Free Technology Newsletters
» All 33 InfoWorld Newsletters
Technology & Business Daily
 
InfoWorld
 
   

Patently Absurd

By Ed Foster, Section Columns
Posted on Thu Apr 22, 2004 at 08:57:03 AM PDT

What an idiot I am. For months I've been trying to figure out how to make a living from my weblog, and the answer is patently obvious. All I have to do is patent it.


What finally made me see the light was a wave of news stories over the last few weeks about various uses and abuses of the patent system. The $440 million settlement Microsoft agreed to pay InterTrust for its DRM patents is certainly inspiration for would-be patent holders, particularly considering Sony and Philips bought InterTrust for not much more than that a little over a year ago. European Union bureaucrats appear to be working hard to undermine EU laws against software patents, providing a ray of hope for all those poor and downtrodden European patent attorneys. And our own National Academy of Sciences released a report on Monday that, while detailing just how badly the American patent system is broken, nonetheless concluded that it does not require a major overhaul.

So let's face it -- patenting software is where the money is. The business model of the 21st Century is not about creating new and innovative technology; it's about creating new and innovative patents to cover old ideas. So that's the business I need to be in, which is why I have to start getting some patents on the GripeLog.

OK, I think I hear a few objections out there. "Come on, Ed," you're saying politely. "The GripeLog is nice enough, but it's hardly full of inventive technology. As a matter of fact, it looks an awful like a lot of other websites that use the same free software tools that you do. How can you claim to have patent rights over other people's ideas? Besides, you've already got a copyright on it -- that's the only form of intellectual property protection a website needs."

Ah, but that's where you don't understand the modern American patent system. Not only can you both copyright and patent the same software, but you can now take out "business method" or e-commerce patents that can cover virtually any feature or function on your website. And it doesn't really matter that it's an idea many had before you. The best known example is probably the "one-click shopping" patent that Amazon used to sue Barnes & Nobel, but there are whole companies dedicated to accumulating and enforcing dubious e-commerce patents. Many of them focus their collection efforts on small businesses rather than tangling with corporations that might have bigger, stronger patent attorneys. (See www.chillingeffects.org/ecom for some examples.)

Lacking a staff of patent attorneys myself, isn't too late for me to get into the game? Maybe not. The great thing about patenting software and e-commerce business methods is that it's really a word game, and that plays to my strengths. For example, my first patent I file could be on "Triple-leveled, Multi-pronged Fund Collection Mechanism with Optional Time-Delay." With a few complicated diagrams and some obfuscating jargon that I make up (see, I really will be inventing something), I'll have a patent on my donations page. Or, at least as I will interpret it, a patent on the very idea of a donations page.

Of course, this means I'm going to have to take down my actual donations page. When going after a patent like this, it's an awful handicap to have a real implementation of your invention that people can see. Even the most obtuse patent examiner is likely to realize how obvious and unoriginal your idea is if you give them a concrete example. But, hey, the donations have served their purpose in helping me get the GripeLog, and thank all of you for your contributions. But now it's time to make some real money.

There are a few problems with my patent scheme, though, such as some news items from last week I forgot to mention. One involved an organization called the Public Patent Foundation that just filed a request with the U.S. Patent Office to revoke Microsoft's FAT file system patents. And then there's the Electronic Frontier Foundation,, which just announced its "Patent Busting Project" to identify the worst patents and seek to have them revoked.

What a bunch of fun killers. I'll tell you this - anybody who wants to donate to these patent-busting efforts better do so real quick. Once my patent on donation pages is granted, they're all in big trouble.

< Reader Voices: Criticizing Sneakwrap | Backup.com Keeps Coming Back for More >


Display: Sort:
Patently Absurd | 12 comments (12 topical) | Post A Comment
Come on, Ed[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#1)
by AlRock on Thu Apr 22, 2004 at 11:19:37 AM PDT

Come on, Ed, The GripeLog is nice enough, but it's hardly full of inventive technology. As a matter of fact, it looks an awful like a lot of other websites that use the same free software tools that you do. How can you claim to have patent rights over other people's ideas? Besides, you've already got a copyright on it -- that's the only form of intellectual property protection a website needs.

[ Reply to This ]


Ed, you've missed the obvious...[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#2)
by sconeu on Thu Apr 22, 2004 at 11:35:36 AM PDT


"A method for communicating customer service grievances over the internet".

Pure gold!

To be honest, I'm sick of these patents that are "[blindingly obvious thing here] BUT ON THE INTERNET!!!"

