Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

AvantGo Gets a Patent

Posted by michael on from the slashdot.org/palm/ dept.

AnElder writes: "Yahoo's Daily News Technology section is carrying a story reporting that AvantGo has received a patent for its synchronization technology. And here's an excerpt: "In legal jargon, AvantGo said the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office had issued it patent No. 6,341,316 covering the system, method and computer program product for synchronizing content between a server and a client." Why didn't I think of this?" In all fairness, the patent doesn't seem to be as bad as many that have been issued. It cites many other patents as references (which helps ensure that AvantGo is doing something *different*), and is rather specific about the process - I would expect that there are many ways to "synchronize" data that wouldn't run into this patent.

4 of 128 comments (clear)

  1. Patent link by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Link to the patent is here.

  2. Only a method of.. by reachinmark · · Score: 4, Informative
    The common phrase in a lot of these types of patents is "A method of". As in this case, obviously they aren't patenting the concept, rather a fairly specific method.

    The patent actually reads: What is claimed is: 1. A method of synchronizing a server and a client on behalf of a user, comprising the steps of:... - from the patent database

  3. They actually did something, unlike most companies by qslack · · Score: 4, Informative

    I'm completely against silly software patents, like the 1-click one, but I think that AvantGo deserves this one.

    If you've ever used AvantGo, you know that it's an incredible system. They deserve this patent! Clearly, they worked hard on their idea, it wasn't stolen from someone else or obvious.

    This patent only covers server->handheld synchronization, not server->client sync (it's not overly broad). It won't make the whole Internet infringing. :)

    This isn't a patent on a simple algorithm or something really simple, it's a patent on a complicated method (as opposed to most software patents). It obviously took a lot of work to perfect this idea, and the way our current IP system works, we let the inventors keep the right to their inventions. Whether or not you agree with our IP system, it's the way it works over here, and they deserve the patent.

    --
    qslack.com
  4. Lotus Notes Replication is prior art circa 1985 by dudeman2 · · Score: 5, Informative

    This patent looks to be worded broadly enough to cover Lotus Notes clientserver replication, which was developed around 1985. The only difference I can see is that Notes replication does not use XML or HTTP... obviously these were not available in 1985. I don't know if that's a material part of the patent claim.

    I think Lotus has their own patents covering replication. I also know that some work was being done to leverage the Notes replication engine in the Internet world, (circa 1995) perhaps using HTTP or XML, but I can't prove this.

    IBM, owner of Lotus and the world's largest patent holder, may have something to say about this patent.