Slashdot Mirror
Domain: uspto.gov
Stories and comments across the archive that link to uspto.gov.
Comments · 5,413
-
Patents and progressFrom the introduction to the U.S. Patent Office:
For over 200 years, the basic role of the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) has remained the same: to promote the progress of science and the useful arts by securing for limited times to inventors the exclusive right to their respective discoveries (Article 1, Section 8 of the United States Constitution). (italics are mine, and the exact quote from Article 1, Section 8 is that "[Congress shall have the power to] promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.")
It seems to me that Bezos is perfectly justified to, at least for a limited time, attempt to regulate the use of a new way of approaching the internet shopping idea. Take for instance the "Flaming Moe's" episode of The Simpsons. According to my interpretation of the patent classification system as described on the PTO's site, Homer could have indeed patented his drink and/or the process for making it. After Moe stole it from him, Homer was out of luck, and had no recourse other than to beat the tar out of him (which he didn't). When Homer eventually went nuts and told a barful of people the secret ingredient to the "Flaming Moe(/Homer)," everybody and their brother picked started up their own "Flaming Something" stand, and, because of the lack of centralized control over the public use of the recipe, the marketing of the drink was ruined for everybody, and, I'm sure, after a few weeks, nobody would want one ever again. I guess it's kind of like coffee in Seattle. The explosion was neat for a while, but then suddenly it was everywhere, and it was just too much.
Granted, Amazon's 1-Click approach to internet shopping doesn't seem quite as patentable as a mixed drink, but I feel Bezos does have some claim to the centralized control over how widespread the distribution of 1-Click "technology" goes. Were everyone to suddenly latch on to this idea, Bezos in effect loses some of the fruits of his labor. Sure, he and the Amazon staff dreamed up 1-Click to make shopping easier, but they also did it to turn a profit, to drive people away from traditional "shopping cart" sites and onto theirs. If everyone turns into a little Amazon, Bezos loses -- but so does everyone else.
I've been thinking of something along the lines of this (though completely unrelated) for the last few days. I recently found out from a residence hall neighbor that every hotel room within 50 miles is already booked solid for my 2003 graduation. I had no idea people would think so far ahead -- I certainly didn't! When I asked why this was so, he told me the hotels had booths at freshman orientation and took reservations on the spot. It occurred to me that, at some point, one hotel had decided that they were going to solicit business at freshman orientations, and started doing so, and for one orientation reaped great benefits. However, after that first year, I'm sure every hotel with a little money to spare for a booth set one up and started doing the same thing.
It made me wonder; by setting up booths, were the hotels helping or hurting customers? For those who stopped at the booths and inquired why they were there, perhaps it was a help. I don't think, though, that this idea was ever intended to be a service to the customers. It was meant for one hotel to beat out the others by getting a huge head start on reservations. So, for those like my family, who will now have little to no chance of finding a place to stay (four years in advance!), I see this as something of an annoyance, that within the span of a few days, hotel rooms for the families of 3,000 students for four years in advance are reserved unnecessarily. After that first year, this "innovation" ceased to be an innovation and became a necessity to keep up with the competition. So the hotels gain little (their rooms would have been booked anyway, and they're not getting a head start anymore), but some customers are greatly hurt.
1-Click may follow the same pattern, if its use is not regulated. After widespread use is implemented, it may prove to be a burden for customers. Perhaps a spike in internet sales will follow as people start impulse buying. Maybe soon after this buying spike an online depression will result as people shy away from internet resellers because it's too easy to drop a lot of money on 1-Click impulse buying sprees. I'll admit that right after Christmas this year I fell victim to such a disease, so I turned off 1-Click as fast as I could and now keep away from Amazon and other online department stores because I'm just too tempted to buy stuff. I'm just speculating, of course, but I do think that, for at least a limited period of time, it would be useful for someone interested in the future of internet commerce have control over where, how, and when such features are implemented.
And from the summary of a Congressional recommendation report by the late Secretary of Commerce Ron Brown regarding intellectual property rights and the National Information Infrastructure (NII):Creators and other owners of intellectual property rights will not be willing to put their investments and their property at risk unless appropriate systems are in place -- both in the U.S. and internationally -- to permit them to set and enforce the terms and conditions under which their works are made available in the NII environment. Likewise, the public will not use the services available on the NII and generate the market necessary for its success unless a wide variety of works are available under equitable and reasonable terms and conditions, and the integrity of those works is assured.
I wanted to talk about this passage a little also, and how, though it's really intended toward situations like the DVD fiasco, it also applies to the stuff I said above. However, it's getting pretty late, I can't hardly keep my eyes open, and I'm starting to write gibberish, so I'll quit for now.