--
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the United States of America.
[ Reply to This ]



"Windowing" Patent[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#3)
by Anonymous User on Thu Apr 22, 2004 at 02:39:43 PM PDT

My personal favorite is the "Windowing" patent granted in the very late '90s.  There used to be a lot of old code that used two digit year values.  With Y2K coming, this became an issue.  When doing other changes on code in '91, I was asked to add logic to extend the two digit years to handle the century, assuming anything below 30 was 2000+.  No more detail than that. The logic I added looked about like this:

If YY < 30 THEN
  CCYY = YY + 2000
ELSE
  CCYY = YY + 1900

I was by no means the first to do this, and it was, of course, trivially obvious.  A few years later years that basic and now common technique came to be called "windowing," but in 1999, I was astonished to find that a fellow at McDonnell Douglas was granted a patent for this, and tried to get many large companies to pay for using HIS technique!  I read the patent, and while it tried to be obtuse, it did nothing more than my code.  And, I later learned, there are easily found examples going back to the '60s.  It never would have occured to me to even think of trying to patent that, any more than "I = I + 1"

The patent system needs major revision.  There is a question of whether it should be possible to patent software at all.  If it is, patents should only be for complex and unobvious logic, and for only a very limited number of years.  It is clear that software innovation is slowing dramatically, and legal battles are a big part of that.

[ Reply to This ]



yes[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#12)
by maderikapapa on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 02:53:54 AM PDT

出会い出会い系サイト出会い喫茶出会い掲示板ナンパ出会いカフェ人妻出会い無 009;系サイト優良出会い系攻略 完全無料。アダルトビデオアダルト動画アダルトアニメアダルト画像アダル 488;サイト無料DVDアダルト風俗サンプル無料風俗優良アダルトサイト比較海 806;。人妻画像人妻パラダイス知合い人妻援護会人妻コレクション風 439;告白。熟女画像東京熟女掲示板動画熟女ビデオおまんこオナニーエロ画像エロフラッシュアニメ 456;ロ動画エロゲームエロ漫画無料エロサイト。エッチ画像エッチ動画エッチ小説写真エッチ 450;ニメエッチ0930。セックスアナルセックス画像セックス動画セックスフレンドスワッピングSEX写真セックスボランティセ 483;クス体位東京セックス仕方 SEX。おっぱい画像おっぱい村長おっぱい楽園掲示板お 387;ぱい命おっぱいゲーム。巨乳動画巨乳画像アイドル巨乳 522;示板風俗。セフレ募集セフレ掲示板セフレ画像掲示板セフレの作り方出会い無料素人セフレ。童貞狩りエロ漫画童貞狩り童貞喪失童貞オークション素人童貞逆援不倫パートナー不倫出会い人妻不倫不倫を楽しみたい方にはお薦め 154;妻画像など満載出会いサイトを楽しむならココ無料出会いで一緒に遊ぼう出会いはLOVEアゲインで決まり

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


JPEG Patent Insanity[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#4)
by Anonymous User on Fri Apr 23, 2004 at 03:25:38 PM PDT

Speaking of software patent insanity, there is a company going after many big names for not paying them money for using ... JPEG!  Look at -

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4816548/

In the article, they claim some special patent on the use for digital images, but in a quick look at their patent, it sure looked like a description of JPEG compression as was put into the public domain, by others, many years earlier (more info at http://www.jpeg.org/jpeg/index.html).

I have no idea what is supposed to make their patent new and unique.  It all looks like work done by others to me.

[ Reply to This ]



Run length encoding[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#9)
by Anonymous User on Tue May 04, 2004 at 08:18:46 AM PDT

From the quick perusal I gave of these stories they appeared to be trying to claim a patent on various forms of run length encoding.

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


jpeg patent insanity[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#11)
by mstrugar on Sun May 09, 2004 at 08:55:28 PM PDT

that seems a little outlandish to me. But what can you do?

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


But you missed the most important step, Ed...[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#5)
by Anonymous User on Sat Apr 24, 2004 at 08:37:48 AM PDT

Patenting an obvious idea is only the first step.  Next, you have to publicize your patent as little as possible, wait for everyone else to start using it (because it's an obvious idea), and once it's firmly entrenched and would be a major burden to remove, _then_ step in waving your patent and demanding royalties.

Now I know what you're thinking, but you're entirely wrong.  This is called _protecting your intellectual property_.  We don't use the word "extortion" around here.

[ Reply to This ]



Will patents cost farmers their farms?[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#6)
by Anonymous User on Tue Apr 27, 2004 at 10:47:45 AM PDT

As I was driving in this morning I drove past a farm that had a series of small signs along the road. They said something like Strawberries coming soon Will be ready in May Don't wait until June This was great and I'm sure many drivers like myself noticed them. However, I couldn't help wondering if Burma Shave had a patent on the method for displaying advertising for viewing by mobile audiences that of course would now be owned by some large corporation. Is this farmer now at risk of being sued for infrigning on this patent and losing his farm. Patents have their place but we've gone WAY too far.

