[smussman]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't a doubly-linked list be covered by this patent? If I understand the claims correctly, the backwards traversal would fall under claim 1.[1] It definitely provides a second sequence to traverse said list, even if it's stretching 'following' a little bit.

[1] The relevant part of claim 1 is:

  said auxiliary pointer being adapted to direct said 
  computer program to a second following item and defining
  a second sequence to traverse said list.

[dpark]

Sure. That alone probably wouldn't invalidate the patent, though. The claim is for a more generic capability.

Of course the patent is obvious and there's (almost certainly) prior art for the multiply-linked list anyway.