in peripherals for other smart phones. Good job, Blackberry, at repositioning yourself. I think I'll buy one, since I trust the Blackberry name and quality."
I think you missed the whole point of trademarks.
Re: (Score:2)
If Apple is a contemptible shit for suing over rounded corners, then so is Blackberry for suing over a tiny modified qwerty keyboard with black keys.
"Mommy, Billy is COPYING me. Make him stop! Wah, wah, wah."
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
It's not about stealing. It's about infringing on an legally granted monopoly, It's akin to trespass.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know why this myth persists in a world of open court documents. Apple never sued anybody over rounded corners.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:patented keyboard technology? (Score:5, Informative)
Really? Because I'm pretty fucking sure they did, in fact, do exactly that. Samsung vs Apple [google.com] involved patent USD504899 [google.com], which claims "the ornamental design for an electronic device, substantially as shown and described", to wit a rectangular cuboid with rounded corners. So, yes, Apple did sue Samsung over rounded corners (although the jury did find Samsung did not infringe, that does not change the fact that Apple did in fact sue Samsung over a thin rectangular design with rounded corners.)
Re:patented keyboard technology? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:patented keyboard technology? (Score:5, Informative)
Let me see.....
GP linked to the patent. The patent covers everything shown in the diagram that isn't excluded by means of being drawn in a dotted line. If you check the diagram, the only thing not dotted are the rounded corners and the curve on the back (which just means the "rounded corners" are 3D).
So, no. This design patent is solely about rounded corners.
Shachar
Re: (Score:3)
Let me see.....
GP linked to the patent. The patent covers everything shown in the diagram that isn't excluded by means of being drawn in a dotted line. If you check the diagram, the only thing not dotted are the rounded corners and the curve on the back (which just means the "rounded corners" are 3D).
So, no. This design patent is solely about rounded corners.
Then how come Apple told the court that Samsung could have avoided infringement without modifying the rounded corners by adding a bezel (or changing any other of a list of several design elements), which they subsequently did in the Galaxy Tab 10.1N? It has the same exact rounded corners as the 10.1, but does not infringe the design patent. So, no. The design patent isn't solely about rounded corners.
Re: (Score:2)
I think we need to cover what makes patents bad. One of the things that make software patents bad (only one of them) is the fact you can't be certain whether you infringe them, even when you have the patent right in front of you. This is due to ambiguities in the patent. You simply cannot know which way claim construction is going to go.
If you aim is not to infringe a patent, you must avoid the most broad interpretation the patent has, since you never know how that is going to be interpreted.
Back to our des
Re: (Score:2)
Basilbrush is trying to claim that the aspect ratio, clearly part of the solid lines, is part of the patent. Just as clearly, however, Apple did not think so.
How the hell is that clear? You claimed elsewhere that Apple falsified a picture to make it look like the Samsung was the same aspect ratio. Why would they do so if they didn't consider the aspect ratio part of the design patent?
Re: (Score:2)
I think we need to cover what makes patents bad.
I'm happy to change the topic to discuss this, but first we should acknowledge that you are apparently conceding that the design patent was just about rounded corners.
One of the things that make software patents bad (only one of them) is the fact you can't be certain whether you infringe them, even when you have the patent right in front of you. This is due to ambiguities in the patent. You simply cannot know which way claim construction is going to go.
If you aim is not to infringe a patent, you must avoid the most broad interpretation the patent has, since you never know how that is going to be interpreted.
Back to our design patent.
This is not a software patent, however, as you acknowledge. This is a design patent - there is no Markman hearing, and claim interpretation is not an issue. Furthermore, the problems you speak of are not unique to software patents, but are true of every utility patent: inevitably in any litigation, one side wants some word construed one way, t
Re: (Score:2)
In what way do the design patent drawings not cover the aspect ratio?
In the practical way. Samsung were sued for violating this patent despite having a different aspect ratio. Obviously, Apple doesn't think the aspect ratio in any way limits the applicability of this patent.
The aspect ratio was so different that Apple felt the need to photoshop evidence [slashdot.org] to make the devices look more alike.
