Slashdot Mirror
Busting Microsoft's Patent On Web-Polls?
"The patent above appears to claim an automated, database-run webpoll that:
- Has an automatic 'authoring tool' that allows an editor to create and store polls (claim 7), including fields for question text, numbers, and answers (claim 4).
- Total votes and percentage fields for displaying poll results (claim 5).
- A 'votes table' to track users that have already voted, a "totals table" to contain vote tallies, a 'vote handler' that processes votes, and a 'survey index table' that displays either the poll questions, or results, depending on whether the user has voted (claim 1)."
Of course, the voting system has evolved quite a bit since March of '98. Our current polling system, like the patent, uses 3 tables: one table to keep track of the questions (pollquestions), one to keep track of the answers for each poll (pollanswers), and another to track the individual votes made to the active poll (pollvoters). However, back in March of '98, the system was only two tables: pollquestions, and pollanswers, with pollanswers pulling double duty as the place where the votes were counted. Duplicate vote checking wasn't implemented until the creation of the pollvoters table, waaay back in Slash v0.9, which was released in the beginning of 1999, almost a year later.
Still, as I understand it, you don't need to have prior art that's an exact implementation of a patent to break it. I think that as long as enough core ideas of a patent are exhibited in a piece of prior art, then there may be grounds for the patent to be invalidated, but I Am Not A Patent Lawyer, and unfortunately, I won't have time to contact one before this story runs.
So, is Slashdot's Poll feature enough to constitute prior art in this case?
Regardless, we're looking for other examples prior art (the more the better), to try and break yet another example of a Patent That Should Never Have Been. There is always the worry that Microsoft can begin acting in the same fashion as NCR has recently (since the patent has been issued), and start throwing lawsuits at every online poll they can find on the net.
Including Slashdot's.
Update: 03/16 07:24 PM by C :According to CmdrTaco, the poll system had it's earliest incarnations in the beginnings of Slash, way back in November of 1997, however that system wasn't SQL based, it was text file based (with judicious use of various unix tools [sed, grep, wc] to cull the voting and catch dupes). You can see a mention of the old system from this archived story from the earliest days of Slashdot...way back in November of 1997. The first SQL implementation of the poll is the March, 1998 version. And there is even more existence of online polls from Slashdot archives, including an even earlier article which mentions a ZDNet poll in the comments! Just so you know, even though the dates in the comment say 1998, they do indeed come from 1997. Blame CmdrTaco's bad code. ;)
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
Software patents cover ALL implementations of a particular concept, not just the one that company w/ the patent implemented. This is one of the major problems with software patents. Its not exclusive use of their invention, meaning their code. Their "invention" is the entire concept.
"But remember, most lynch mobs aren't this nice." (H.Simpson)
-- Joe
Depends on how many other "claims" you violate. The patent is a list of claims, and each claim may or may not be "valid". Only a court case or an out-of-court agreement can determine what claims are valid for a particular potential licensee or potential violator. A court case decision will refute a claim for all. Otherwise, a claim refuted for one in an out of court agreement remains valid for everybody else not subject to that agreement.
"But remember, most lynch mobs aren't this nice." (H.Simpson)
-- Joe
The trouble with the Obviousness test is that what is obvious to an insider, in our case anybody with brains at all and a college degree in C.S., isn't necessarilly obvious to an outsider (e.g., the ignorant patent clerk). If the patent office could hire a C.S. grad with some experience in this, it would be great...
but a C.S. grad with some experience in this would make 10 times more working for a company to make patents than working for the PTO to refute them.
"But remember, most lynch mobs aren't this nice." (H.Simpson)
-- Joe
Patent applications aren't necessarilly "public". If a patent isn't granted, the company would still want the document protected, since they would continue to use the technique and enforce its protection as a "trade secret". A patent is public. An application isn't.
"But remember, most lynch mobs aren't this nice." (H.Simpson)
-- Joe
This idiocy started when the politicos tried to turn the patent office into a profit center. Its not. It never was. Its was idiocy to try to make it into one and the outcome is a total failure.
Instead the reform turned the office into a patent paper-mill and the patents issued are as palatable as used toilet paper.
Ignore all software and procedure patents issued by them as they are totally suspect and unenforcable anywhere else on the planet.
(The other stuff is suspect too but some percentage of it may be valid as it would have passed the necessary criteria that existed before they turned the patent officers into street-walkers hustling their butts for the executive's bonuses.)
