Slashdot Mirror


NCR Patents the Internet

An anonymous reader writes "We all know about NCR's lawsuit against Palm & Handspring, but I haven't seen much press about patent infringements they are claiming against some of the biggest sites on the planet. According to documentation that a friend's company has recently received, their patents protect everything from keyword searching to product categorization. Patents to look for (and filed in 1998) include 6,253,203, 6,169,997, 6,151,601, 6,085,223 and 5,991,791 . IMHO, this is absolutely outrageous and is likely to cause billions in both legal fees and eventual licensing fees (eBay, Amazon and MSFT have already licensed from NCR). How is this not the lead story on every site? every day? Maybe because no one wants to get sued for having an online business."

19 of 426 comments (clear)

  1. Patents are overrated.... by Kafka_Canada · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Don't worry (yeh yeh, TM)... if this gets out of hand, patents will stop being respected. No need to worry our little panties off that this spells the end of the internet!

    --
    Fuck it
    1. Re:Patents are overrated.... by Gabe+Garza · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Don't worry (yeh yeh, TM)... if this gets out of hand, patents will stop being respected. No need to worry our little panties off that this spells the end of the internet!

      The problem is that this is going to screw over a whole lot of people before laws are enacted to end this legalized extortion.

      What makes this especially ugly is that it's going to have a disproportionate impact on smaller web-based retailers, because they are going to have neither a legal department nor the hundreds of thousands of dollars a legal battle of this scope would cost--the only real choice will be to either pay the extortion money or not do business on the web. Everyone but the patent holder loses.

  2. evidence please by stinky+wizzleteats · · Score: 5, Insightful

    (eBay, Amazon and MSFT have already licensed from NCR)

    Is there proof of this?

  3. It looks like they're patenting database "filters" by plover · · Score: 4, Insightful
    So apparently if you can filter a database you violate their patents?

    If Borland could find an old copy of PowerBase they could probably get this patent thrown out for prior art, and have their own patent rejected for coming 20 years too late.

    I dunno. Whining about incompetently issued patents is like whining about Microsoft or the DMCA. Good for a few quotable flames, but no real news. Move along, nothing to see here.

    --
    John
  4. Re:It's about time... by zachjb · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yeah but the sad thing is that they will be making money off of other internet entrepreneurs, instead of consumers. I would hate to see some great sites go down due to patent infringement. Isn't science supposed to be unpatentable if it prohibits evolution?

    --

    --If only there was a license required to use a computer.
  5. eRalph by sstory · · Score: 3, Insightful

    this is why in the latest Wired Ralph Nader says we shouldn't export our patent system to other countries--for all it costs, it's malfunctional, routinely issuing destructive, horrible patents.

  6. Don't Worry by thomas.galvin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I used to say "Don't worry... there's no way anyone will take this seriously."

    Except that they are. Ebay, Amazon, etc are licensing these patents. Why? Because it's easier than fighting in court.

    But I still used to say "Don't worry... eventually, this will get bad enough, and real reform will come."

    Except the people with the money to change things are also benifiting from this situation. See Amazon's "one click" patent.

    So now I say, "start worrying." I get the very bad impression that things will get much worse before they get better.

    So, what needs to change?

    1. The legal system makes it more affordable to lie down and take it than to stand up to those who more than likely have no legal leg to stand on. This has to change.

    2. Patents protect just about everything possible. If you can do it with a computer, chances are someone, somewhere, has a copyright that you are infringing. I once saw a patent on nested for lops, for crying out loud. Software and business practices shouldn't be patentable.

    3. Lobbyists have got to go. People buy legislation. That is not democracy, and it is not right.

    4. Parties. "Go ahead, waste your vote on a third party candidate. Muahaha!" We should not have to choose between Republicrates, Democans, and Hopeless.

    1. Re:Don't Worry by SubtleNuance · · Score: 4, Insightful

      USA is a Plutocracy Admit it. Realize it. Fix it.
      This thing in Iraq is caused by the same PROBLEMS (you described) that are causing the USPTO to become so damned ridiculous.