[ Reply to This ]


Patent abuse[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#7)
by Anonymous User on Tue Apr 27, 2004 at 12:14:53 PM PDT

The path to correcting this absurd arrangement of patents and copyrights is to turn the thing on it head; instead of giving the registered owners the right to tell others they cannot use or publish a product, the law should be rewritten to encourage anyone who finds it useful to use and publish anything found in the copyright and patent archives with the proviso that some small portion of the sale price will be reserved for the owners, and that small portion will be the same regardless of how many owners may be included. Products merely given away for free would pay a small percentage of zero, which most of us can afford, and major publishing houses and manufacturers would be free to negotiate even smaller percentages with the owners if they wished. Small scale publishers and manufacturers could protect themselves from liability by simply setting up an account to hold the funds as they accumulate until the owners get around to collecting it.

[ Reply to This ]


Patent System Out of Control[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#8)
by Anonymous User on Wed Apr 28, 2004 at 12:02:05 PM PDT

Ed,

You're exactly right. Our patent system has become ridiculous, granting patents for the most obvious and trivial of ideas. The Amazon one-click checkout patent was the one that blew me away. Ever since, I've been boycotting Amazon. (Not that they've noticed.)

The patent system, as enforced today, works to protect big business---not to encourage innovation. It's in need of a drastic overhaul. However, I'm not optimistic about Congress' ability or willingness to do it properly. Look what they did to the copyright law. They increased to 75 years the length of time for a copyright, so that big companies like Disney can profit from the rights for Mickey Mouse, etc. for another generation. Tell me, how exactly a 75-year copyright term encourages the creation of new works.

David Salahi



[ Reply to This ]


Intertrust patents nontrivial and worthy of patent[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#10)
by Anonymous User on Tue May 04, 2004 at 08:34:08 AM PDT

Many companies have patented trivial or obvious things but the suite of Intertrust patents are very substantial and definitely patent worthy. Microsoft was infringing on those patents and got off lightly in only having to pay 400 million or so. Whether software should be patentable at all is another issue. I'd argue that it shouldn't be patentable or that the threshold for patentability should be made clearer and enforced and possibly the duration of the patent should be shorter for software patents. I'd definitely argue for shorter copyright durations. Originally patents and copyrights had the same duration (to wit 14 years). Patent's durations have slowly creaped to 17 years and fairly recently to the current 20 years. Copyright meanwhile skipped ahead to 28, 42, 56, and now life + 70 or 95-120 for corporation's "works for hire". In reality the duration of copyrights is asymptotically approaching infinity and some works may never enter the public domain. (Nothing can enter the public domain for another 14 years.) Even worse is the fact that much of what made the copyright system function was gutted in 76 (relaxation of the requirement to put a copyright marking along with the copyright holders name and the copyright origination date on the material, placing works under copyright by default instead of in the public domain by default, etc.)

[ Reply to This ]


Patently Absurd | 12 comments (12 topical) | Post A Comment
Display: Sort:
Recent Entries
Bill Gates and PC history
21 comments

Borderline searches and seizures
15 comments

Reader voices: Angry at eBay
12 comments

Teleblend's terrible terms
2 comments

Spyware bill cloaks a mini-UCITA
9 comments

Reader Voices: Autorenewal Defenses
23 comments

More The Gripelog...

Submit a gripe
About the Author
Email Ed Foster

Help Ed and his readers build these projects:
The Gripewiki
The EULA Library

Login
Make a new account
Username:
Password:

Live Gripes
Has AOL Changed Their Ways?
12 comments

A Nestle SweeTarts Conspiracy
13 comments

AT&T Kills "Bad" Username
26 comments

DESPERATE! AOL HAS TAKEN OVER MY COMPUTER
47 comments

parkingticket.com SCAM on refunds
22 comments

Don't let Net Enforcers Ruin Your Day.
14 comments

More Live Gripes...

Sign up for my newsletter

To have my column automatically e-mailed to you, submit your email address in the form below. Of course, I will not turn your address over to any other party or send you any unrequested e-mail.

Infoworld Blogs

Recomended Sites
The AFFECT Coalition
Electronic Frontier Foundation
Electronic Privacy Information Center
Free Software Foundation
HearUsNow.org
Public Knowledge
StopBadware.org

Jeff Angus
Ben Edelman
Dan Gillmor
Bob Lewis
Brian Livingston
Freedom to Tinker
Lawmeme
PC World's Techlog
SunBeltSoftware Blog
Troubleshootsers.com

Rss Feeds
How this works
 Top News 
 Columnists 
 Tech Watch 
 Test Center Reviews 
 Applications 
 App Development 
 E-Business Solutions & Strategies 
 End-user Hardware 
 Networking 
 Operating Systems 
 Platforms 
 Security 
 Standards & Protocols 
 Storage 
 Telecommunications 
 Wireless 
 Web Services 

 

create account | faq | search