Curiouser and Curiouser!

Curiouser and Curiouser! on patents http://matt.blogs.it/ RSS feed for topic patents Copyright 2006 Matt Mower Squib/0.1 self@mattmower.com self@mattmower.com en-gb Patently absurd Thu, 15 Aug 2002 18:24:32 +0100 <A href="http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/article.php/1446781">Internet News</A>: "New York-based ActiveBuddy has won a crucial patent covering instant messaging bot-making technology, but hobbyists and amateur developers aren't buying the company's claim that it invented the technology." [<A href="http://www.scripting.com/">Scripting News</A>] <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> » I'm drawn to wonder;  Does a patent application have a space for you to list your venture backers these days?  Does the patent office even bother to look for prior art? <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> From <A href="http://www.cpan.org">www.cpan.org</A> <IMG alt="[ ]" src="http://www.cpan.org/icons/unknown.gif"> <A href="http://www.cpan.org/modules/by-module/Net/Net-AIM-0.01.readme">Net-AIM-0.01.readme</A>                   18-Aug-1999 15:37  1.5K  <IMG alt=[CMP] src="http://www.cpan.org/icons/compressed.gif"> <A href="http://www.cpan.org/modules/by-module/Net/Net-AIM-0.01.tar.gz">Net-AIM-0.01.tar.gz</A>                   18-Aug-1999 16:34   25K  </BLOCKQUOTE> I think the patent system should be changed into a community based process.  There should be an RSS stream generated by the various offices that details applications under review for processing and trackback should be used to allow the community to comment on them. As to Tim Kay's assertion: <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> "If you want to do things that our products allow you to do, your best choice is to use our products," Kay said, referring to the <A href="http://www.instantmessagingplanet.com/enterprise/article/0,,10816_1444521,00.html">recent launch</A> of the Lite BuddyScript Server, which can be used by hobbyists to develop and run IM bots.</BLOCKQUOTE> Well I guess I'd be that smug too if I'd just put one over on my competitors.  </BLOCKQUOTE> http://matt.blogs.it/entries/00000336.html Have you disclosed today? Sat, 14 Sep 2002 10:52:47 +0100 My friend <A href="http://www.windowgroup.com/">Joe Rotello</A> put me onto <A href="http://www.ip.com/">ip.com</A> today.  They have a system called Innovation Q which they hope will help with the patent problems we are facing at the moment by creating a secure database for handling disclosures and recording prior art.  If this kind of system were widely used I think it would help lift the burden on overworked patent officers. A nice touch is that you can get guest access and browse the list of recent disclosures.  It makes for fascinating <A href="https://my.ip.com/">reading</A>! http://matt.blogs.it/entries/00000545.html Domains By Proxy: I can't see the patent Tue, 17 Sep 2002 09:25:37 +0100 <A href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/27150.html">Go Daddy offers anonymous domain registration</A>. No spam, No slam [<A href="http://www.theregister.co.uk">The Register</A>] <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> » Good idea albeit one I wouldn't normally comment on.  But in this case what I want to know is: <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> "Parsons said the company has patents pending on the technology behind the service"</BLOCKQUOTE> What on earth can they be patenting?  What super new technology is required so that a company can put someone elses details in a DNS server?  Maybe they're patenting the whole proxy thing so that the government have to pay every time someone uses a postal ballot?</BLOCKQUOTE> http://matt.blogs.it/entries/00000549.html I'll take 'a 16th century monopoly grant' for $200 Tue, 24 Sep 2002 10:36:50 +0100 <A href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/54/27253.html">Readers scorn 'Lawsuits in Motion' keyboard claim</A> [<A href="http://www.theregister.co.uk">The Register</A>] <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> » Some good debunking information here on the history of letters patent and why they were introduced.  </BLOCKQUOTE> http://matt.blogs.it/entries/00000575.html You've been framed Thu, 23 Jan 2003 09:56:09 +0000 <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <A href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/28985.html">SBC enforcing all-encompassing Web patent</A>. You've been Framed [<A href="http://www.theregister.co.uk">The Register</A>]</BLOCKQUOTE> More absurdity. http://matt.blogs.it/entries/00001102.html Patently absurb Wed, 26 Feb 2003 15:04:25 +0000 <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <A href="http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=6,525,747.WKU.&OS=PN/6,525,747&RS=PN/6,525,747">Jeff Bezos</A>, the founder and CEO of Amazon, claims to have invented discussion group software in August 1999. The patent was issued yesterday by the USPTO. [<A href="http://www.scripting.com/">Scripting News</A>]</BLOCKQUOTE> Well that's nice for him. http://matt.blogs.it/entries/00001216.html No sanity for the DMCA Fri, 05 Sep 2003 16:43:56 +0100 <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <A href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/7/32684.html">Garage door makers battle over DMCA</A>. Open and shut case [<A href="http://www.theregister.co.uk">The Register</A>]</BLOCKQUOTE> Quoting from the above: <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> Can you imagine a world where every electronic item you possess would legally have to be accessed using a piece of equipment from a particular manufacturer? Well, you nearly had to. There is some sanity in the world then. ® </BLOCKQUOTE> You know I kind of wish they there hadn't been.  I wish the judge had upheld the DMCA and established this precedent.  