Slashdot Mirror
Software Installation/Update via Internet Patented
RKBA writes "My wife just handed me an article from the Wednesday, October 22, 2003 issue of the Wall Street Journal about a tiny Austin, TX company called Bluecurrent that has been awarded patent No. 6,636,857 covering the Internet installation of any software or settings on new computers. The patent was granted by the USPTO on October 21, 2003. It will be interesting to see if it can be enforced. I think it's time for someone to file a patent on Earth, Fire, and Water. ;-)"
It's official. There is no God, the madness will never end. Kill me now.
According to the WSJ article, They have already found a law firm willing to pursue the claim for a contingency fee.
"Mr. Thomas said Bluecurrent intends to seek royalties of $10 to $25 for each time a new computer has software or other settings updated over the Web."
Frost piss.
I think it's time for someone to file a patent on Earth, Fire, and Water. ;-)
Wind is already patented?
Who did what now?
multiple computers connected by digital communications?
I'm gonna patent Air and Spirit.
Will Debian have to move APT to non-us now?
NO! This is *not* a patent "covering the Internet installation of any software or settings on new computers".
This is a patent covering backing up preferences on a remote server so that someone can safely upgrade their OS or move computers.
To recap:
I wish /.ers would check their facts before screaming how the sky is going to fall on our heads every time the USPTO grants a patent.
foo mane padme hum
Mainframes.
(And please don't tell me this applies "originally" to the World Wide Web... if that matters I'm applying for a patent to do the exact same thing "for IP block 90.x.x.x".)
~ Whence do you come, slayer of men, or where are you going, conqueror of space?
...but here's a link to a relevant article.
I hope someone counter-sues them into the dust!
evil adrian
Aren't American Citizens ASHAMED of the US Patent Office? I know I would be.
Then people think about the USA = stupid stereotype and wonder where it comes from. It's not just GWB.
Well I will just patent breathing and sue everyone. Now I'm sorry that there has to be prior art to this. Surely even Windows Update covers this. Prehaps MS should just bring up a test case as they have deep enough pockets. Then again they will probably just buy the patent for stupid amounts then tax everyone else
Rus
Cheap UK and US VPS
I find it especially funny that this amazing company can't be accessed from my computer due to their use of Shockwave Flash, which I removed because it is being systematically abused by large websites for popup ads.
I'm guessing their current plans are equally as amazing!
"I think it's time for someone to file a patent on Earth, Fire, and Water. ;-)"
I hold a patent on Eart, Wind, and Fire
And I always thought the name was Earth, Wind and Fire...
And can you patent a band?
Dood!
You REALY need to get out more!
GPLv2: I want my rights, I want my phone call! DRM: What use is a phone call, if you are unable to speak?
It looks like this is a bit more specific than the original post would lead one to believe. It does not cover installing software remotely. This patent is more about saving a user's settings remotely, then transferring them to a new computer. Looks like it is a way to facilitate the use of a remote IT staff. It does not look like it covers downloading software install packs, nor does it seem to cover software updates. But hey, IANAL :)
He's right.
That said, who can blame anyone for assuming the worst-case here?
Is this truly the only Earth I can live on?
.Mac allows me to backup much of my data and utilize that data on other computers. I wonder if these people will go after Apple.
After that the installer run's locally, i.e. the installer executable is running on the consumer's PC not on the webserver.
So unless the patent cover's downloading over internet, which in turn would mean patenting the HTTP or FTP or any kind of File transfering protocol, I don't see how can they apply this patent.
for the last time people, I am "frodo from middle eaRTH", not "middle eaST".
maybe this will stop all those browser hi-jack programs like comet cursor and gator that auto installs on browers with low security.
Any of you readers who live in europe should be writing letters or whatever else is necessary to get your local media in some way to report this and other stories like this.
You need for the Great Washed, the computer-uninformed persons of europe, to become aware that if software patents go forward in Europe, this is the sort of thing you have to look forward to.
They need to understand that software patents will not help the innovators. They will simply mean that by some kind of strange lottery system, the first person to successfully get through a bs application describing something that is already an obvious, common practice will suddenly "own" that practice.
They need to understand that software patents help nobody who actually makes a profit, and will only help vultures like this Austin company who have never made a product anyone noticed; at the one end, it causes the small companies to do a strange dance around concepts that they thought of but turned out to already be patented; at the other end, it causes the large companies to obsessively spend time, money, and effort tossing all their obvious ideas they can think of at the patent system in hopes that enough of them will be granted they can generate a strong "patent shield".