Respond with questions, concerns, or, if you live within 50 miles of Ithaca, NY, and have a spare room for ma familia in May 2003, your phone number and address.
enmity. -
Patents and progressFrom the introduction to the U.S. Patent Office:
For over 200 years, the basic role of the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) has remained the same: to promote the progress of science and the useful arts by securing for limited times to inventors the exclusive right to their respective discoveries (Article 1, Section 8 of the United States Constitution). (italics are mine, and the exact quote from Article 1, Section 8 is that "[Congress shall have the power to] promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.")
It seems to me that Bezos is perfectly justified to, at least for a limited time, attempt to regulate the use of a new way of approaching the internet shopping idea. Take for instance the "Flaming Moe's" episode of The Simpsons. According to my interpretation of the patent classification system as described on the PTO's site, Homer could have indeed patented his drink and/or the process for making it. After Moe stole it from him, Homer was out of luck, and had no recourse other than to beat the tar out of him (which he didn't). When Homer eventually went nuts and told a barful of people the secret ingredient to the "Flaming Moe(/Homer)," everybody and their brother picked started up their own "Flaming Something" stand, and, because of the lack of centralized control over the public use of the recipe, the marketing of the drink was ruined for everybody, and, I'm sure, after a few weeks, nobody would want one ever again. I guess it's kind of like coffee in Seattle. The explosion was neat for a while, but then suddenly it was everywhere, and it was just too much.
Granted, Amazon's 1-Click approach to internet shopping doesn't seem quite as patentable as a mixed drink, but I feel Bezos does have some claim to the centralized control over how widespread the distribution of 1-Click "technology" goes. Were everyone to suddenly latch on to this idea, Bezos in effect loses some of the fruits of his labor. Sure, he and the Amazon staff dreamed up 1-Click to make shopping easier, but they also did it to turn a profit, to drive people away from traditional "shopping cart" sites and onto theirs. If everyone turns into a little Amazon, Bezos loses -- but so does everyone else.
I've been thinking of something along the lines of this (though completely unrelated) for the last few days. I recently found out from a residence hall neighbor that every hotel room within 50 miles is already booked solid for my 2003 graduation. I had no idea people would think so far ahead -- I certainly didn't! When I asked why this was so, he told me the hotels had booths at freshman orientation and took reservations on the spot. It occurred to me that, at some point, one hotel had decided that they were going to solicit business at freshman orientations, and started doing so, and for one orientation reaped great benefits. However, after that first year, I'm sure every hotel with a little money to spare for a booth set one up and started doing the same thing.
It made me wonder; by setting up booths, were the hotels helping or hurting customers? For those who stopped at the booths and inquired why they were there, perhaps it was a help. I don't think, though, that this idea was ever intended to be a service to the customers. It was meant for one hotel to beat out the others by getting a huge head start on reservations. So, for those like my family, who will now have little to no chance of finding a place to stay (four years in advance!), I see this as something of an annoyance, that within the span of a few days, hotel rooms for the families of 3,000 students for four years in advance are reserved unnecessarily. After that first year, this "innovation" ceased to be an innovation and became a necessity to keep up with the competition. So the hotels gain little (their rooms would have been booked anyway, and they're not getting a head start anymore), but some customers are greatly hurt.
1-Click may follow the same pattern, if its use is not regulated. After widespread use is implemented, it may prove to be a burden for customers. Perhaps a spike in internet sales will follow as people start impulse buying. Maybe soon after this buying spike an online depression will result as people shy away from internet resellers because it's too easy to drop a lot of money on 1-Click impulse buying sprees. I'll admit that right after Christmas this year I fell victim to such a disease, so I turned off 1-Click as fast as I could and now keep away from Amazon and other online department stores because I'm just too tempted to buy stuff. I'm just speculating, of course, but I do think that, for at least a limited period of time, it would be useful for someone interested in the future of internet commerce have control over where, how, and when such features are implemented.
And from the summary of a Congressional recommendation report by the late Secretary of Commerce Ron Brown regarding intellectual property rights and the National Information Infrastructure (NII):Creators and other owners of intellectual property rights will not be willing to put their investments and their property at risk unless appropriate systems are in place -- both in the U.S. and internationally -- to permit them to set and enforce the terms and conditions under which their works are made available in the NII environment. Likewise, the public will not use the services available on the NII and generate the market necessary for its success unless a wide variety of works are available under equitable and reasonable terms and conditions, and the integrity of those works is assured.
I wanted to talk about this passage a little also, and how, though it's really intended toward situations like the DVD fiasco, it also applies to the stuff I said above. However, it's getting pretty late, I can't hardly keep my eyes open, and I'm starting to write gibberish, so I'll quit for now.