Shachar
Re: (Score:2)
And I answer again:
I ask again, in what way do the design patent drawings not cover a specific aspect ratio?
In the most practical way. If you issue a device that has a different aspect ratio, you might still get sued (as Samsung has).
More generally, you need to be a patent lawyer in order to answer, in general, whether things like aspect ratio are part of the specific claims of a design patent. I am not a lawyer. Obviously, Apple's lawyers thought it is not.
If you know differently (maybe you are a patent lawyer), please do speak up. If not, please avoid re-asking the same question merely becaus
Re: (Score:2)
Then why did Apple think they had a chance to win? Why did the German judge, when confronted with Apple changing Samsung's tablet aspect ratio, not think they were falsifying evidence? Why didn't Samsung defense center around the aspect ratio?
It seems to me that a lot of people who know a lot more about the field than me (you haven't stated what your qualifications are, if any) do not agree with you.
Shachar
End times (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Self respect. How about you?
Further injury to Blackberry? (Score:5, Funny)
Dear Blackberry (Score:3)
Nobody decides to buy a BB solely based upon a hardware keyboard.
Probably could have stopped w/"nobody decides to buy a BB"
Not taking sides. (Score:5, Informative)
They have gone further than just putting a keyboard on the iphone, see pic:
http://www.macrumors.com/2014/... [macrumors.com]
They've copied the shape of the keys, the horizontal bars between the keys etc.
Re: (Score:2)
Just wait till Apple realises that the edges are also curved.
Re: (Score:2)
Patents are supposed to protect inventions, not megacorps that happen to be butthurt.
Re: (Score:2)
Were the patents involved design patents? If so, then it's not about what functionality was "invented" but rather how it looks as an entirety.
Can't get past the name (Score:5, Funny)
Why would they name a keyboard "typo"? Even as an amusing meta-reference, it falls flat.
It's like trying to sell a toilet paper named "Anal Scraper".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Die Blackberry (the) (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, we've been hearing that for years now. Still hasn't happened.
Just keep making predictions until you get a hit, Silvia Brown. I'm sure we'll all be impressed with your intellectual prowess then.
Funny (Score:2)
Funny. There's a shit-ton of Chinese messaging phones [google.com] using Blackberry style keyboards with shaped keys (oooh so innovative). I doubt they're licensing the patent given the low price point these sell at in emerging markets.
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah, it is "oooh so innovative". There's a reason why everyone raved about the quality of their keyboards, you know.
Ever try to type, well, anything on a Motorola Droid Pro or Palm Pre? There's obviously a lot more here than just "shaped keys".
Re: (Score:2)
Yep. A Blackberry is pretty much just a refined HP Chiclet keyboard... 30 years later.
We need reform (Score:2)
Asserting a patent that turns out to be invalid or not applicable should cost the accuser big time. All of the defendants legal costs plus 5% of annual worldwide gross revenue would be a good start.
One small victory in the war on Ryan Seacrest (Score:2)
this isn't about patents or saving blackberry, it's about stopping ryan seacrest. he's the one behind the kardasshians for heaven's sake. set aside your petty libertarian and socialist differences and unite against tyranny of another more diabolical sort!
Gotta side with Blackberry (Score:3)
Keyboards like this one...
http://0.tqn.com/d/ipod/1/0/w/... [tqn.com]
However, one look at the "Typo" tells you that it's a blatant BB ripoff. If you want / need a keyboard like that, buy a 'Berry.
Lets Make a Deal (Score:3)
( family guy shop teacher ) (Score:2)
Oh Nos!
This will surely help blackberry survive in the market!
Good job with those patents! Now nobody can have a working keyboard, not their
nonexistent client nor the iPhone people who could have used a Typo.
E
I USE ONE AND OWN FOUR (Score:2)
Wow rip off (Score:2)
I _was_ going to say, "I can't imagine blocking such a product would increase RIM's market share. All this does is make people hate Blackberries even more."
But then I saw what it looks like. It's a freaking Blackberry keyboard rip off! At least take the time to design something a LITTLE new, guys.
