Slashdot Mirror

We've all read about some of the dumber patents issued recently by the United States Patent and Trademark Office [USPTO]. The Slashdot community is full of talent and creativity, so why not come up with our own stupid patent ideas instead of waiting for Amazon or Priceline or some other company to come up with something amusing? First prize is a $50 ThinkGeek Gift Certificate that I am paying for out of my own pocket, and will personally sign. The winner will be chosen on the basis of originality, believability, and humor value. To start things off, I will describe my own personal contribution to the Stupid Patent Pool: Zero Click Shopping.

As you know, Amazon has successfully patented "One Click Shopping," Barnes & Noble is angry about the patent, and Apple has bought into the idea. Such tomfoolery! This concept is no more deserving of a patent than something as basic as, say, the hyperlink.

So I decided to go Amazon one better and invent Zero Click Shopping:

"A method of using javascript or similar technology to produce a series of Web page-displayed images that, when "rolled over" by a customer's mouse in a predetermined order, either causes a purchase to be consummated or causes a series of preselected items to be placed in a single customer-accessible data file so that the customer can purchase all selected items at the same time instead of having to perform a series of separate transactions."

Remember, you saw it here first!

If anyone tries to patent this silly, rather obvious concept from this day forward, you can point them to this article to show that is was instantly obvious to anyone familiar with the "state of the art," which means that this idea should not be patentable.

But nowadays, the head of the USPTO seems to believe that every boneheaded concept deserves patent protection, and that if you don't like a patent, you are supposed to hire a lawyer and take it to court. Gaaah!

So let's take the idea and lampoon it -- minus the legal fees, of course.

Write a patent summary. It can be for anything, as long as it sounds credible and is written in patent-talk or a reasonable parody thereof. Post it here. We'll let the Slashdot moderators decide which ideas have merit (or at least humor value) and which don't.

The Slashdot Authors, acting in all of their usual chaotic glory, will decide which of the highest-moderated pseudo-patents wins the grand prize.

Three Honorable Mention winners will each receive a Slashdot t-shirt from ThinkGeek.

You must be a registered Slashdot user to win. Entries will be accepted until 11:59 p.m. (2359) GMT on Friday, October 13. Winners will be announced on Tuesday, October 16. Judges' decisions are final. (If you don't like them, hold your own contest, okay?) The purpose of this whole thing is to laugh, not to get rule-bound, so post away, have a good time, and may the dumbest... er... best ... idea win!

Thanks to Bruce Schneier ^[?] of Counterpane fame for sending in this tidbit. The US Patent Office has granted William Friedman a patent for an Engima-like device - the catch is that he filed in 1933. Still it's a cool vintage piece of crypto - and I also noticed that a gallery copy of Bruce's new book is on eBay. 'Course, you could wait just a few weeks and buy a new one, but hey - if you gotta have it now, you gotta have it.

Anonymous Coward writes: "The U.S. Patent and Trademark office is seeking public comments (pdf form) on the Draft Patent Law Treaty. They say the treaty is intended to "simplify the formal requirements associated with patent applications." Here's your chance to weigh in alongside Tim O'Reilly, Jeff Bezos, RMS, et. al." WIPO will be meeting from May 11 to June 2 of this year in Geneva, and all public comments are due by April 21. The pdf linked to above lists fax, snail-mail and e-mail addresses to which you can direct your comments on their efforts to streamline patent applications and patents, "and the subsequent changes to United States law and practice." Non-U.S. residents, remember your voice is important here, too!