Respond with questions, concerns, or, if you live within 50 miles of Ithaca, NY, and have a spare room for ma familia in May 2003, your phone number and address.
enmity. -
Re:It looks like this is an automatic process...You may not like their business practices, you may not like their marketing, you may hate their OSes, but their "What If..." department is as good as much any other research center out there.
Actually, no it's not. If you look at objective measures, such as patent counts, MS sucked rocks until the very last couple of years. Apple regularly stomped MS in pure number of patents (until 1998, when Apple's business problems took their toll), an incredible feat considering their relative sizes.
From 1990 to date, Apple has been assigned 1,270 patents, compared to MS getting 1,168, and an incredible 15,715 for IBM. (No idea on the quality of those patents though...)
Based on queries to the U.S. Patent Database
While the implementation of this idea may have some new wrinkles, the fundamental ideas on which it's based have been kicking around for a long time.
-
Off-Topic: Slashdot Celebrity Deathmatch #1SLASHDOT CELEBRITY DEATHMATCH No. 1: Tux vs. the BSD daemon
Announcer: Good evening and welcome to another exciting round of Slashdot Celebrity Deathmatch. We've got quite an exciting matchup for you tonight. In the left corner is our plucky but not-quite-GPL challenger, the BSD daemon!
(The BSD daemon strikes a pose for the crowd. The crowd cheers.)
Announcer: And in the right corner we have the most electrifying name in open source entertainment... the one, the only, TUX THE PENGUIN!
(Silence)
Announcer:
BSD Daemon: There's no one to fight here!
(The crowd gasps)
Announcer: This is highly peculiar. If Tux does not arrive within the next five minutes, he'll have to forfeit the match.
BSD Daemon: And then we'll pour hot grits down his pants!
(Tux finally enters the stadium, running. He's carrying a briefcase and a cell phone.)
Tux: Hi, I just got back from posing for my new Linux Business icon. Sorry I'm late.
BSD Daemon: Hey, what's with that? How come there's no BSD Business icon? LINUX BIAS!
Tux: BSD sucks!
BSD Daemon: No, Linux sucks!
Tux: I said it first! By the way, the color scheme on your Slashdot section is really ugly.
BSD Daemon: When we last met, you were the master and I was the apprentice. Now, the circle is complete. (his pitchfork lights up)
Tux: (strikes martial arts pose) There can be only one!
BSD Daemon: Ha! You don't have a chance against the power of my Naked And Petrified Ray!
Tux: (rolls eyes) I don't even wear clothes. I'm already naked. Tee hee.
BSD Daemon: No, you're wearing that tie.
Tux: (looks down at his tie) Oops, so I am. (He pulls the tie off) Let's get ready to rumble!
BSD Daemon: Can you smell what the daemon's cookin'?
Tux: Na na na na na na. (starts putting mousse on his hair)
BSD Daemon: What the hell are you doing?
(Tux pulls his hair feathers up to form spikes)
Tux: SUPAAAA HAAAADO! (He starts glowing and flies into the air)
Announcer: Wow, it's Super Saiyajin Tux!
Tux: I'll send you to
(Tux starts charging up a huge karma energy beam)
Announcer: Uh-oh, this could be trouble for the daemon!
BSD Daemon: Take this! (He hurls a huge tarball at Tux and connects. The tar gets all over Tux's feathers, preventing Tux from flying.)
(Tux falls to the mat)
Announcer: Ouch! What a fall!
BSD Daemon: Code freeze! (BSD Daemon throws a ball of ice at Tux and freezes him in place)
Announcer: Oh! It looks like Tux has been frozen by the BSD daemon's Code Freeze spell!
BSD Daemon: I've got you now, penguin!
(Suddenly, the SuSE chameleon runs out of the crowd and jumps into the ring)
Announcer: Here comes the SuSE chameleon! Tag team!
BSD Daemon: Hey! That's cheating!
(The SuSE chameleon flicks his tongue out at the daemon's pitchfork, catches it, and pulls it out of the daemon's hands)
SuSE Chameleon: Gotcha!
BSD Daemon: Arrrgh! All, right, fine, I'll fight you without my pitchfork! All I need is my patented Drunken Daemon Kung Fu. I learned it from a NINJA! He ate pancakes, too.
Crowd: Gasp! He patented it!
(A horde of angry
Announcer: What a surprise! An angry mob is attempting to tear the daemon from limb to limb! We certainly don't condone this kind of senseless violence, but I just can't stop thinking about what it will do for our ratings!