    2. Re:Don't Worry by dnoyeb · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is going to be redundant on my part and the last time I will post this correction...

      Ebay and friends are not chosing to pay because its cheaper than fighting in court. They are chosing to pay because they know lots of their competitors can not. Get it?

  7. Jeez ... the gall! by taniwha · · Score: 3, Insightful
    A method and apparatus for providing access to object data stored in a database management system to a receiver client. The method comprises the steps of receiving a database query from a submitting client on a first communication path, transforming the database query into database management system commands, transmitting the database management system commands to a database management system, receiving a response from the database management system comprising a media object locator, compiling an answer set comprising the database management system response, and transmitting the media object locator to the receiver client on the first communication path.

    Looking up a URL in a remote database and then using it - that describes just about everything usefull on the net (including Slashdot).

    This is definitely both in the "obvious to the prectitioner in the art" (as shown by all the people who've gone off and done it) - and also prior art (because of all the DB driven web sites out there prior to 1998)

  8. Is NCR really AT&T by __aavonx8281 · · Score: 3, Insightful
    from: http://www.att.com/news/0993/930922.nca.html


    1991 - AT&T and NCR signed a definitive merger agreement in May, and the merger was completed on September 19. Product introductions included: the NCR 3600, the most powerful general-purpose computer on the market; NCR Document Management System, a general-purpose imaging system based on microprocessor technology and open, scalable systems; the NCR 3120, a notebook computer designed for mobile professionals who want feature-rich computing both in and outside the office; the NCR 3125, an advanced pen-based notepad that is the first mobile automation tool with true handwriting-recognition capabilities; and NCR Fourth Generation Self-Service Systems, which offer retail banks an unprecedented availability level of up to 99.9 percent. Charles E. Exley retired and Gilbert P. Williamson assumed the position of chairman and chief executive officer. R. Elton White was named president.



    1992 - Teradata merged with AT&T on February 28 and was functionally integrated into NCR. Groundbreaking on a new development facility for massively parallel computing takes place in San Diego. NCR and AT&T recognize one-year anniversary of successful high-tech merger. 1992 Democratic National Convention delegates vote using NCR 7054 Integrated Touch Screen Systems. Product introductions included: the NCR 3170, successor to the Safari notebook computer; the 3130 NotePad computer; the System 7000 family of MIPS RISC-based symmetric multiprocessing systems running UNIX System V 4.0; the 5688 drive-up ATM; and new ATMs capable of reading AT&T smart cards.

  9. Re:It looks like they're patenting database "filte by SirSlud · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It doesn't matter.

    America's #1 passtime is 'settling out of court' .. aka, self-censorship and the growing iirelevency of America's legal system.

    Not only is lady justice blind, she's also sitting at home watching financial interests undermine her purpose. It's become cheaper to sell out to your sworn enemy than actually figure out who's on the correct side of the law.

    --
    "Old man yells at systemd"
  10. Sky Falling: Film at 11 by szquirrel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How is this not the lead story on every site? every day? Maybe because no one wants to get sued for having an online business.

    Or maybe, just maybe now, because it's a complete non-story. If these patent claims are so ludicrous then they will never stand up to a serious challange. You say the USPTO grants some silly patents? So what else is new? Call me back when any of these manages to survive a day in court.

    Isn't this story early? I thought we did patent hysteria on Thursdays.

    --
    Never approach a vast undertaking with a half-vast plan.
  11. Good News, Add Fuel to the Anti-Patent Fire by alexander.morgan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This sort of a patent is good news overall, because it will give anti-patent advocates yet another argument against patents, and perhaps Congress will get a wakeup call from the people they fear the most--ordinary voters motivated to cause change. The people did win the vitamin battle against well connected and rich corporations. Who says we can't win the patent battle?

    Unfortunately, this type of patents is also good news for large corporations. Sure they might have to pay a few dollars here and there, but it keeps that pesky innovation from the small players at bay, and that's the biggest threat to the established order--not patents from another stagnant mega corp. So it's dumb for a big company to fight this kind of patent. For them, patent payments are just musical chairs.