Re:How dare they make the user experience better (Score:5, Informative)
Did you even look at the article? That keyboard looks like a blackberry keyboard to me. It's a blatant ripoff of the design. While I think software patents are absurd, this is a copy of a physical device.
Re: (Score:2)
That keyboard looks like a blackberry keyboard to me. It's a blatant ripoff of the design.
That seems stupid - they should have ripped off the Treo design - straight rows of keys don't make sense for actual human thumbs.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm interested to know how many ways you could possibly think of cramming a keyboard into a 2" x 1" space.
Regardless of how it looks, do you really think that putting a set of standard keys in a small space is somehow deserving of a patent? Or OMG my dell keyboard has a Fn key that lets the F1 key share with the sleep function, should that be patented too? Maybe IBM should patent the fact they removed the SysRq button from their keyboard while they are at it.
If anything Blackberry was shamelessly ripping of
Re: (Score:2)
Yup, there's only so many ways you can make a keyboard. Ergo, anyone copying the key bevel and switch technology is justified in doing so. After all, there's no difference between the tactile feel of Cherry switches and cheap membrane switches, just to name one single aspect of keyboard tech.
Oh, wait...
(Cue someone random popping in to say a cellphone doesn't use a full-size keyboard, failing completely to understand the concept of an anaolgy.)
Re: (Score:2)
So I'll wait until you show me the patent on the switching mechanism blackberry used.
Still waiting.....
Ahh screw it, I'm not dying of old age. The answer is there's no keyboard out there with any proprietary switching mechanisms.
So come again and answer my original question, and this time take into account the size of a mobile phone and the realisation that a membrane switch doesn't work at such small scales as there isn't sufficient supporting structure in such a small space.
Now if you think that the shape
Re: (Score:2)
It wasn't someone random who fails to understand what "analogy" means after all. Usually the person to whom a response is addressed doesn't walk right into something like that. Bravo.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
A spectacular exam
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
The result is that by elimination of dominated strategies, the best strategy in a world without patents is to not actually come up with anything new, but instead to just copy what everyone else is doing, as it gets you the same result with much lower cost.
It's not an unreasonable first guess, but that turns out to actually not be how people behave [ted.com] when the constraints are lifted.
Re:So what's the problem? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:So what's the problem? (Score:4, Interesting)
"Beveled Keys have been in use since the HP 35 calculator. The HP35 was HP's very first calculator and the first iterations only had printing on a few of the keys -- the rest of the key designations were printed on the board the keys protruded through. The HP41 (early to mid 1980's) had a full alphabet keyboard as well as punctuation and all the keys were beveled. As I understand the patent, it should be thrown out due to prior art or at least obviousness since all the HP keys were beveled."
There exists a thing called a "design patent" which prevents others from copying your style. I could be wrong, but I suspect that is what is at issue here.
Re: (Score:2)
If they were making something that looks like blackberry for the purpose of selling to apple users, I don't think an injunction was necessary.
Re: (Score:2)
Really? In that case, I'm totes gonna sue Li'l Wayne.
Brother's been biting my style for the longest. Even down to my face tattoos and penchant for purple drank.
Re: (Score:2)
Beveled Keys have been in use since the HP 35 calculator. The HP35 was HP's very first calculator and the first iterations only had printing on a few of the keys -- the rest of the key designations were printed on the board the keys protruded through. The HP41 (early to mid 1980's) had a full alphabet keyboard as well as punctuation and all the keys were beveled. As I understand the patent, it should be thrown out due to prior art or at least obviousness since all the HP keys were beveled.
The desktop HP 9100 was HP's first calculator. The HP35 was their first portable calculator (basically the 9100 that fit in a shirt pocket), but otherwise, what you say about HP is correct. As for your conclusion on the patent, I will defer to others.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I still have and occasionally use my HP-25 (although I've had to replace the battery pack a long time ago). RPN confuses people as much today as it did back then.
Re: (Score:2)
The HP35 was HP's very first calculator
Wrong. There were HP calculators before the HP35. HP made desktop calculators that sported a small CRT display. I used to have one. It had core memory in it. It had no ICs at all. Hundreds and hundreds of diodes.
