Re: A question about converting code to another programming language
The prospect of this patent application resulting in a patent that can
be successfully litigated is zero. (IANAL, TINLA.)
The principal "inventor" himself is less than impressed with his
employer's attempt to patent such a triviality, which is in any case
long since part of the prior art.
Blame Microsoft for stupidity if you like, but IMHO the rapacity award
goes to Woodcock Washburn LLP. Filing such a patent application is
such a waste of the time and money of everyone involved, and will
result in so much abuse heaped on the participants if it is not
quietly abandoned, that it's hard not to see it as a political
maneuver on someone's part (perhaps against IBM, whose participation
in the patent system is far larger than Microsoft's). An attorney who
would play ball with such a stunt is risking public excoriation of
himself and his firm.