Pretty weak journalism. The source article on ComOn mentions two "patents," but they're actually patent applications. One of them has gone abandoned, and the ot

Pretty weak journalism. The source article on ComOn mentions two "patents," but they're actually patent applications. One of them has gone abandoned, and the other has already issued as U.S. Patent No. 7,643,853: http://www.google.com/patents?id=QsvOAAAAEBAJ http://www.google.com/patents?id=QsvOAAAAEBAJ. There is no excuse for linking to a published application when it has already issued as a patent. There is absolutely no excuse for linking to a published application that's already gone abandoned. It sounds like other U.S. and foreign patents may be in play here too, but the articles don't give us the foggiest idea which ones they actually are. Come on, people.