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
Microsoft files a lot of patents. Microsoft is better known for being sued for infringing on the partner's patents than for suing over patents. Microsoft has sued other companies over patents. Microsoft has been accused many times of using patents as leverage against competitors. I recall a story from over five years ago of Microsoft slipping a clause into its site licensing agreements saying that licenees agreed not to sue Microsoft for using their patents: buy our software, give up your patents to us. I can't find a link though, so you can just take it as a rumor.
One might observe that Microsoft decreased the number of lawsuits it launched as publicity over their illegal and allegedly illegal activiates increased(the several DOJ trials, and the IRS trial.
Microsoft sues over the name of the Python language Microsoft sues over Compression Patent
Microsoft sues over mouse cable patent
FTC investigate Intel
Microsoft sues for access to patent
Microsoft fails to disclose CSS patent to W3C
Let's not forget Microsoft threatening to not release software for Apple's platform and the whole question of patents that Apple brought up. This is a really interesting story, but I don't have time to post more links. A quick google search should get you lots of background on the Apple vs. Microsoft thing.
Microsoft has so many patents they developed an in-house application to search and manage them.
Microsoft doesn't like look-alike mouse, claims infringment
There are also many more cases of Microsoft being sued for Patent infringment. But I won't bother to list them; typically they involve a small company who pitched their product to Microsoft only to be rejected and find that MS released a similar product a year later.
Yeah, I ran T.A.G. (TG's chief rival in those days :) which had online voting probably as early as 1986 or 1987...I haven't read the patent, so I don't know if it specifically states that these are Web-based or not, but it meets all the requirements: uses a table to see who voted what, uses a table to store the questions, uses automated tools for creating the poll, you can see a tabulation at the end, and so on.
My journal has hot
Code commentary is like sex.
If it's good, it's VERY good.
My office has been taken over by iPod people.
Code commentary is like sex.
If it's good, it's VERY good.
My office has been taken over by iPod people.
That's pretty cool. How'd you manage to do that?
Linux - Because Mommy taught me to Share.
Trademarks cannot be selectively enforced, but patents and copyrights can. See Unisys/GIF, Fraunhofer/MP3, or the Cult of Scientology. Oh, the last one was bogus, I just love tweaking those lying, evil, stinking, freedom-hating, brainwashing, murdering, sue-happy motherfuckers.
Hey, I heard that the Scientologists teach pederasty will get you into heaven! Didn't you hear that? Oh, well, I can't remember where I heard that, but it sounds true to me.
Boss of nothin. Big deal.
Son, go get daddy's hard plastic eyes.
Expanding a vast wasteland since 1996.
Yes, it's nice that they haven't tried shutting down other polls due to their patent. However, the fact is, they patented something, and with that patent, could decide at a moment's notice to sue someone over it, and tie things up in courts for months, if they wanted to.
The fact that they haven't yet done it is a good thing. The fact that they have it, and the money to ride things out in court for a few months to take down some other company isn't.
Build it, and they will come^Hplain.
So let's suppose the Slashdot poll box would count as prior art. How do you prove that that system actually existed before April 22nd, 1998? I mean you can easily fake the information in the database, so would Cliff's word count? I have my doubts ...
And generally: How do you prove prior art with software? You could have just written that the previous night to bust the patent? Can anybody shed some light here?
EagerEyes.org: Visualization and Visual Communication
Went over to The CGI Resource Index and found a couple that might work:
Zone Coaster's Survey
Version: 2.50 - Released: 05/27/97
This versatile survey script allows you to administer a survey using any form you like. Results are stored in a text file and are retrieved, sorted, and presented to you how you want when you want. Tested under Windows and Unix.
FreeScripts: Vote Script
Version: 1.1 - Released: 06/23/96 - Free - Platform(s): Unix, Windows NT
This script allows people to rate anything on a scale of one to ten. It produces a graph of the cumulative results of the voting and the graph is updated every time the script is run.
Voting on My Site
Released: 02/03/98 - Free - Platform(s): Unix
Voting On My Site is a great add-on to any web page! It will allow you to have your visitors vote on your page! They can choose whether they think the site is excellent, average, poor, etc. It even includes a comment section. This script will email the webmaster whenever a new vote has been made. This script will even display the results in a very nice graphical format.
MultiPoll
Version: 2.1 - Released: 11/10/97 - $50 - Platform(s): Unix
Now run a number of online polls quicky, easily & hassle free. MultiPoll features Auto expiration of polls, online administrating, double vote blocking (cookies), email notification of expired polls, great display, & no time consuming tasks from the admin user.