(While the BSD daemon is being attacked, the SuSE chameleon puts on the Mandrake magician hat and waves the wand)
Crowd: Plunk your magic twanger, SuSEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!
SuSE Chameleon: Release code! (he bops Tux on the head with the wand)
(Tux comes out of stasis and starts charging up his karma blast again)
(Meanwhile, BSD is still being attacked by the
BSD Daemon: Look! It's Jon Katz! (points randomlyinto the spectators)
Angry Mob: Let's lynch him! (they run out of the ring and go looking for Katz)
BSD Daemon: C'mon, I'll fight both of you at once.
Tux: Eat my tie! (he fires his wave of karma energy at BSD. BSD gets moderated down to the mat.)
Announcer: Wow! It looks like Tux moderated the daemon all the way down to -3! What a move!
Tux: Suck it down! (TM ION Storm)
Announcer: That's it for today, folks, but stay tuned next week for Mozilla vs. Mecha-Go!Zilla. Don't miss it!
-
Poetry ...I was on the train the other day and sat opposite was an American Patent Lawyer. Must have been a serious suit as he was in, well, the wrong country and not on holiday. (The invasion is not due for another few weeks yet.)
Anyhow, we got to discussing the Amazon patents, and just at the moment he was saying that he thought they were OK the Cook, who was collecting crockery, dropped a cup of tea on him.
Poetic, don't you think?
-
Re:Affiliate Programs
No kidding! The guidelines for what is patentable state that whatever it is must be "new, nonobvious and useful" (source). Ask any of the thousands of businesses/websites that have been offering affiliate programs for years, or tons of people who have been participating in affiliate programs (myself included) and you will find that they are not new. This method having been around for a while, I'd also say that it is no longer nonobvious. Back when affiliate programs first starting poping up they were nonobvious. Now, as common as they are, they are a pretty obvious method of advertisement.
It looks like the patent judges (or whoever does the deciding for these things) are about as clueless as the rest of'em.
Mike -
Patent Searching for DummiesIf you want to know "how it works", you can read their patents.
Instead of giving you a giant results URL, I'll explain how to do it:
- Go to US Patents & Trademark Office.
- Select Patents.
- Select Search US Patent Databases (it's big, it's red, it likes like a title rather than a clickable item!)
- Select Boolean Search.
- Search for Dimension Technologies in the Assignee Name field (when an engineer works for a company, the usual deal is that the engineer agrees to assign patent rights to the company in partial consideration for the salary they get. The company is the assignee and this is the primary way companies come to own patents).
- Read the patents.
I'm not enough of a hardware guy to understand how this display actually works, but maybe someone here can comment on that!
-
Re:This would not help
Technically you can do them yourself. You'll find most relevent stuff easily. There are many libraries that are used as depositories.
(see http://www.uspto.gov/web/of fices/ac/ido/ptdl/ptdlib.htm) Chances are there's one nearby. Its actually rather interesting to sift through it all. Most of these libraries also have some kind of search engines too. Or if you want to do it from home look at http://www.patents.ibm.com/. If its a decent library they'll probably even have someone who can help you figure out how to do a search. Its not eaxactly easy, but nor is it rocket science. If you make a reasonable effort you'll probably find all of the relavent patents quickly. The $10,000 is for a professional lawyer or librarian or both to search thouroughly the entire patent database. You can probably restrict yourself to just the software stuff.
-cpd -
Re:The irony.The decoder is patented.
Interesting. A search for "Digital video disk" at the USPTO turned up Patent 5,883,958.
However this patent does not describe the CSS scrambling algorithm itself. It only talks about the key management system surrounding it, and gives DES as an example of a scrambling algorithm that could be used for the data. This sill allows them to use another trade-secret algorithm, which is what they did.
Possibly the best thing to do at this point is to repeat the reverse engineering of CSS while paying careful attention to the trade secret and RE laws. Then publish that, along with a trail of evidence to show how the RE was done. However there is no getting around the fact that DeCSS, or any similar program, will still be in violation of this patent.
Paul.
-
Re:The irony.The decoder is patented.
Interesting. A search for "Digital video disk" at the USPTO turned up Patent 5,883,958.
However this patent does not describe the CSS scrambling algorithm itself. It only talks about the key management system surrounding it, and gives DES as an example of a scrambling algorithm that could be used for the data. This sill allows them to use another trade-secret algorithm, which is what they did.
Possibly the best thing to do at this point is to repeat the reverse engineering of CSS while paying careful attention to the trade secret and RE laws. Then publish that, along with a trail of evidence to show how the RE was done. However there is no getting around the fact that DeCSS, or any similar program, will still be in violation of this patent.
Paul.
-
Or how about...
