Slashdot Mirror


BT Pushing Hyperlink Patent

There's been a lot of new publicity lately about the British Telecom trying to defend a patent that they claim means they invented hyperlinking. Currently they are going after Prodigy for using hyperlinking back in the early eighties. We've mentioned this one before, but it really looks like they are going to push it. Insane.

4 of 452 comments (clear)

  1. Prior rights to hyperlinks - from old /. articles by jgaynor · · Score: 5, Informative

    1968 - includes MOVIES of working links

    1965

    1940's

    And alot more

    The list goes on and on. Let them squander their money. To quote a recent game - "If theyre deadset on squandering prescious resources sabotaging their own [] efforts, I say we let em do it."

    Along the same vein I cant believe Xerox hasnt made a stink about this. You think they would have learned their lesson after not screaming about the mouse, GUI, etc . . .

  2. prior art 1968 by martin · · Score: 5, Informative

    Well looks like the US PO wasn't that brilliant even in 1980. This Slashdot article shows MIT demonstrating the idea back on Dec 9 1968.
    Given BT's cash problems I think they are trying it just in case they can get some money.

  3. Re:Patent filed in 1980?... by NickV · · Score: 5, Informative

    The article says "BT is determined to prove that a patent lodged with the US patent office back in 1980". That's 22 years ago. Doesn't that mean it's already expired even if it were valid (which I doubt)?

    Nothing pisses me off more on /. than people who don't read the article. Hell, I'd expect better from someone with a UID > 20000.


    From the actual article, (you know... what you didn't read)...
    "The UK patent has already expired so ISPs in the UK would escape having to pay anything. But in the US, the patent does not expire until 2006. "

    Also, to answer your second question (which is also IN the article you didn't read,) BT used to be a part of the Post Office, but it no longer is so.

  4. Re:Patent filed in 1980?... by markmoss · · Score: 5, Informative

    US patents used to run for 17 years from the time a patent was granted, vs. 20 years from the time of application in the rest of the world. So if it expires in 2006, then it must have been granted in 1989 -- that's a rather long delay if the UK application was in 1980. Or, the article seems to say that the suit now is over patent infringement in the 80's -- which makes this a remarkably long time to wait, and isn't there an applicable statute of limitations?

    Also, US courts are just now beginning to consider that failure to enforce a patent for an unreasonably long time (like while the patented technique becomes industry standard practice, with no royalties), may constitute "prosecution laches" and make the patent unenforceable. See this.