All the way back in 2007 (The Year Gilmore Girls ended), a company called IP Innovation sued Red Hat and Novell over a patent related to the concept of virtual desktops. It seems like common sense hasn't been drained entirely from the US justice system, since yesterday, the courts declared said patent invalid.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2007-02-17
But the biggest concerns I can think of right now are 1- what the USPTO thinks of itself after such blunders and 2- what the American people think of the USPTO.
Company A submits an "invention" of linked lists for a patent application, claiming it is innovative and original.
Clerk at USPTO has never heard of linked lists.
USPTO takes company A's money, and awards them a patent.
Company A sues company B, C, D, E & F for billions.
Company B, C, D, E & F point out prior art from 1955-56 by Allen Newell, Cliff Shaw and Herbert Simon at RAND Corporation, and in Donald Knuth's work, TAOCP. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linked_list
Case is thrown out of court. Company A's patent is invalidated.
Huge WOFTAM.
I'm blowed if I can see the point of it all.
Edited 2010-05-05 09:52 UTC
Member since:2007-09-06
Member since:2008-10-23
Company A has deep pockets and many connections in the legal field.
Company B has 3 busy employees, and owes a lot of money to the bank. Company B has invested all the money from family and friends to put up a product that would threaten company A profit margin.
Company B counts on the revenue that their product will bring to pay back its debts and develop new stuff that would further steal market from company A.
Company A sues company B over frivolous patents it know full well will be invalidated in the end.
Judge orders company B to stop selling its product while investigation on alleged patent infringement is ongoing.
Investigations takes 3 f--king long years before judge finally decides that the patent is invalid. Something everybody knew since the start but the legal system had to "investigate", go to higher court and all the usual legal bullshit.
In the mean time, Company B has gone bankrupt. The bank has sold all of its assets and the product from 3 years ago is obsolete.
Company A wins.
2nd option
Company A is a patent troll with deep pockets.
Company B is small but starting to be successful and win money.
Company A: I want 10% of your revenues now, or I sue.
Company B: You can't win, your patent is shit.
Company A: Wanna bet? Look at what happened to company C... What will your customer think about you? and some more FUD.
Company B: OK then but you will only get 5%.
Company A: 8%!
Company B: 7.5%!
Company A: deal! win!
I can see some other scenarios where Company A wins if they are not as stupid as the patent troll that goes after Red Hat and Novell (seriously, what did they think?)
Edited 2010-05-05 12:54 UTC
Member since:2007-08-17
The linked list patent in question isn't a simple linked list. It is patent for a linked list with two or more pointers where each item is pointed at two or more times - so that the list can simultaneously ordered in two or more orders.
Yes, its bullshit and trivial - i.e. if you are set the problem of maintaining two sort orders with a single linked list, I can't see a more obvious way to do it. However, it got me to thinking, is there any prior art? I imagine there probably is somewhere, but unless someone can find it, the only way to invalidate it is to show that it is obvious - the whole system relies on that subject measure. It's obvious to me and you, but what about a judge whose never created an algorithm in his life?
It also got me to thinking about what a waste of time the whole patent system is. Say you come up with a good idea that you think is original - you search for existing patents and prior art and find none, and file your own patent. You get some VCs behind you and start getting, five years later you're just about to start turning a profit when somebody undercuts you using your patented invention. Turns out they have prior art and there is nothing you can do.
Software patents aren't just stupid because they make software development a minefield, always having to make sure that you aren't infringing. The are stupid because they offer a false sense of security - you may have a field full of mines, ready to destroy your competition, then again they might all be duff.
How do you check that there is no prior art in closed source software world? Reverse engineer every piece of software that you think might contain prior art (probably against their EULA)? The same could be said for regular patents too, I imagine - but at least with a mechanical object, it is typically straightforward to see how it works. Another issue with closed source software, how easy is it to identify infringement, let alone prove that infringement?
"The first killer app was VisiCalc. This early spreadsheet turned the Apple II from a hobbyist toy to a business computer. VisiCalc came with room for improvement, though. In addition, a new architecture and operating system, the Intel-based IBM PC and MS-DOS, also needed a spreadsheet to be taken seriously. That spreadsheet, released in early 1983, would be Lotus 1-2-3, and it would change the world. It became the PC's killer app, and the world would never be the same. On May 14, IBM quietly announced the end of the road for 1-2-3, along with Lotus Organizer and the Lotus SmartSuite office suite. Lotus 1-2-3's day is done." Impressive 30 year run."There's a disconnect between how Apple CEO Tim Cook sees his company's tax strategies and how some members of the US Senate view it. That became clearer than ever today after Cook and two other Apple executives testified before Congress, explaining why they're holding most of their international income in Irish subsidiaries like Apple Operations International, which declare no tax residency anywhere in the world. AOI hasn't filed a tax return anywhere in the world for the last five years, yet it earned $30 billion in income from 2009 to 2012, according to a Senate report released yesterday." Just because something is legal, doesn't mean it's just. Apple, Google, Microsoft, and many more - these companies might not be breaking any laws, but it's obvious to anyone that what they are doing is scummy.