Haddock, Salmon, Pike, Bass, Cod, Tuna
I knew this kid named Jimmy when I was growing up. Jimmy was, how shold I put it... "Special". Jimmy loved to eat peanut butter and jelly sandwiches. That's why I think pb & j is the appropriate smell for these guys
Nervous sweat is the smell for these guys and these guys too
For these guys it's obvious, rocket fuel.
And in the same spirit, that vomitey, greasy, sugarey, metallic smell you find near big rollercoasters for them
And the muddy, porcine smell you'd find around that prize-winning heiffer that just keeps eating and getting bigger for these freaks. Of course you know that animal is the main ingredient for the spiced ham smell that you'd find here
-
Other trademarks with "Linux" in the name.
Got this from trademarks.uspto.gov.
1. 1916230 -- LINUX
2. 75-780385 -- PEN LINUX
3. 75-775058 -- E/LINUX
4. 75-769978 -- LINUX CLINICS
5. 75-760514 -- LETSGOLINUX
6. 75-750440 -- RTLINUX
7. 75-750433 -- "BEST IN LINUX SYSTEMS"
8. 75-750147 -- REALTIME LINUX OPERATING SYSTEM
9. 75-735641 -- LINUX
10.75-735625 -- WE PUT THE X IN LINUX
11.75-735418 -- LINUX GADGETS
12.75-735313 -- LEADING THE WAY TO LINUX
13.75-727469 -- LINUX WAREHOUSE
14.75-715213 -- THE LINUX SHOW
15.75-710491 -- SAIR LINUX AND GNU CERTIFICATION
16.75-702822 -- LINUX WEARABLE
17.75-695940 -- ENTERPRISE LINUX
18.75-681910 -- LINUX START START WITH US FOR FOR ALL YOUR LINUX NEEDS
19. 75-678044 -- LINUXWORLD CONFERENCE & EXPO
20. 75-675176 -- LINUXOUTLET.COM
21. 75-638274 -- LINUX LAPTOPS
22. 75-637347 -- LINUX FOR BUSINESS
23. 75-629587 -- LINUX WEEK
24. 75-609600 -- PUTTING LINUX TO WORK FOR YOU
25. 75-598476 -- LINUX HARDWARE SOLUTIONS
26. 75-593358 -- LINUXWIRE -
Re:Thank You (TM)
-
Remember, Linus NEVER started any of this
Remember, Linus NEVER started any of this.
The only reason Linus even owns the trademark is because of greedy @$$ decided to do it. Then he had his lawyers start forcing the (R) on everything that beared the name "Linux." Authors, publishers and the like.
Linux would have rather had some pro-Linux organization do it and keep it open. He talked about this after the whole fiasco started. He NEVER intended to register it himself.
Check out the USPTO Database for Linux. Note the (REGISTRANT) Croce, William R. Della, Jr!
-- Bryan "TheBS" Smith
-
Re:Thank You (TM)
Thank God(tm*) this is just for a logo, and likewise :
Disclaimer: NO CLAIM IS MADE TO THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO USE "THANK" APART FROM THE MARK AS SHOWN
from the trademark. Trade marks are used in this case to enforce a piece of artwork for commercial purposes. There are also word marks (aka service marks) like THANK YOU FOR TRAVELING WITH PETRO PRIDE. which is covered because of the colours used. in fact there seems to be 64 pages of similar phrases, etc involving this.
* God, apparently is copyright the Vatican (nothing personal) -
Thank You (TM)Thank you (*)
-
Linux Detergent
Is the formula open source?
Your welcome to investigate, the "other" Linux® trademark filed at the USPTO is availible here. -
No
I know little about trademark law, or the conditions in which Linus Torvalds allows people to use the Linux trademark, but it is probably something like "You may use the Linux trademark so long as you give credit to the owner." Your welcome to investigate, the Linux trademark filed at the USPTO is availible here.
-
Re:ACME Name
Well, our favorite Patent Office lists 149 trademarks on ACME.
Interstingly enough acme.com seems to be owned by yet another nerd from Berkley, who has an interesting solution to the domain-name disputes. -
Hardware si, Software no!
I agree that software patents are inherently suspect and the best course of action is to discard the current crop and no longer issue them. I'd join in extending that to gene and related bio-patents. That track would lead to silliness like patenting elements! Hardware patents serve a purpose however, and while the cumbersome process should be reviewed they should not be thrown out with the software bathwater.
disclosure: 5,715,675, 5,893,266
aem -
Hardware si, Software no!