Anonymous Coward writes: "The U.S. Patent and Trademark office is seeking public comments (pdf form) on the Draft Patent Law Treaty. They say the treaty is intended to "simplify the formal requirements associated with patent applications." Here's your chance to weigh in alongside Tim O'Reilly, Jeff Bezos, RMS, et. al." WIPO will be meeting from May 11 to June 2 of this year in Geneva, and all public comments are due by April 21. The pdf linked to above lists fax, snail-mail and e-mail addresses to which you can direct your comments on their efforts to streamline patent applications and patents, "and the subsequent changes to United States law and practice." Non-U.S. residents, remember your voice is important here, too!

thaJungle was the first to pass along the buzz. "Looks like owning all the bandwidth in America isn't good enough for Verio; they apparently want to own WHOIS as well. In fact, they trademarked it..." Well, not exactly. I talked to Verio PR and legal. They own "whois.net," and when they filed to trademark that, they filed for the standalone name too as a matter of course. Since there's just a bit of prior use, the registration was rejected; aware now of its history, they're dropping the application. Update: 02/05 by J : Brian McWilliams has a more informative and skeptical story at internetnews.com.

FFFish writes "Rosch AG, a Swiss chemical company (and strangely absent from the web, as far as I can tell) has submitted a US trademark application. You can view the nasty details at the US Patent and Trademarks Office. " Its fast, stable, uses less system resources... and it gets out stains without causing colors to fade.

It's been a long week for etoy.com. On Monday, a judge issued a preliminary injuction fining them $10,000 each day that their website was hosted at their domain. They shut it down right away, of course. They're just internet artists. They don't have six billion dollars like the company that filed the suit: eToys.com. It's beginning to look a lot like Christmas. Click More. Update: For more information about etoy, see the freshly-updated dmoz category.

etoy was founded in 1994 by a group of European artists who worked on the cutting edge, doing performance art at techno events and raves. Their focus has always been on the internet as new medium; this interview gives a feel for their perspective.

They picked the name "etoy" literally by consensus and running code. Being from Italy, England, and Switzerland, physical collaboration was difficult, so they got together on an IRC channel and went through a list of random names generated by a perl script. When "etoy" came up, they all knew that was the name they wanted; they first used it in October of 1994. In October 1995 they put up their website at etoy.com.

Christmas 1995 came and went.

In 1996, etoy won their first artistic award. Their work typically blurs the line between real world and art; in this case, they had undertaken to demonstrate how important and yet how fragile the system of search engines was. By subverting the meta tags of prominent websites like Playboy, they pulled inexperienced surfers to their site, where they put in a plug for Kevin Mitnick, and had a few laughs at the newbies' expense. They called it the "Digital Hijack."

A curious kind of art. In 1996 it was original enough to win an award from Ars Electronica. Nowadays everyone knows the trick, the search engines find it and disregard it, and some underhanded websites try to make a fast buck by stealing trademarks - but etoy did it first, for fun.

Christmas 1996 came and went.

In June 1997 etoys.com, with an S, began operations. It wasn't until October that their website went online. They filed for a U.S. trademark on their domain, at which point etoy got a little alarmed and filed for their own trademark on their own domain. Maybe because they're based in Europe, or maybe for some other reason, etoy says their application is still pending on some technicalities.

But it doesn't matter when their trademark is granted. Their website went online in October 1995, two full years before etoys', and it's date of first use that's important - not the date of filing.

Christmas 1997 came and went.

Christmas 1998 came and went.

But now it's 1999, the year of the e-tailer. Suddenly etoys.com, with an S, has gone public and is worth six billion dollars. Meanwhile etoy.com, without an S, again putting the spotlight on corporations and society, has raised money by "selling shares" of itself. I'm not quite sure how they did it, but at an artists' gathering, a half-serious, half-mocking exhibition-slash-fundraising they pulled in something over ten thousand dollars. (Which they then donated to their friends in the U.S., also working at the boundary of society and corporations, RTMark, best-known for their George W. Bush parody site.)

In the year of the e-tailer, what kind of speech scares corporations more than anything? Disrespect. Artists who don't play by the rules. People who don't understand that business is serious business.

Etoys.com, with an S, wants etoy.com, with no S. They offered money. At one point they were offering cash and (mostly) stock that would have been worth almost half a million dollars. No sale.

But that should give us an idea of how much they're willing to spend on lawyers.

Finally, in September, eToys filed a lawsuit against etoy, on the grounds that a potential customer had mistakenly gone to the wrong site and had seen the message that - if they wanted to enjoy etoy.com to its fullest extent - they should download "the fucking flash plugin." They also didn't like the pierced breasts or etoy's sense of humor.