-- Super Ugly Ultraman
The US Patent Offide has it's head up it's collective ass. SPAM the patentholders...track them down and SPAM them. Be relentless, they deserve no less. Snail mail SPAM, Email SPAM, pron until they relinquish the patent. SPAM the US Patent Office, nail all the guilty parties.
You just earned you asshole merit badge!
What about mozilla .xpi installs?
Or windowsupdate?
Or plugins?
Open Source Java Web Forum with LDAP authentication
They have women on g4?
BookmarkSync, which has recently gone open source. This does exactly what they're talking about in the patent, the preferences here being bookmarks, of course, and this was being done well before the 2001 application date of the patent.
Is this truly the only Earth I can live on?
Aaah hahaha. Pahahahhahahaha. Ooooooh my... PAHAHAHAHAHA. Oh MAN, I ... I JUST LAUGH MAAHAHAH WMwmahahahahahaha, can't... PAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA. It with... with the... and update... PAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA.
Patent on abuse of the patent system
Abstract: This patent shall cover the act of patenting an idea, concept or plan for the purposes of eliminating competition, stopping another party from pursuing an idea which I find threatening, or creating a method of suing other people. The act of patenting an obvious or previously-invented idea is also covered by this patent.
Whatever it is I'm complaining about, I'm sure the Republicans did it. This is
Read the actual text
It repeatedly refers to using the "world wide web" to do its magic.
As most slashdot geeks know, the internet is far, far more than the world wide web. The web is a small subset of the internet.
So do everything outlined in the patent, just use ftp, ssh, NFS or samba.
I think the lawyer/patent agent who wrote this thing needs a cluestick.
Too bad for the company.
With your powers combined, I am Captain Patent!!
Insert clever one liner here.
Now, in my opinion, the actual patent is also ridiculous and way too broad in scope, but not nearly as bad as the picture painted by /.
Seems to be the new Buzz word of Patentology.
Patentology - The process of putting patents on everyday common tasks.
Who would consider adding on "Over the ineternet" onto a common task and call it "Technology". Not I, Thats for sure. Then tossing a patent on it. This is totally out of hand.. This needs to stop sooner rather than later.
Who needs WiFi when we can have Packet Over Sheep! http://datacomm.org/PoS-InternetDraft.txt
I plan on patenting DOS attacks. Someone's going to pay me whether what they are doing is illegal or not.
ogg
Black cat, searing pain, flames...? I must be in Heaven! - Homer Simpson
The scary part of this patent isn't the user settings stuff, it's this claim:
This seems to cover cases where every computer on a network (say in a corporate IT environment) uploads a bit of information about itself to a server, and then someone prepares a report based on that information. But there must be prior art on this one. And it would be pretty easy to get around this claim anyway -- just poll the machines for information rather than having them upload it to a central server.Poll: 75% of Palestinians support Haifa restaurant attack:
Sig-lines like this should warrant posts automatically being modded down as off-topic or troll.
Is this truly the only Earth I can live on?
You're going to patent anal scents?
Kinda neat!
so does that mean the patent only protects such activities when the transfer takes place through port 80 on the server?
"The method and system of the present invention provides an improved technique for replacing, implementing and managing computer-related assets. A technician accesses the World Wide Web through a user's computer."
You forgot "Air" on that list. Well, unless someone has already patented it. :)
t ion_elements.php
http://www.paganlibrary.com/rituals_spells/invoca
North = Earth
East = Air
South = Fire
West = Water
Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
no, just unlikely
This patent specifically covers using the World Wide Web to update a computer; it does not cover all possible ways to update software via the Internet (the web is just the subset of the internet that uses HTTP and HTML). Thus, if you perform automatic updates without using HTTP or HTML (say, XML and SCP), this patent does not affect you. In essence, this patent is easy to work around, so it should have much of a long-term effect on the world as we know it.
I suspect the only reason this patent was issued was due to this specific nature of the claims; however, in the short-run this pattent still might cause some big headaches if the lawyers get really over eager (which always seems to happen...)
There aren't any claims about installing software or software updates. Perhaps a case could be made that an online software installation/update system that copies a computer's configuration from the computer to a remote system via the Internet could be infringing, but as far as I can tell software installers/updaters simply send an installer program that examines what's on the computer, then requests the appropriate files from the remote server. And it seems to me that that's how it should be done, anyway.
Nonetheless, this still does not seem like anything particularly novel. The idea of maintaining a database of settings is certainly nothing new. Making that database accessible over the Internet doesn't seem like a particularly significant improvement. In fact, what is (critically) missing is automation. The claims that are made in the patent specifically call for the intervention of a technician in the process, to interpret the settings reported from the remote database. Regardless of the novelty of the idea, it doesn't seem to be as broadly applicable as the title of the
And it seems that if anybody wants to look at an existing system that might infringe, Red Hat's RHN system may be just the thing. But I think that it's been around since well before 2002.
