Interwoven Patents Code Versioning

webengr writes "It seems like the USPO is pretty lenient when it comes to awarding software patents. CVS has been around for a long time, but now Interwoven has been awarded a new patent covering version control of web assets. The claims include, 'The use of a hierarchical file system and an object repository for representing and hosting content and its structure,' and 'The combined concepts of file history, versioning, comparison, and merging as it relates to content, provide an archive of all individual changes as well as collections of changes so they can be versioned and audited.'"

Comments

article in case of server meltdown

[mrhandstand]

pertinent info frfom article

Interwoven's U.S. patent (#6505212)

A system for asset management comprised of multiple workareas, each configured to maintain a virtual copy of content as it would appear when published;

A staging area to which content is submitted from multiple work areas and where any conflicts between content can be resolved;

Branches and sub-branches (for different projects or initiatives) that contain individual workareas, staging areas, and editions which allows for massively parallel development on a single platform;

The use of a hierarchical file system and an object repository for representing and hosting content and its structure;

Virtualization of all content regardless of location as well as Web and application servers - this allows contributors to make changes "in context" of the entire site;

The combined concepts of file history, versioning, comparison, and merging as it relates to content, provide an archive of all individual changes as well as collections of changes so they can be versioned and audited.

Re:article in case of server meltdown

[Anonymous Coward]

Regardless of what Interwoven's site says, here are the 13 actual claims that define the scope of their exclusive rights. Pick the braodest among these and see if prior art exists that discloses each and every limitation. If so, great.

The point to remember, gentle reader, is to put zero stock in the company-paraphrased/sweeping language on their website. To quote (or at least paraphrase) a famous patent law scholar and judge, "The name of the game is the claim." IAAL, a patent one at that.

1. A system for file management for files containing website content comprising:

a work area configured to allow a user to create and maintain web content to be displayed on a website, the work area being a file system having read and write operations to enable a user to edit virtual representations of files having web content that is located in the work area; and

a staging area adapted to receive and integrate the web content submitted from the work area when the web content of the work area does not conflict with other web content submitted to the staging area and configured to retain versions of web content submitted from the work area.

2. The system of claim 1, further comprising a plurality of work areas configured to allow different users to create and maintain web content to be displayed on a website, wherein the staging area is adapted to receive web content changes of files modified in the work areas and is configured to check for conflicts in web content received from two or more work areas.

3. In a system having a plurality of file systems containing web content, for use in a system for developing virtual copies of web content to be displayed on a website, a method for maintaining the history and ancestry of the web content of an item in each of the file systems in which the item is included, the method comprising:

associating a history object with a first item containing information related to the revision history of the item web content;

associating information related to the ancestry of the item web content; and

maintaining an entry in the history object for each file system in which the item is included that identifies the web content associated with the first item in that file system so that conflicts with other items and their associated web content may be ascertained.

4. The method of claim 3, further comprising:

associating new web content in one of the plurality of file systems with the item;

modifying an entry in the history object corresponding to that file system to indicate that the item is associated with the new web content; and

adding a reference to the previous web content in the new web content.

5. The method of claim 4, further comprising:

determining whether a second item is in conflict with the first item by determining whether web content in the second item are previous web content of the first item.

6. A method for developing a website by resolving potential conflicts in web content submitted to a web content staging area by a work area where virtual copies of web content are developed, comprising:

modifying data associated with a selected object in a work area that is related to web content to be published on a website;

determining whether other web content is in conflict with web content developed by the work area;

resolving the any conflicts among the different web content; and

submitting web Content from the work area to the staging area where web content is staged before being published on a website.

7. A system for developing a website comprising:

a work area defined within a memory location and configured to enable a user to edit virtual copies of web content by editing files containing web content within the work area and to submit web content to be staged for publication on a website; and

a staging area defined within a memory location and configured to receive web content submitted by a work area, to determine whether conflicts exist between web content submitted by any one work area and other content to be staged in the staging area, and to integrate web content submitted from a work area when the web content of the work area does not conflict with other content submitted to the staging area and to maintain versions of web content sent from a work area.