Let people live with for a while with the consequences of allowing corrupt or inept politicians to pass such laws. Maybe then the whole of the DMCA could be addressed (and the issue of patents along with it)? http://matt.blogs.it/entries/00001613.html Patenting over our right of way Wed, 17 Sep 2003 13:06:37 +0100 <div style="margin-left: 40px;"><a href="http://www.docuverse.com/blog/donpark/2003/09/16.html#a895">Patents</a>. </div> <a href="http://tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2003/09/15/SWPatents">Tim Bray confesses about having two patents</a> in the pipeline and goes on to talk about software patents. I also have a couple of security-related patents in the pipeline. To me, it's not the software patents but patents that violate public's right of passage. GIF patent was legit but Unisys was standing there and charging toll on what most of us considered public road. What is public road and what is not? The distinction is simple. If your enforcement of the patent hurts your public relations more than it adds to your bottomline, then you are standing on a public road. To be more precise, if your patent gives your solution advantages in quality of service, then it's legit. But if your patent leads to the only solution, then you are a troll. If your patented formula makes cars go faster, I am fine with that. If you patented the idea of automobiles, I am not all right with that and all for public's right to steamroll over such patents. My justification is this. Since patent laws can be changed or even banished by the people, the people has the right to selectively change or banish any specific patent it chooses. Implementation is problematic, but the principle is sound IMHO. <div style="margin-left: 40px;"> [<a href="http://www.docuverse.com/blog/donpark/">Don Park's Daily Habit</a>] </div> Don's really captured my feelings on patents. It's like toll-roads over here.  In principle I'm okay with private money being used to build toll-roads to relieve congested public roads.  On the other hand if it was suggested that a toll-road be the only way to get from A to B then I'd have a big problem with that (like for example what happened on the <a href="http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/ray_shields/bnews.htm">Isle of Skye</a>). So it is with patents. A few days ago Simon Phipps was <a href="http://www.webmink.net/2003_08_31_oldblog.htm#106279620209462444">talking</a> about the problem of patents retroactively breaking established standards (in the light of the EOLAS patent dispute).  As Don says the issue of implemting a sensible approach to overriding patents is complex, but I think it's necessary if we are to keep building. The case in Europe doesn't look great.  It seems the vested interests are wielding their mighty chequebooks as effectively over here as they do in Washington. http://matt.blogs.it/entries/00001626.html Reigning in on patents Tue, 11 Nov 2003 06:32:27 +0000 <div style="margin-left: 40px;"><a href="http://www.webmink.net/2003_11_09_oldblog.htm#106852881736221160">Patents on progress</a>. Surfing tonight I've seen a couple of patents on what folk regard as obvious - <a href="http://www.jroller.com/comments/jonmountjoy/Weblog/streams_of_apis_stax_of">Jon</a> comments on XML pull parsers, and <a href="http://www.gadgetopia.com/archives/000920.html">Gadgetopia</a> I've <a href="http://www.webmink.net/2003_08_31_oldblog.htm#106279620209462444">commented before</a> on this subject but I'd like to reiterate my personal position: on streaming media (and at least one other I can't find). How can we possibly carry on like this? Patents protecting innovation are one thing, and I can find space in my thoughts for them. Patents taxing standardisation are another. They are surely anathema in a fast-paced, techno-centric culture?</div> <blockquote style="margin-left: 40px;">Once a technology has, through an open process, been incorporated into a ratified standard from a recognised body like W3C, it should be impossible to assert patent rights over it unless they were asserted during the standardisation process.</blockquote> <div style="margin-left: 40px;">I think that provides a reasonable compromise, and though I can at this point only speak for me, I'd love to see a body of us articulating that position and getting it into the law in some places that matter like the EU. If we don't patents will have become a tax by the unethical on progress. [<a href="http://www.webmink.net/minkblog.htm">WebMink</a>] </div> I think this is certainly a good starting point.  Does anyone have a list of MP's & MEP's who are savvy to patent issuses? http://matt.blogs.it/entries/00001716.html Another sad step on the bad patents journey Mon, 14 Jun 2004 09:56:26 +0100 <blockquote><a href="http://www.docuverse.com/blog/donpark/EntryViewPage.aspx?guid=11dd5697-51c1-4dfe-a426-71e521e9342e">Smart TODO Patent</a>. Automatic handling of TODO comments in source code is something Eclipse has been doing for a while now but Microsoft has been <a href="http://news.com.com/Microsoft+checks+off+patent+win/2100-1008_3-5228693.html?tag=nefd.top">granted</a> a <a href="http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=6,748,582.WKU.&OS=PN/6,748,582&RS=PN/6,748,582">patent</a> the feature. The patent was filed on March 6, 2000. I forget when Eclipse had the smart TODO feature. <img src="http://www.docuverse.com/blog/donpark/aggbug.ashx?id=11dd5697-51c1-4dfe-a426-71e521e9342e" height="0" width="0"> [<a href="http://www.docuverse.com/blog/donpark/">Don Park's Daily Habit</a>] </blockquote> There has been some talk of this in the Intellij IDEA groups with some people claiming that Delphi had the feature long before 2000.  I've never used Delphi so I can't comment. http://matt.blogs.it/entries/00002320.html A very fishy business i'm sure EULAgree Wed, 22 Jun 2005 00:06:09 +0100 If this quote doesn't tempt you to <a href="http://weblog.infoworld.com/foster/2005/06/17.html#a266">read on</a> there's no saving you:<blockquote>"And they leave it open to interpretation whether they would come after me if I were to get a pair of these fish and they mated and had babies. Do I need to destroy the babies? Can I give them away to non-California friends? Does the reproduction of the fish revoke my license to the original fish? Will they come take my fish away?"</blockquote> http://matt.blogs.it/entries/00002677.html