Poll
Version: 1.0 - Released: 06/01/96 - $80 - Platform(s): Unix, Windows NT
With this script, you will easily create as many interactive polls on your Website as you can possibly handle. It's strange, but people do like to vote for their favorite rock-musician, best baby-formula, sexiest model, or predict results of the upcoming presidential/school board election.
Poll It Pro!
Version: 1.6 - Released: 08/26/96 - $20 - Platform(s): Unix
Tally, Archive, E-Mail results, stop multiple votes, and more! - Poll It Pro was designed for the High Tech sites who are looking to host Online Polls in a easy, manageble way.
The Scripts Home: Voting Booth
Version: 1.0 - Released: 01/12/96 - Free/$30>
"The Voting Booth allows your visitors to cast their vote in an unlimited number of topics and updates the info immediately, giving them percentages and number of votes cast for each choice." Commercial sites are charged $30 for this script.
The Poll Master
Version: 1.3 - Released: 03/17/98 - $99 - Platform(s): Unix, Windows
Handles all of your polling needs: display questions, get input, and calculate results A simple question's file allows you to group certain questions that you wish to appear together or you can access each question individually. Only allows one answer per visitor even with your cookies turned off. Price includes free setup on any server!
Dave Bewley's survey.pl
Version: 1.1 - Released: 04/06/96 - Free
Bewley says, "Survey gathers comments on any number of pages using one standard survey or a unique survey for each page if you like. Designed to be inobtrusive, it knows the page a user referenced it from and will return them to that page once they submit the form."
If you could fake prior art in a one-nighter why should it qualify for a patent in the first place?
The message on the other side of this sig is false.
Let's actually spend our time trying to bust patents that are being used to SUE or RESTRICT other people, huh? Blind hatred or devotion for a company and its operations is just another example of childish groupthink.
Microsoft is one of the better cases in the patent arena; they rarely if ever sue over patent infringement (anyone have headlines showing Microsoft patent suits?).
Microsoft and many other companies hold a vast array of patents for purely defensive position. Nobody else can sue them for those methods, and nobody who is infringing on these methods can sue them for OTHER patented methods.
It is the latter case which keeps Microsoft or other companies from merely opening these methods to the public domain. If Microsoft had no patents, then it would be barraged by all the other companies who DO have stupid overbroad patents. As it is, Microsoft's ace in the hole is in their own patent holdings.
[
Does it have to be web based? I rember seeing polls on BBSes back in the late 80s, and early 90s. PC-Board is a popular BBS that had poll plug-ins. Also, C-Net that ran on the Commodore 64 and C128 had them.
Prevent email address forgery. Publish SPF records for y
Back when I ran a RAT(radioactive Telegard) BBS i had polling plugin that would do all of that essentialy and it was realtime(even thoe 1 person was logged on to the system at once) it would take the vote, display it, and make sure the same person could not vote again.... anyone else remember this?
As popular as /. is with the geekhood, someone at MS probably stole^H^H^H^H^Hinnovated the idea from here.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
I am sure this has been mentioned before, but this is a perfect time for a slashdot poll on favorite ridiculous patent...
a) MS patent on web polls
b) RAMBUS patent on every time of RAM that will ever be made EVER
c) One click
etc...
I hope they dont bust it.. The worse it gets the better. Sooner or later almost everything will be patented(or atleast claimed patented) and politicians and everybody else will be forced to admit the studipy of the system and timerange
Contrary to most things there is nothing the corporations can do about, not making it worse for society would make them loose competive edged, and be prey for patentenhuggers.
We must enjure this periode of stupidity so that out childen might be free!!!
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
Send my $10K from bountyquest to some legal defense fund for high-school kids who get branded as "dangerous" just because they happen to know more about computers than their teachers.
Satan: The Justice department is onto us Bill, what are we going to do.
Bill: Oh Satan, always the worrier. I have a plan.
Satan: A Palm!! Wow, I've got one too.
Bill: Not a Palm you silly prince of darkness, a PLAN to get the DOJ off our tails.
Satan: Oh, what is it?
Bill: First, we need to file for a patent on web based voting and tallying.
Satan: Bill, what does a patent on web based voting have to do with the DOJ.
Bill: Let me finish and quit interrupting.
Satan: Sorry Bill.
Bill: After the patent filing, we will fix the 2000 Presidential election in Florida so that an unpopular republican president will win with the minority of the popular vote but the majority of the electoral college after a contentious legal battle and uncertainty about the punch-card ballots.