I agree that software patents are inherently suspect and the best course of action is to discard the current crop and no longer issue them. I'd join in extending that to gene and related bio-patents. That track would lead to silliness like patenting elements! Hardware patents serve a purpose however, and while the cumbersome process should be reviewed they should not be thrown out with the software bathwater.
disclosure: 5,715,675, 5,893,266
aem -
Re:Linus' take on thisYou can't copyright a name. And trademark works on a per-country basis. I know that Linus holds the trademark in the US. (Fun to note this one though. Perfectly ok because operating systems aren't laundry detergent or toothpaste.) I believe that Linus also holds the trademark Linux in several other countries, but I'm not sure of details. Anyone?
--
-
Re:Linus' take on thisYou can't copyright a name. And trademark works on a per-country basis. I know that Linus holds the trademark in the US. (Fun to note this one though. Perfectly ok because operating systems aren't laundry detergent or toothpaste.) I believe that Linus also holds the trademark Linux in several other countries, but I'm not sure of details. Anyone?
--
-
14 patentsYou might also want to check out some of Bruce Schneier's work to see if he's patented his encryption algorithms.
I did. A quick check shows 14 patents, a fair chunk of which involve dealing with issues related to cryptography.
For what it's worth, I am glad to see that he is protecting his intellectual property. It is his choice what to do with his patents (except for the several I noticed are assigned to various corporate entities), and he does not need to fear some other entity laying claim to his inventions.
-
Re:20thCentury Fox is no more
It's just Fox now. They changed it pretty recently. Besides, 21st Century Fox is a tacky name.
Maybe it's "tacky" and maybe it isn't -- but Fox *have* registered it with (your favorite bureaucratic pests) the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office anyway. The race is on with the golden egg being tried for by Fox Studios, but also some porn producer in Michigan, a very brave independent producer in Texas, and even some N.O.W.-wannabe web site at http://www.21st.centuryfox.com/!! This isn't the last we're going to hear of this fight, I can figure out that much...
-
Re:20thCentury Fox is no more
It's just Fox now. They changed it pretty recently. Besides, 21st Century Fox is a tacky name.
Maybe it's "tacky" and maybe it isn't -- but Fox *have* registered it with (your favorite bureaucratic pests) the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office anyway. The race is on with the golden egg being tried for by Fox Studios, but also some porn producer in Michigan, a very brave independent producer in Texas, and even some N.O.W.-wannabe web site at http://www.21st.centuryfox.com/!! This isn't the last we're going to hear of this fight, I can figure out that much...
-
Re:20thCentury Fox is no more
It's just Fox now. They changed it pretty recently. Besides, 21st Century Fox is a tacky name.
Maybe it's "tacky" and maybe it isn't -- but Fox *have* registered it with (your favorite bureaucratic pests) the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office anyway. The race is on with the golden egg being tried for by Fox Studios, but also some porn producer in Michigan, a very brave independent producer in Texas, and even some N.O.W.-wannabe web site at http://www.21st.centuryfox.com/!! This isn't the last we're going to hear of this fight, I can figure out that much...
-
Re:20thCentury Fox is no more
It's just Fox now. They changed it pretty recently. Besides, 21st Century Fox is a tacky name.
Maybe it's "tacky" and maybe it isn't -- but Fox *have* registered it with (your favorite bureaucratic pests) the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office anyway. The race is on with the golden egg being tried for by Fox Studios, but also some porn producer in Michigan, a very brave independent producer in Texas, and even some N.O.W.-wannabe web site at http://www.21st.centuryfox.com/!! This isn't the last we're going to hear of this fight, I can figure out that much...
-
Etoys Wins; We LoseWe didn't win this one, in spite of the misleading info in the story on slashdot. Etoys did not "drop" the suit but has just agreed "not to press" it. Conveniently, as several have noted in this discussion, right after their goal was met: The holiday shopping rush is over, etoy.com was forced offline during the rush, even though Etoys' trademark application was rejected. Now Etoys gets good publicity (even on slashdot, with one poster even calling for slashdotters to buy toys in jubilation) by declaring that they are "not pressing" the suit. Meanwhile, etoy faces thousands in legal fees. Perhaps Etoys will drop the suit; perhaps the suit will languish in the bottom drawer until, say, the back-to-school shopping rush.
Read more at nofuncharlie.com and RTMark.
-
We fixed that one here years agoIn the US, we have laws against raids against a publisher. They apply to cyberspace; we got that issue settled with the Neidorf and Steve Jackson Games cases.(I was an expert witness for Neidorf.) If this raid had happened in the US, a big countersuit would probably be successful. France has different rules, but no way is this company going to win exclusive rights to the name "Leonardo" in France.
There are about 30 trademarks of "Leonardo" as a single word in the US, including Mitsubishi (monitors) and Mentor Graphics (design software). Leonardo Finance is a latecomer, and the USPTO has initially rejected their trademark application.