To be precise, they claim that "the antisocial, obscene, and offensive images associated with defendants' use of the mark 'etoy,' both on the Internet and elsewhere, have tarnished the ETOYS® mark and the eToys brand name..."

Let this be a lesson to anyone whose domain is coveted by a multi-billion-dollar company: careful with the F-word.

In October and November the case was bounced from an L.A. court to U.S. District Court, and finally to a California State Court. In late November the judge refused a request to let the European artists attend the proceedings by teleconference. In those proceedings, the judge was told that the artists had engaged in "digital hijacking" (the 1996 project), and had sold shares of stock without being properly regulated on an official stock exchange (the 1999 fundraising exhibition). Worst of all, they were hosting illegal hardcore pornography (which was actually just a link to another site).

They claim:

"Defendants use the mark ETOY indiscriminately and in random association with unrelated concepts. For example, on the etoy web site alone, defendants use the mark ETOY in conjunction with other, randomly selected words to create phrases such as: 'etoy.research,' 'etoy.eternity,' 'etoy.timezone,' 'etoy.history,' 'etoy.servers,' 'etoy.strategy,' 'etoy.journeys,' 'etoy.universe,' and 'etoy.crew.'

"By using the mark ETOY in this random, indiscriminate manner, defendants cause both ETOY and the ETOYS® mark to lose any distinctive, signifying meaning."

Serious business.

The lawyers also kindly suggested that, since at least one etoy member is from Switzerland, they really would be more suited to a website in the .ch domain: etoy.ch. Never mind the years of work and the reputation that the artists have built around etoy.com - we all know that "dot-com" belongs to America!

Faced with a torrent of buzzwords, the judge issued a preliminary injunction barring etoy from: operating a website in the etoy.com domain; associating their domain name with the "digital hijack"; or selling their "shares" in the U.S.

Penalty for disobeying the injuction: $10,000 per day in fines.

On November 30, etoy.com shut down its Apache webserver. Its last access came from the eToys law firm (which has been monitoring it closely). They had no choice, really. In fact, when I talked with a member of etoy, he was very nervous about saying things which might get him in more legal trouble. Suddenly, the artists are afraid to speak.

How can this be, when, as the Village Voice wrote in an excellent article, this lawsuit doesn't even pass the "giggle test"? It's absurd to think that one website can shut down another for having a similar domain name - when the second site is not a domain poacher and has been operating two years longer than the first.

The date of the next court hearing, at which this preliminary injunction will surely be overturned: December 27th. How convenient! Just after the Christmas shopping season.

If you'd like to see more about etoy, their domain is down of course, and I don't know of any mirrors, but their fans have constructed a site at toywar.com that has some information. And etoy may put some or all of its site back online at its IP number (not name!): 146.228.204.72:8080.

Good rules have been written to prevent things like this from happening. Unfortunately, the rules have not taken effect yet for most domains. Even after they do take effect, their legal status will be uncertain until they are tested in court.

Those rules are ICANN's Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy. This policy ensures that the conditions under which a domain name can be disputed are strictly limited. For such a dispute even to proceed, a complainant must assert that each of three things is true:

your domain name infringes on a trademark;

you have "no rights or legitimate interests" to your domain;

and your domain name is being used "in bad faith."

As long as you're operating in good faith, or you have any legitimate interest in your domain, there is not even cause to bring up a dispute over a domain. Clearly this puts etoy.com on firm ground, because regardless of the trademark issue (which should be resolved once their mark registration is granted) they win on the other two points. This doesn't stop clueless judges from issuing injuctions, of course. But having these rules codified as official policy will give the legal system better guidelines to operate by.

These rules went into effect for some domain name registries on Wednesday, but will not apply to the most popular registry, Network Solutions, until January.