Satan: Who are we going to get into the White House that won't detect your plan?
Bill: That's easy, after 8 years of Clinton the GOP will do anything to get one of their guys in the White House and I know a guy in Texas who, well let's say, won't ask too many questions.
Satan: OK, great!! Now we have yet another patent, and we have helped some party boy into the Presidency. How does that solve our problem with the DOJ?
Bill: Satan, I told you not to interrupt. Don't make me BSOD your ass!!
Satan:
Bill: The GOP will be so glad to get control of the Executive branch that they will lead G.W. to get the DOJ lighten-up on our World Conquest, I mean, Monopolistic practices.
Satan: OK, that will work for 4 years. But what about the next president?
Bill: Remember, that little patent we are going to file? Since the whole country is in an uproar about the lack of technology in voting, there will be congressional studies, focus groups, et cetera to fix this problem. Of course the only way to be sure that all future voting is trustworty is to you the Micro$oft Inter-.NET
Satan: Ohhh, I'm begining to understand, and since we hold the patent on web voting, we control the voting!!!
Bill: Satan, you make me proud some times...
The big question is:
Did you publish the code (i.e. can you show that you gave either the code, or a description of how it worked, to somebody else). Remember that some sort of puplication of the idea is a critical aspect of prior art.
--
Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
n : an organized body of related information
That is the entirety of the definition in gdict.
It doesn't have to be SQL to be a database. I remember UNIX documentation on how the various UNIX text tools (cut, grep, paste, sort, etc.) were used to turn flat text files into a simple relational database. In that respect, the earlier slashdot polls (which seem to have done precisely that) could be considered a 'database implementation'.
Shrinkwrap doesn't make a database, any more than the requirement for a purchase order makes good software.
--
Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
If enough people can show examples where they've implemented this prior to the publication date of the patent, I think that it could be construed as proof that it was 'obvious to an expert reasonably practised in the arts.'
--
Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
I implemented this (online elections, blocking duplicate votes, talking to a SQL database, with secure voting, etc.) for Stanford's student association elections in 1998, which concluded prior to the patent filing. That system was based on the system that Stanford had used for the two previous years, which did much the same thing, only in C instead of Perl, and that system itself was preceded by a telnet-based voting system. In other words, it's been done before.
This makes me believe there are companies searching 24/7 to acquire the all currently unavailable IP and functional patents in lue of eliminating all potential competition. How are we to create something original if everything is being 'squatted' on. We all know how difficult it is to find an original domain name these days. What if ideas become so scarse that it's just like searching for an 'unleased' domainname? Does the future hold for us idea/conceptual auctions? (Geez, maybe I should patent that one...) The only way to get a domain name today that we have our heart set upon is to pay off the current owner: $300+ just to transfer the 'lease'. I don't even want to think about how much ideas will go for...
I know on an online mud I run, Nightmare, we have had online votes since 1994. Not Web based, but the patent does not seem to make any claims abut the UI.
In late 1997 I was commisioned by my boss, the Registrar of a small women's college in central Virginia, to create a web-based instructor evaluation. The system was to simplify and streamline an existing paper based process (which was pretty time consuming and inconvenient for all involved). This evaluation was to:
I made a damn good product if I may say so myself, and my colleagues were impressed as well. Due to political reasons, we never rolled it out, but I created it nonetheless (ironically enough using Active Server Pages and Perl!).
It seems to me that I have prior art on this patent. All of my files are (obviously) dated, and they were created before the patent filing date. Obviously, the dates on the files could have been faked, but there must be some way to use this to invalidate this ridiculous patent.
Shareware, publicly available in source code format.
# Filename: vote1.cgi
# Version: 3.5
# Author: Richard Ian-Frese
# e-mail: rif@u.washington.edu
# www: http://staff.washington.edu/rif
# Date created: 17-Nov-95
# Last updated: 04-Mar-99
# Tested running: Perl v4.036, v5.003
# Server protocol: HTTP/1.0
# Server software: NCSA v1.4.2, Apache v1.1.1, NT v4.00
While there are a number of organizations (notably Bounty Quest) involved in breaking already issued patents are there any watch-dog groups devoted to looking for "trivial" pending patents? Based on what I know about the process it is easier to stop a patent before it is issued than to try to overturn one after it exists. I think such a group could significantly reduce the number of "bogus" patents out there.
--Chris
--
--
#nohup cat
You can't have it both ways.
If patent battles only get fought over exact copies of someone's way of doing things then the "one-click" patent, BT's patent, Alta Vista's patent, [name another shithead lawyer]'s overly broad patent, and all the rest wouldn't be an issue because the people who they are going after could change some small detail and the case would be moot.