  12. EXAMPLE: by Boss,+Pointy+Haired · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Currently, a web site stores Internet data indicating file access status for the files that have been accessed in response to requests from web browsers. Unfortunately, the Internet data are kept as a set of separate and non-correlated data records that are chronologically arranged according to the times at which the requests have been received and processed. Consequently, the Internet data are not arranged meaningful to management and business operation. The present invention correlates web page files (HTML, SHTML, DHTML, or CGI files) with subject areas (such as sports, news, entertainment, restaurant, shopping, computing, business, health, family, travel and weather). In this way, the Internet data are presented in a format meaningful to management and business operation.

    Roughly translated:

    Currently, a web site stores Internet data indicating file access status for the files that have been accessed in response to requests from web browsers.

    A log.

    Unfortunately, the Internet data are kept as a set of separate and non-correlated data records that are chronologically arranged according to the times at which the requests have been received and processed.

    A chronological log.

    Consequently, the [log] not arranged meaningful to management and business operation.

    Ok, so Boss, Pointy Haired couldn't read it. It's just a server log after all. Fine. What'ya gonna do about it, NCR?

    Well...

    The present invention correlates web page files (HTML, SHTML, DHTML, or CGI files) with subject areas (such as sports, news, entertainment, restaurant, shopping, computing, business, health, family, travel and weather).

    Cool! We can take an "Internet Data" (sorry, log) and split it up, no doubt by looking at other components of the path.

    Finally...

    In this way, the [log is] presented in a format meaningful to management and business operation.

    GEE WHIZ! They patented log file analysis.

    Go to hell NCR, and take US Patent #6,169,997 with you.

  13. Re:Another example of WHY the US Patent office suc by bitMonster · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Actually, they do check patent applications against other patents. I recently had to rework some claim wording describing a circuit design because other patents already claimed that. The original claim wording was overly broad.

    What they do not check is unpatented prior art. That is left to the courts.

  14. Re:Another example of WHY the US Patent office suc by gmuslera · · Score: 3, Insightful

    But there is not punishment to the one that patented the wrong thing?

    Lets assume that I patent something very used but not patented, and start asking licences to everyone. Until someone decide to lose more money than my licence and get me to the courts, I only win, and after that (if a prior art or in the court emerges that my patent or claims are unreasonables) I only stop wining, nothing more, but don't lose a penny in all of this.

    I wonder why all "make rich fast!" schemes don't include patenting common sense or widely used ideas and technologies, you can't lose with that.

  15. Three Words: "Class Action Lawsuit" by beaucfus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A small company doesn't need an army of lawyers. Everyone who runs an internet business needs to join together and sue them all at once. It would cost pennies on the dollar to sue them that way.

  16. Patents ARE legalized extortion. That's the point by akmed · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Sorry, but I couldn't resist commenting. Patents are exactly that. Legalized extortion. If I get a patent on something, I can rightfully exclude you from using it for 20 years. Or I can let you use it for free. Or for money. And if you use it without me letting you I can sue you for lots of money and also get a court order saying you can't use it (which, if you break you'll be quite sorry).

    What everyone forgets is that if anyone in the US was doing what your patent describes before you filed for the patent, then your patent is no good. And it doesn't cost billions of dollars to get a patent invalidated. First you need to get sued for violating a patent. Then you need to show some proof that at least one person was doing whatever the patent says before the filing date. Then you win. Given that it costs a minimum of $20k to get a patent, all this company has done is waste lots of money. If it ever tries to bring suit it'll spend even more money and it'll have nothing to show for it because these patents all seem to cover stuff that people've been doing with computers for a while. I doubt you will ever see a suit on any of those patents. It's like the guy who patented swinging. He spent at least $20k to prove that he doesn't understand the patent system. All I need is to bring in some witnesses that'll say they were swinging before Nov. 17th 2000 and he has officially wasted a lot of money. Patent examiners can only work with what they find in literature and trade journals etc. Courts can use anything you bring them.

    http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PT O1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm &r=1&f=G&l=50&s1='6368227'.WKU.&OS=PN/6368227&RS=P N/6368227