8. A system according to claim 7, wherein the work area may be characterized as a file system stored within memory and having read and write operations to enable a user to edit files containing web content in the work area; and

wherein the staging area may be characterized as a file system for staging web content developed in a plurality of work areas and stored within memory and capable of receiving web content from a work area, the staging area including a versioning mechanism configured to maintain versions of web content received from a work area and an integration mechanism configured to integrate web content received from a plurality of work areas when the web content does not have conflicts.

9. A method for modifying website content, wherein the method is configured for use in a web content modification system having at least one. work area for modifying virtual copies of web content and a staging area for integrating web content submitted by one or more work areas, the method comprising:

modifying virtual copies of web content of a selected object in a work area;

analyzing the web content of the work area to determine whether it is in conflict with other web content submitted to the sting area; and

in response to said other web content not being in conflict with the web content of the work area, submitting the web content modified in the work area to the staging area; and

in response to said other web content being in conflict with the web content submitted by the work area, not submitting the web content to the staging area.

10. The method of claim 9, further comprising, in response to said other web content submitted to the staging area being in conflict with the web content of the work area, rejecting the web content from being submitted to the staging area.

11. The method of claim 9, further comprising, in response to the other web content submitted to the staging area being in conflict with the web content submitted to the staging area by the work area, refraining from submitting the web content of the working area to the staging area for integration with other web content.

12. The method of claim 9, wherein analyzing the web content of the work area to determine whether it is in conflict with other web content submitted to the staging area further includes analyzing the web content of the work area to determine whether the web content of the work area shares a common ancestry with other web content submitted to the staging area by a work area, wherein if the web content of the work area shares a common ancestry with the other web content, no conflict exists, and wherein if the web content of the work area does not share a common ancestry with the other web content, a conflict exists.

13. The method of claim wherein analyzing the content of the work area to determine whether it is in conflict with other content submitted to the staging area further includes:

analyzing the content of the work area to determine whether it is the same content as and whether the content of the work area shares a common ancestry with other content submitted to the staging area;

if the web content of the work area is not the same as the other web content submitted to the staging area, a conflict exists and the web content from the work area may not be submitted to the staging area;

if the web content of the work area is the same as the other web content submitted to the staging area, a conflict does not exist and the web content from the work area may be submitted to the staging area;

if web the content of the work area does not share a common ancestry with other web content submitted to the staging area, a conflict exists and the web content from the work area may not be submitted to the staging area; and

if the web content of the work area shares a common ancestry with other web content submitted to the staging area, a conflict does not exist and the web content from the work area may be submitted to the staging area.

Prior Art: Wiki

[Anonymous Coward]

Many Wiki's are already doing this and have been doing this for years.

Clearcase is prior art -it was their prior company

[puppetluva]

The interwoven designers were the original designers for Clearcase.

Clearcase has all of this stuff including staging and work-areas.

They are basically patenting "Clearcase as applied to the web".

Re:um, actually...

[Anonymous Coward]

Layman's opinion is the key. Versioning systems dont care if you are versioing C code, Java code, HTML, word docs, zip files, what have you. Source control systems version electronic files. If the patent office had a 5 minute inderstanding of what a source control system does and how it can be used, this patent would not have been awarded.

Way back in 1985....

[Anonymous Coward]

We were doing this with DSE (Domain Software Engineering) system (Apollo computers). They had versioned files like VMS and this was a CVS like system. The controlled directory looked just like a normal file system but DSE would let you extract older/different versions for the file set. Then this would control the build process. (And we had to walk uphill, in the snow, both ways, in Utah !)

--jim

Link to patent

[forand]

Here is a link to the actual patent.

Re:Ugh.

[SpacePunk]

Unfortunately it's up to the person(s)/entitiy submitting the patent to supply prior art. Evidently they aren't fullfilling this requirement.

Re:Is the phrase 'web assets' significant ?

[jfx32]

Zope has built in version control for it's 'web assets', and I am pretty sure they predate Interwoven at doing so.

Re:PTO Link

[hpulley]

here is a clickable link to the patent at the USPTO.

a real technological lynchpin

[GunFodder]

The patent for the integrated circuit was hotly contested between Fairchild and Texas Instruments when Jack Kilby and Robert Noyce both invented the integrated circuit at about the same time. The battle dragged on and by the time it was resolved it was totally irrelevant since both companies were making tons of ICs.

Re:Ugh.

[arkanes]

By serving members, I assume he means senator, congressmen, presidents, and judges. In other words, people with the direct power to create and change law. I suspect the 90% figure is close.