Re:So what's the problem? (Score:5, Informative)
HP35 keyboard [vintagecalculators.com]
Side-by-side Typo vs Blackberry keyboard [powerpage.org]
The HP35 isnt even close, and the Typo is a blatant ripoff. I hate patent trolls as much as the next guy, but come on, theres not even room for debate here. Theyre EXACTLY the same. Even ALT and Shift are in the same spots, and the numbers-- which have generally gone across the top on other phones-- are laid out the same way.
Re: (Score:2)
Overlaying the qwerty keyboard-- specifically the "qwe-asd-zxc-0" keys-- with 0-9 is something that is pretty specifically Blackberry. Every other phone with qwerty I've seen has overlaid it over qwertyuiop. On-screen keyboards have generally had it as an alternate keyset, or overlaid it over the qwerty.... keys.
Its not even just that, its that when you put the two side by side you cant really tell which is which. Everything about the styling and design is exactly like Blackberry, and generally one of th
Re: (Score:2)
Patents can be on nitpicky things, and frequently are. Obviously, beveled keys per se don't deserve a patent, but keys beveled in a certain way may.
I haven't looked at the patent, but if it was just on beveled keys it would probably have been thrown out earlier, and if not Blackberry would be careful about suing over it.
However, on /., it is standard practice to look at part of something and present it as if it were the whole thing.
Re: (Score:2)
While there at it, can they make some that slip over popular andriod phones? By the look of the design, it seems like it'd be pretty easy to make versions that fit other popular phones, and keep using the same bluetooth keyboard (fyi, it extends the length of the phone a bit, so this isn't a question of how much non-screen real estate exists at the bottom of the phone).
Slightly off topic... anyone know of a good keyboard case for a galaxy S4? The only one's I've found add incredible bulk, have poor reviews,
Re: (Score:3)
I wish they would just die with a little grace and accept that they world will be better off without them
Ya, like SCO did - oh, wait... :-)
Re: (Score:2)
Its hilarious to hear this in a world where SSL is a beseiged technology, and RIM offered the only solution with per-device keys. Clearly we'll all be better off without the only mass-produced product that is neigh on unhackable.
I have of course moved on to android because RIM hasnt kept up-- but the world would be better off if they had because they had some incredibly good offerings and to this day have the only workable physical keyboard. With as much as I love swiftkey, Im still not convinced it holds
Re: (Score:3)
I honestly couldn't tell you what Blackberry does. And that's their biggest problem.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
The GPU in the Galaxy S4 consistently beats the Ax processors in the graphics department, so no.
Re:Quick, Slashdotters! (Score:4, Interesting)
After playing the role of plaintiff in multiple patent lawsuits concerning relatively miniscule design innovations, the double-edged sword that is the US patent system is now seemingly also willing to slice the apple.
Perhaps the only hope for reform of the patent system relies on it becoming inconvenient even for it's former proponents?
Re: (Score:2)
See, every now and then it does pay to get out of bed in the morning!
Re: (Score:2)
Look up "design patents". They are completely different animals from "utility patents". There are also abortions called "plant patents" (yeah, plant as in green growing thing), and "defensive publications", the latter now superseded by "statutory invention registrations". See this [uspto.gov].
The court is doing its job. If a design patent is infringed, what else can the court do? The contemptible lunacy of design patents is on the heads of the legislature.
Re: (Score:2)
If some one grants you a monopoly and you don't have that monopoly any longer, than the monopoly was stolen by those who infringed upon it.
Re: (Score:2)
Ah, I see. Then the "thief" must have the monopoly.
Re: (Score:2)
Thieves steal copper cabling all the time. The value to the thieves (as scrap) is a mere fraction of what it's worth to the telecom provider.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm just trying to steer the conversation towards monopoly, and away from larceny.
Re: (Score:2)
Personally I have my browser set to ignore nearly everything a web server hands it these days. Refreshes, ecmascript, plugins - all the crap that makes the web suck.