-
Re:prior art and patent reexamination
Thanks for pointing this out. The proper form for filing a reexamination request is available online at the USPTO (Requires Adobe Acrobat Reader). The main problem here is that, as with all patent fees, personal requests are not in mind. The fee to file such a request is US$2385 - Which must accompany the form. I would *Love* to see an organization similar to the EFF which dealt entirely with situations like this. Not only patent issues - GPL violations, etc.
signature smigmature -
Re:Patent
Well, almost.
If I can read the legalese right, this means that the Patent Office is in violation of patent 5,991,780, since their own web server is a "Computer based system, method, and computer program product for selectively displaying patent text and images". -
Patent number is 5982276
You can read it online here
-
PTO infringing patentsThe USPTO patent site uses gifs images all over the place. As all good
So, can anyone tell me, has the PTO licenced gif technology from Unisys (unlikely - have you licenced it?) or are they breaking their own rules? I would suggest that anyone wanting to break the system could start by using the PTO's own system against them
Roddy McLachlan
-
The software or the hardware?
Untill intelligent computers have rights I think the owners of the patents will get to be the owners of the computer
The owners of the computer, or the authors of the software? In cases where patents have been rewarded (Linden's antenna algorithms) it seems to have been the author of the software, rather than the owner of the hardware who gets the patent.
This was reported on in Science News a few months ago. Unfortunately it only appeared in the pulp-and-staples publication, not the online one. But a little search through the patent office turned up only a patent on the algorithms themselves, not on the antennas that the algorithm invented. Unless I really misunderstood the abstract. -
Re:Purdueonline could easily mean POULTRY!
Trademarks are granted over a particular domain. For instance Microsoft has trademarked Windows as it applies to their software product, and so has Randall Products International for their sunscreen product.
So, whether you spell it Purdue or Perdue, as long as you're operating in a completely different domain, you don't infringe on their trademark.
--JoePS. The links above work for me right now, but they did result from a search for "Windows" on the USPTO site. I don't know if search links expire.
-- -
Re:Purdueonline could easily mean POULTRY!
Trademarks are granted over a particular domain. For instance Microsoft has trademarked Windows as it applies to their software product, and so has Randall Products International for their sunscreen product.
So, whether you spell it Purdue or Perdue, as long as you're operating in a completely different domain, you don't infringe on their trademark.
--JoePS. The links above work for me right now, but they did result from a search for "Windows" on the USPTO site. I don't know if search links expire.
-- -
Re:egads No..
Screw the GUI, you're not thinking like Bill. He wants total control. Click on this shortcut link to make Bill a richer person.
-
Is the USPTO infringing on this patent?
Take a look at this page on the USPTO's own web site. It allows you to order customized set of patents on their site, and they can either be downlaoded onto your machine or sent to you in the mail.
CD-Now's patent seems to cover the general concept of customizing a product via a website, and automating its manufacture and delivery. The key difference they site between their patent and the (dubious) prior art is that it involves a network such as the Internet. The only thing that ties their patent to burning CDs is that that is the "preferred embodiment."
This whole idea of patenting business models is absurd, and needs to stop.
--Joe
-- -
And still more silly patents.
MICRO~1 silly patent #1 #5,877,765 AMD silly patent #1 #5,968,170 . AMD patent might not be to silly. Ron Obvious.
-
And still more silly patents.
MICRO~1 silly patent #1 #5,877,765 AMD silly patent #1 #5,968,170 . AMD patent might not be to silly. Ron Obvious.
-
THAT'S IT! WE BURN THE #@&$ PATENT OFFICE!
This, along with a story about a patent on Y2K 'windowing' I heard last night on NPR (which was also reported earlier here on Slashdot) has got me completely disgusted.
It's about time we get together as an angry mob with pitchforks and torches, and knock over and burn that damn patent office. Why hasn't there been any congressional lobbying or attention on this yet? (Because companies like being able to fence off almost brainlessly obvious solutions and hold other companies hostage? Hello Amazon? Hello Yahoo? Hello-- oh hell, just search for 'patent' on Slashdot!)
I'd rather see no patents whatsoever on anything than this garbage!
-
Re:Same old same oldThere's a thing apparently noone noticed. According the latest patent, they check for segment limits via software (reportedly, Intel has a patent to do that in hardware), and the included code (meta-code?) does the compare with zero and 0xffffffff (ie. they compare a number via the maximum possible value in 32 bit arithmetics -- and this code is even present in the "superoptimized" version of the code too...).