-h-
Replace "tear her ass open with my engorged dick" with "copy a 20 MB file from one folder on her hard drive to another", and it will be perfect.
Oh, and work GNAA into there somewhere, too.
Does this mean I have to pay $10 to $25 when I use apt. I mean it seems pretty clear to me that apt goes through the method of the patent. I think the USPTO has gone to far.
Did Glenn Beck rape and kill a girl in 1990? gb1990.com
well, we're gonna have a hard time /.ing you if you don't give us your IP...
:)
Very nice pun, in a story about patents
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
I intend to file for a business practice patent covering filing fraudulent method patents as a revenue source. Who's with me?
Roaming profiles seem to be prior art for this one !. Also what about likes of NortonsGhost or Veritas and the myriad of backup systems that save user data to network for bare-metal recoveries. Puting magic words of world wide web just means using http to transfer files: nothing new and done many time before. Bluecurrent probaly can't believe their luck in getting this patent. User settings saved on a network so that you can re-use these when you re-install on another machine (asset) ! Shit, I would never have thought of doing that ! No my first thought when I re-install my PCs is to copy my files from my local hard disk to my local hard disk; you know, the one I'm about to format/junk/rebuild !. Doh !.
... or did they just patent rcp?
Traveling Software/Laplink's PC Sync, which was out quite some time ago, is prior art.
Microsoft should be able to whack it.
I'm writing letters to my U.S. Senators about this issue...if it raises a few eyebrows, mission accomplished.
Yes, I said writing and letters. I am going to mail dead trees to them.
PLEASE!
But who else is noticing the new ads on the front page ?
http://opencurve.org/~sunny/images/slashdot.png
Sunny Dubey
...in the US, we bomb foreign countries for less invsive violations of human rights, such as free speech. Imagine these folks suign the Debian project, for example. I'm more worried day-to-day about the more suttle, under-the-table terrorism enacted against our industry and trade by those willing to exert power through the legal and patent system. The problem here is that enforcing a patent can trace its authority to the end of the barrel of a law-enforcement officer's handgun, or the weapons of economic ruin in court pronouncements. As long as corporations can carry this kind of power protected by the rule-of-law to stifle free speech and free enterprise, how can it not be called fascism? It's not a stretch to call this violence, is it? What kind of sentences should we give to violent criminals (perhaps better use of the court system)?
A patent is easy to get considering that the burden of proof depends partly on the party filing. Along with the research done by the patent office, which takes a long time, the patent filer is supposed to, for their own sake, research for prior art, etc. I've been schooled on this by another slashdot user on the topic of how many ways there are to bust a patent.
WebMachines "iaNetwork" used to support remote storage and management of user preferences, so you could log into any machine managed by iaNetwork and see your data the way you liked. It handled remote updates, individual user preferences, devive settings, etc. See this link, courtesy of the WayBack Machine for a look at the (sadly, defunct) WebMachines iaNetwork. The iaNetwork "Identity Server" and iaNetwork "Device Server" seem most relevant to the patent in question.
Tell them that examiners need more time to do a quality job for each patent than what they are currently given. More search time will result in better quality searches and fewer bad cases getting through.
h tml
See here for some more info:
http://www.popa.org/newsletters/sepoct03.s
It is a fact.
= JP ost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1066287147759&p=1008596 981749
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename
Just because something doesn't fit your view of the world, doesn't mean that it should be hidden. If you don't agree with it, you should confront it, not try to hide it.
for that document to stand up in court.
On a more serious note. It's hard actually to see what they are patenting, which I guess is the hallmark of a good money grabbing patent. I think, though, that prior art will probably deal with this. The patent system is being slowly broken by people patenting the gimcrack, and the money grubbing rather than the truly novel.
to file a patent on Earth, Fire, and Water.
Yeah, that's right, you can't patent Air, because I've already patented it along with breathing so you people better start coughing up that money now!
[Patents on earth, fire, wind, water, heart]
By your powers combined, I have patented Captain Planet!
Will I retire or break 10K?
Isn't this the same as the M$ user setting migration utility? Hate to say it but the boys in Redmond may have thought of this before the Patent Submitter......
~corporate tool, but employed~
Windows Roaming Profiles have been mentioned, but starting with Windows XP MS offered the "Files and Settings Transfer Wizard." I think third parties have also previously provided software like this as well which allows program settings and files to be saved to a disk or transferred over the network to the new computer.