The new WebKit Opera for Android has been released. "Opera 14 for Android is built on top of Chromium 26, with a total overhaul of the UI in native code, making it fit well with the latest Android design guidelines. Go get the build from Google Play or point your browser to m.opera.com, and give it a spin!"
The Verge pointed me to a blog post by Leap Motion - which reveals how their Kinect-like motion control works with Windows 8. "From the second you plug in your Leap Motion Controller, you'll be able to browse the web and interact with your computer just by moving your hands and fingers in the air. With Leap Motion technology and Windows, you can do everything that's possible with multi-touch inputs - without actually touching anything. This also means that existing applications in Windows 7 and 8 will respond to your natural hand and finger movements. Soon, we'll show you how Leap Motion will work with Mac OS X." Quite cool.
PocketNow interviews Marc Dillon, and there's an interesting note about why Jolla is keeping the display properties under wraps: "We're leaving some of those details out because we do understand that there are a lot of really big players in the market and they tend to take certain components in the market and dominate them. We created the ability to actually be able to run Sailfish on multiple hardware displays and be able to swap components, so this is part of the demand and supply planning phase. We are committed to this industrial design which is a 4.5-inch display, an 8 megapixel camera on the back and a front-facing camera at the front, and the exact specs of the display we'll provide when we're close to delivery." Something you rarely hear anything about.
"This is my NeXTstation Turbo Color booting the Mac System 7.1 Operating System using a hardware add-on called 'Daydream'. The Daydream has a Mac ROM and a few custom ICs in it and hooked up to the NeXTs DSP port. Turns your NeXT into a full fledged 68k powered Mac." So cool.
"The NetBSD Project is pleased to announce NetBSD 6.1, the first feature update of the NetBSD 6 release branch. It represents a selected subset of fixes deemed important for security or stability reasons, as well as new features and enhancements. Please note that all fixes in the prior security/bugfix updates (NetBSD 6.0.1 and 6.0.2) are also in 6.1."
"At the end of a week in which Electronic Arts confirmed it wasn't developing a thing for the Wii U, one of the software engineers in EA Sports' Canada studio, in a series of since-deleted tweets, disparaged the console as 'crap' and suggested Nintendo should give up on hardware altogether. 'The Wii U is crap. Less powerful than an Xbox 360. Poor online/store. Weird tablet', tweeted Bob Summerwill, listed as a senior software engineer at EA Canada, in a reply to a tweet posting a link about EA's no-Wii U news. 'Nintendo are walking dead at this point'." The Wii U is turning into the 21st century's Virtual Boy.
"In NixOS, the entire operating system - the kernel, applications, system packages, configuration files, and so on - is built by the Nix package manager from a description in a purely functional build language. The fact that it's purely functional essentially means that building a new configuration cannot overwrite previous configurations. Most of the other features follow from this." Interesting approach. A Linux distribution, sure, but with some very refreshing ideas about system configuration.
Appfour added, among other features, C/C++ support to its new version of AIDE. From Android-IDE, "Now you can write parts of your app or your whole app in C/C++ on your device. AIDE supports the Standard Android NDK toolchain (GCC 4.6 + Bionic, STL, ...). No changes are necessary if you want to build an app developed on a PC with Eclipse. C/C++ development is fully integrated: Build errors appear in the error list and files can easily be navigated to with Go to file. The editor supports C/C++ syntax highlighting."
Member since:
2010-03-30
Oh, that's sooo nasty of you. But I love it.
Well, not much to say... although such an association would have (probably) never come to my mind.
http://www.wikipatents.com/US-Patent-7028023/linked-list
It has been granted in 2006, and it's about patenting linked lists! The USPTO gave it a pass. I wouldn't be surprised to find multiple duplicate patents if I had time to review all this crap they call inventions.
I don't believe the court takes the USPTO seriously at this point.
Patenting linked lists... I am so baffled I don't even know what to think. Linked lists. Are we talking about the data structure that Donald Knuth wrote pages about in TAOCP?
But the biggest concerns I can think of right now are 1- what the USPTO thinks of itself after such blunders and 2- what the American people think of the USPTO.