That "proves" the CPU is not a 32 bit one... So, maybe the x86 compatibility is just a big plus, maybe the main thing is really different
That crusoe thing is another easily confirmable, they have three refused trademark applications for the word "Crusoe", (available via search only at the USPTO web site, no constant URL's, search for crusoe, the applications are: 75-708413, 75-706113 and 75-706048).
-
Yes, but...Yes, it's called a Request for Reexamination. However, why do it yourself? Surely there's large corporations out there who a) have a financial interest in seeing such a patent invalidated, and b) have the patent attorneys who have a much better familiarity with the process of filing a Request for Reexamination.
If you're really interested, some additional information on Requests for Reexamination are at http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/p ac/mpep/22.txt
Another reason to let a corporation with a financial interest file the Request for Reexamination is that there's a $2520 fee for filing one: http://www.uspto.gov/we b/offices/ac/qs/ope/1999/fee1999.htm
-
Yes, but...Yes, it's called a Request for Reexamination. However, why do it yourself? Surely there's large corporations out there who a) have a financial interest in seeing such a patent invalidated, and b) have the patent attorneys who have a much better familiarity with the process of filing a Request for Reexamination.
If you're really interested, some additional information on Requests for Reexamination are at http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/p ac/mpep/22.txt
Another reason to let a corporation with a financial interest file the Request for Reexamination is that there's a $2520 fee for filing one: http://www.uspto.gov/we b/offices/ac/qs/ope/1999/fee1999.htm
-
Re:Link?
You can try the IBM patent database or the US Patent and Trademark Office. I usually use the former.
---
"'Is not a quine' is not a quine" is a quine. -
Patent work starts at under $5,000
- My Favorite Patent Attorney is Karen Dana Oster
- http://www.millernash.com/osterk_r.html
http://www.millernash.com/
oster@millernash.com ,
All the best, scott.rainey@webheels.com
- http://www.millernash.com/osterk_r.html
-
Not a good idea to go cheap
In theory, the cost of a patent should be the cost that the US Patent and Trademark Office charges you for all the filing fees. I think it was like $2000 last time I checked their website.
The problem is that patents (especially intellectual property patents) are not something that you want to do yourself. Nor are they something you want to hire small-time lawyers (paralegals or your law-school buddies) to do. The reason is that if you screw something up, you might have your patent thrown out in court if some big company challenges it.
Think about it, do you really want to bank your entire company on something that you had done by the lowest possible bidder? You need a good foundation to build a company and that means you need to make your patent rock-solid.
Find a patent attorney that works for a major law firm. Those firms pay a lot for extensive malpractice insurance. That means if they mess it up and you end up losing financially, they can probably cover it. Small time firms are probably going to be more like "Gee, sorry I screwed up."
I don't know where this $20,000 price quote is coming from. I recently talked with a couple medium sized firms that specialize in patent law. I was told it would cost around $900 to have a patent agent (someone registered with the patent office and therefore anything you show them is kept confidential) to run a patent search. That's a great starting point. The patent search compares your idea to all the existing patents to see if there are any obvious overlaps. If there are bits and pieces of your idea already in the patent database, then it decreases the chance of getting your patent approved.
OF course, anything that isn't in the database yet (pending) isn't going to be found, so this is not an absolute yes or no (few things are in life). But, it helps prepare you for when you actually submit your patent application.
I was quoted a price of around $4,000 for the actual patent (not including filing fees). The law firms I spoke with were very clear that it could turn out that I submit my patent, and the patent office says "I took X from patent 123 and Y from 234 and created your idea, therefore it's not unique enough to be awarded a patent." At this point, hopefully I'd already know this from the patent search and now be ready to counter with reasons why it's not such an obvious connection or why it's not the same thing.
It all comes down to confidence in your idea. If you think you have a good idea, it makes sense to borrow the money to get the patent. At that point you can rest easy and not wake up in a cold sweat after dreaming that someone beat you to it.
Just my non-lawyer observations based on personal experience.
- JoeShmoe
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= -=-=-=-=-=-=-=- -
One place to look...
Any patent worth having is going to be expensive..
The price index falls between $20K and $40K.
This is a bunch more information on the US Patent Office I've been told theres a list of Lawyers there but I've never bothered to look. There's lots of information regardless. -
Internationalization efforts
On a related note, I've noticed that there has been a LOT of progress in internationalization in Linux, particularly for Oriental languages (Japanese in particular). Over the last few days, Debian has suddenly gained several dozen packages specifically for Japanese language support, and many other programs have been retrofit for various internationalized functionalization. Definitely a Good Thing(tm). No reason to exclude most of the civilized world just because they don't use 8-bit Roman characters.
---
"'Is not a quine' is not a quine" is a quine.