I can't even complain to eToys.com. I clicked all over their website looking for an email contact address and couldn't find one. When I filled in the web form to ask that someone get in touch with me for this story, all I got was a email form letter:

It is our goal to respond to all order-related e-mail within 24 hours. If your e-mail is not order-related, we will do our best to take care of your questions, concerns and suggestions as soon as possible.

It's 72 hours later, so my email must not have been sufficiently order-related.

In the meantime, I can at least have the satisfaction of taking my order-related business elsewhere this holiday season. I'm sure eToys couldn't care less, but it will serve me as a small comfort during the remaining 22 holy shopping days. In a world run by retailers, e-tailers, and lawyers, I need everything I can get to help me make sense of the bizarre orgy of spirituality-soaked commerce that serves as the endcap of each year. Hohoho.

Anonymous Coward writes "It seems someone has received a patent on tattooing barcodes on people to verify your identity. Check it out at the US government's Patent Site." Yes, it's a real patent. Yes, it's loony. Yes, it's scary. So scary that we might as well laugh at it, because laughter is healthier than tears. (Sigh)

__roo writes "Today's New York Times [free login req. to read - ed.]reports that Michigan inventor Lynn Svevad has invented the "Ancestral Computer Program", which virtually brings a deceased relative "back to life" by drawing upon stored data. It uses voice recognition and stored animations and responses recorded while the person was alive to simulate the responses that the relative would have given, simulating 'a two way conversation between the user and the relative.' Search www.uspto.gov for patent #5,946,657. Didn't I see this in an old episode of Max Headroom? (see episode #8)"

sv0o sent in a link to a new, amazingly attractive US Patent and Trademark Office Web site called Independent Inventor Resources. It could easily be subtitled "Everything you ever wanted to know about U.S. patents and trademarks but didn't know who to ask." Now, when you have a question about patent or trademark law, you have an authoritative place you can go for answers instead of guessing - or relying on opinions from people who don't necessarily know what they're talking about.

The German branch of Microsoft has demanded that our collegues at the German Linux Web site remove their slogan "Where do you want to go tomorrow?". They have complied by blacking out their slogan, but Microsoft's legal position appears tenuous: A search on Altavista for that phrase produced over 400 hits, and ... this trademark is pending for Cybernet Systems Corporation of Michigan anyway..

r3drun sent us pictures of the first production empeg (the Linux based car MP3 player). Tom Porter hooked us up with interesting essay by Neal Stephenson that is pretty interesting. Worth a read. emad sent us a link to a Vote for your favorite RFC page. Cracked me up: You vote by number. wall sent us what appears to be the new SGI Logo. Next, I've been waiting for an excuse to link Space Ghost for awhile, and Visoblast sent one that I think us amusing as hell: Naked Pictures of Keith Richards do not affect wildlife. I'm probably only posting it because I listened to Some Girls and Beggers Banquet today. In other music news, RedOregon sent us amusing parody lyrics, Welcome to Berkeley California (you can guess the tune) And finally, GiMP wrote in to say that someone created the Slashdot dance. Hemos has never looked lovelier.

ewhac writes "In the current issue of The Bulletin (an email newsletter, pricey subscription required), it is reported that, in mid-January, Microsoft was awarded patent #5860073 on, "The use of style sheets in an electronic publishing system." The Seybold article casts doubt on the validity of the patent, citing prior art back to the 1960's, and on the competence of the US Patent and Trademark Office for awarding it. The article also calls Microsoft's motives into question for failing to mention this patent application to the World Wide Web Consortium, with whom it has been working for some time to develop a style sheet standard. Thomas Reardon, director of standards at Microsoft, claims that it will offer a "free and reciprocal" license to anyone wishing to use the technology, adding, "These are the most liberal licensing terms out there." (It would seem Reardon is not aware of the GPL.) "

In the continuing worrisome trend of US patent office incompetence, news.com reports that Open Market has been awarded extremely broad patents covering much of the software in common use today for Internet shopping and credit card payments. Larger companies can cross-license or claim patent infringement against Open Market, but smaller ones will be screwed. Nice to know that the fine tradition of patenting prior inventions, such as wheels (also awarded this year) continues in the US.