If patents are going to apply to anything that happens to fall under some broad description of what they describe (which seems to be the case in the recent headlines) then broadly relate prior art should be acceptable.
What you seem to be describing is a world where only exact prior art can invalidate a patent but the patent holder can sue anyone whoes work is even remotely related.
Waltz, nymph, for quick jigs vex Bud.
Microsoft is obviously holding this patent in reserve for the next time the results of a poll don't favor Microsoft.
For example when /. publishes the following poll:
Favorite OS:
Windows 2000 2%
CP/M 20%
Linux 50%
xxxBSD 50%
Cowboy Neal 75%
Microsoft could have the poll removed because it infringed on their patent.
Then they would embrace and extend Cowboy Neal
134340: I am not a number. I am a free planet!
Um, yes you do. Sort of.
To bust a particular claim in a patent (the little numbered bits), you have to identify prior art that does exactly what that claim describes.
Each claim stands or falls on its own. So if you find something that exactly matches what's described in claim #1, you can (in theory) have claim #1 invalidated, but the other claims may still stand.
This is important to understand: in a legal challenge, each claim will stand or fall on its own. It is very common in validity challenges for some of the claims in a patent to be overturned, while others are upheld.
The other area which sometimes causes confusion is the specification (the long part that comes before the numbered claims, also sometimes called the detailed description). This is supposed to describe exactly how the inventor implemented the invention, and is usually much more specific than the claims. (It has to be specific enough so that someone "skilled in the art" can re-create what the inventors have done.) To invalidate a patent's claims, your prior art does not have to exactly match the specification.
IANAL, but I do work with patent lawyers on a regular basis.
Never take moderation advice from sigs, including this one.
Microsoft have not made any attempts to enforce this patent, they are not part of the brigade who will patent something stupid and then sue everyone who tries to use it. You should be happier that a company like Microsoft who don't pursue stupid patent infringment suits has a patent on such a basic thing. Now if someone else tries to patent something similar at least a company with some financial clout can go after them.
Just because it is Microsoft doesn't nescessarily mean it is bad. The time could be better spent trying to get rid of a patent that is being enforced rather than just a childish drive to pull one over on Microsoft.
Slashdot: Proof that a million monkeys at a million typewriters can create a masterpiece
This patent is a claim on a new method of polling, not polling itself. I don't understand how a physical polling system, in existance for many years and used by millions, can evolve into an electronic version, and a patent be allowed on the electronic version. How is online polling an invention? Is there a way to have a patent killed without proving prior work? Can a claim of "this is a dumb-ass patent" be made with that office so they will dissolve it? Can a patent be claimed invalid simply because it shouldn't exist and not because someone else thought of it first?
This is like claiming to patent the push-button telephone after the rotary's been in use. It can't be allowed.
Developers: We can use your help.
Well then break out the floppies that hold that BBS code and call your lawyer. Get in touch with the PTO and make a claim. I'm serious. It may not seem like much, but at least write the patent office and claim prior art. Please... Do it! For real!
Developers: We can use your help.
Once the patent claim gets approved, meaning that the PTO believes it's non-obvious, how can others come in and then prove it is obvious? Is there a way to prove, other than evidence of prior art, that the patent claim is simply false and was wrongfully approved?
Developers: We can use your help.
You need to read more about the trials with these companies. Boies, the prosecutor, had to push most companies into helping his case. More are afraid to complain about M$ than not. The only reason Sun was willing to help was because they had no ties at all to M$. No one's crying to mommy. Boies had to push very hard to get anyone to talk.
Developers: We can use your help.
As soon as someone comes up with a way to make money from a polling system that the company has patented, then Microsoft will go after them. Microsoft is no better and no worse than any other huge public corporation. This isn't about Microsoft, or bashing those ruthless materialistic bastards. It's about creative freedom, or as they put it, "freedom to innovate," which they are in turn trying to prevent from others.
Developers: We can use your help.
In any case, Microsoft does plenty of things that are shady, but ridiculous over-the-top enforcement of overly broad patents (ala Rambus, NCR, Amazon, etc) is not one of them.
Well the question is wether An online voting system provides a standardized database architecture that integrates editorial and production processes? The voting system has a survey database to store multiple surveys and a server to serve the surveys over a network (e.g., the Internet) to readers. Each survey consists of one or more questions and multiple answer options per question
Diplomacy is the art of letting people have your way