To be fair you last item isn't true

[kfg]

The GPL embraces the concept of intellectual property law and uses it to forward the philosophical point of view that the *code* ( not the coder) should always be free.

If the GPL rejected the concept of intellectual property it would called "public domain."

The GPL is very much *not* the same as the public domain, since it forces contractual obligations. It can only do this because the code is *someone's intellectual property.* You use the code under license. Not right.

This is why we have BSD/GPL/Aritistic license religious wars.

The power of the GPL ( whether you think it's good or bad is up to you. Please note I'm only bringing up facts here, not making value judgements) is that with no concept of intellectual property you would have *no* rights to obtain source code. The GPL uses intellectual property law to force the code "free."

KFG

dont get panties in uproar

[chron]

I've used TeamSite for years.. and checked out the patent. everyone needs to settle down. Interwoven uses some clever tricks in the caching and indexing in their management system that go above and beyond what something like CVS does.

This is what they're pantenting. TeamSite was actually built on top of CVS when the project started, but the standard content manageement scheme is not what's being patented here..

Re: Is the phrase 'web assets' significant ?

[Black Parrot]

> I'm just wondering if the patent being granted is someone hinged on Interwoven's claim to be the first to do version control for 'web assets' (ie, HTML, images) as opposed to source code.

FWIW, I just browsed our cvsroot and found Web pages in it dating back to 1998. And I'd be shocked if I found out that we were the first to do that.

Re:Can the USPO be sued? IANAL but...

[CrazyDuke]

You can not sue the government, or a governmental agency, without the permision of the government. You can, however, sue an employee of a government if they are personally negligent.

Patent Office is a joke

[BlackjackGuy]

One of the main reasons we have so many ridiculous patents these days is that patent office employees get paid per patent they approve! They get no pay for quality of research, or how thoroughly they examine the patents. There is no incentive for these overworked patent researchers to actually do good work or put any thought into what they're examining. With the current pay scale, they are incented to approve as many patents as possible in the shortest amount of time. Until that changes, we'll be stuck with the joke of the patent system we currently have.

GONG! Try again

[GrapesForBuddha]

Peng Ong was most definitely NOT one of the original designers of ClearCase. He was, however, heavily influenced by ClearCase when he set out to create TeamSite.

IWOV actually had to change the way they do things in order to not infringe on some of Rational's patents (for example their MVFS patent for a virtual filesystem that tracks build artifacts). I believe that the whole workspace/staging area/edition structure may have evolved from having to avoid stepping on Rational's toes.

In any case, the engineers at IWOV know that the core of TeamSite is very similar to any other version control system and that it's just optimized for web content control and delivery.

IMHO, there's nothing patentable about TeamSite. It's pretty useful and all, but not worthy of a patent.

Re:Is the phrase 'web assets' significant ?

[Quarters]

Microsoft was pushing Visual Source Safe as part of their internet dev studio package back in the mid-late '90s. It was positioned specifically for versioning web site assets. NXN's Alienbrain package has been considered the premiere package for versioning digital assets for game development for at least as long. There are digital versioning packages for video production and prepress/publication production that date back to at least the early '90s. There's nothing specific about Interwoven's claim of first to do web assets that can't be disproved by prior art. That is, of course, if any potential litigation defendents want to (or can) properly defend themselves.

Re:SourceSafe

[AndroidCat]

That's who they'd go after first, because they have the money.

No no no! The idea is to go against weak opponents first. They don't have the money to wage a legal war, so they rollover and pay a licence fee. You keep going after small targets. If you feel lucky, you go after a target that will fight, but can't afford a legal dream team. If you win, the next victim^w company will fold much quicker.

With the big boys, you horse-trade patent licencing. "We'll let you use our patent, if we can use yours and a first-round draft pick."

You never want to go up against a company that can spend more on legal bills out of petty cash than your total assets.

Unlike trademarks, you don't have to defend a patent against all comers or lose it. You can pick your targets carefully.

IPJusticie: the EFF of the patent wars

[Brian Hatch]

Robin Gross, previously the staff attourney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation has founded a new group named IPJustice. I suspect it's still getting it's feet since it's so new, but it will hopefully be able to do to IP abuses what the EFF does for online/free speech/etc issues.