Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Patents Your Local Weather Report
theodp writes "After a seven year wait, Microsoft was granted a patent Tuesday for the Customization of network documents by accessing customization information on a server computer using unique user identifiers, patent lawyer-speak for using preferences stored on a server for such purposes as "displaying stock quotes for the companies in which the user is interested, and displaying the user's local weather report.""
Nothing like a story involving Microsoft to bring out the haters. Nothing like patents to bring out the righteous indignance. The problem is, most Slashdot readers don't know much of the law behind patents, how they're written, and how they're challenged. Largely, they think if a patent claims something, and the patent is approved, then the claim has force of law.
The fact of the matter is, patents are structured with a series of claims, as you can see in the linked article. Claims are the only thing with meaning in a patent. The rest is provided for reference, clarification, and simple defence. So the only thing of true importance in this document are the claims, near the top.
Secondly, wildly broad claims normally start, and increasingly narrow claims are made as one works down the ordered list. Therefore, the first thing you claim is going to be ridiculously broad. Generally speaking, the first few claims in a patent are not serious attempts to patent something. The last few claims are the ones of importance. And, what do you know, the title of the patent is...the first claim. So before anyone flames Microsoft, have you read claims 11-20? Oh, there's still plenty to complain about, but not as much as the article writer implies.
You like splinters in your crotch? -Jon Caldara
Anyone who uses the Wheel group will have to pay me royalties for use of the name.
"Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
--Dr.W.Edwards Deming
I'm afraid you're not very practiced at reading patents. Each separate claim is an individual protected invention, insofar as it does not rely on the others. Thus just because claim (x+1) refers to "claim x implemented using HTML", that doesn't mean that the patent only applies to HTML. It means that it applies to both x implemented any old way, and to x specifically implemented using HTML.
The reason for this is that if someone can defeat claim x (for being too broad), the patentee can still try and fall back on the more limited claim in (x+1).
Furthermore patent claims are read purposively. Thus for example if a patent for invention specifies a vertical support, then you can't evade the patent by using a support 1 degree off vertical, unless you can establish that the invention patented truly requires absolute verticality. In this situation, a judge would probably rule that a patent covering HTML implementation would extend to XHTML and any other mark-up language that can be read by a standard web browser, since obviosuly the purpose of specifying HTML is to cover such documents.
The author of this post asserts his moral rights.
I'm no Microsoft hater - I honestly doubt most Slashdot readers are either.
...So, there you have it. There are no claims that could not be applied to any news site, any weather site, any sports site, any entertainment site, any science site, or any combination that uses cookies and customization. Indeed, all of the claims are much more general than that. If anyone has any ideas on how this could NOT be applied to any of these, I'd definetly be interested in hearing any other interpretations - I can't see any other way of differentiating based on this document.
I've read the 20 claims. None of them contradict the idea that any news site's weather report could meet any and all of these claims.
1 describes a an abstract computer connection with persistant state and cookie setup and use - it is actually the most specific claim
2 describes the storage of the cookie on the user's system
3 clarifies that the cookie can help identify the connecting system
4 states that HTML is used
5 states that the cookie will contain data about user preferences relative to the site
6 states that information in the cookie may relate to one or more of the following: news, sports, financial matters, entertainment, science and technology, life, and weather
7 states that the form to select preferences will be in html
8 says that the internet may be used in this system
9 says that they may database user information
10 URL's may be used to state addresses
11 cookies may be used to send custom data to the user
12 the cookie can be used to identify the user in step 11
13 the cookie may (again) store this identifier used in step 11
14 again, the user may use a form to set preferences
15 again, topical groupings may be used in this form
16 again, this can take place on the internet
17 this process uses a client-server model, with cookies
18 requests may be cached along the way (happens on any network)
19 again - there is code that allows content to be customized based on the cookies
20 different computers may have different cookies, and they can both still access the system
Note: I have intellectual property lawyer relatives I speak with, yet I am not a lawyer myself.
Ryan Fenton