I am surprised their lawyers aren't busy formulating a defensive suit right now. Lets face it they have been storing your buddy list information, your favorites and emails as backed up files on their servers since aol 3.0 (that I know of please don't flame for earlier versions)
Information is sparse, but one would think that 0Install (http://zero-install.sourceforge.net/) would be prior art...
My Systems
http://www.speedball2000.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/imag es/pumpkin.jpg
Jesus H, all that money spend on law school, why didn't I think of this???
Slashdot "libertarians": Small government for me, big government for those I disagree with. -1, I disagree with you
Mozilla Firebird has an extremely simple but extremely useful plugin (oh, "extension", whatever) called "flash click to view"... It is exactly what it says; every time you load a web page with flash content, it doesn't play until you click it... The ads are gone, and on those rare occasions when I find flash I want to see, it's easy.
Presumambly LDAP is included as part of the 'world wide web' (including http, ftp, ...) as distinct from the 'http web', so they cannot even claim the dubious novelty of just sustituting LDAP with HTTP?
I'm sure that Earth, Wind and Fire may have some issues with being 2/3rds patented by someone else.
Raptor
"Procrastination is great. It gives me a lot more time to do things that I'm never going to do."
I know that transfering personal data across the internet with out encryption is just stupid, but they did specify it...
5. The method of claim 3 or claim 4 wherein said method of accessing said World Wide Web incorporates secure, encrypted transmission.
Why the hell don't people on this site know how to hyperlink? Pasting URLS into Slashdot does not work. You have to make a link like <a href="yoururl">link text</a>
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
If this is true, then Novell ZenWorks is prior art. The ZEN Inventory module has been around at least since 97/98 and does exactly what is listed above using a report engine. It also can export all the inventory data to Crystal Reports....
~corporate tool, but employed~
My own web site is prior art to claim 25 of this patent. Here's how access to a web site running on Apache HTTP Server goes:
25. A method for asset management using the World Wide Web, comprising: accessing the World Wide Web through a series of computer-related hardware devices connected to a network;
People visit the web site, looking for a recently released open-source NES game.
transferring information regarding each computer-related hardware device in said series of computer-related hardware devices to a remote storage medium;
Web browsers send User-agent: HTTP headers to the web site whenever pulling a file.
compiling information related to said series of computer-related hardware devices derived from said information residing on said remote storage medium;
Apache collects User-agent: information in a log file.
and preparing and disseminating reports compiled from said information.
The web site uses Webalizer to produce reports from the server logs, and the webmaster digests the reports into posts on the site's news page.
Will I retire or break 10K?
at least they didn't patent backing up system files to removable media, so at least we still have that area open to us.
Oh, wait. Call my patent attorney, we've got a live one!
KFG
ACAP is prior art
Now this is not nearly as outrageous a patent as the headline would have you believe. But it is still pretty general and there is probably prior art for it.
Anyone else think Slashdot has turned into a sensationalistic tabloid?
Its their patent is pointless because I am filing a patent for zero's and one's. When i get it ALL digital data will belong to me and you will all have to pay me Millions.... muhahahahahaha
"The universe is my dwelling place and my house is my only clothes! Why are you entering into my pants?" - Liu Ling
Yes. The patent system is screwed up. But do we really need to have a story every day about every new piece of evidence that the patent system is screwed up?
When this company starts actually enforcing its patent, then maybe it'll justify a story. Probably not though. I'd wait until they actually win a case. Which will be never.
Have you ever updated your software...over the Internet?
As long as you're not sending the data over port 80 using HTTP, you're not going to be violating the patent!
I don't think this company is going to to take the time to file the other 2^32-1 patents they are going to need to cover the rest of the 'net.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
1. Zip up my home directory on my linux box which has all my settings in rc files. 2. Upload to a server 3. Download to a second linux box 4. Extract settings to my home directory on second linux box.
Forgive me if I am mistaken - but this process is the HTTP protocal!! Pages are stored on your PC (OK in a tempory directory but still, they are "installed") and "run" in your browser. Oh !@#$%^&
What exactly is the 'World Wide Web'? Does it have boundaries, is it a distinct term used for a specific area of the Internet? What?
I say this because as far as I'm concerned, it doesn't cover a system I developed which runs on HTTP over a company intranet. It does exactly what this patent describes and assists in the migration of user settings from one PC to another when systems are updated etc. etc. in a large organisation. It does not use the 'World Wide Web' so to speak.
The 'World Wide Web' is just a buzzword and shows that the holder has no idea about the system that they're talking about, which is too generalised. If they don't describe exactly what it is they're referring to, the whole patent is screwed I guess. IANAL, but it'd be so much better to say 'a method of transferring data using the HTTP protocol to a remote server' - but in any case, a real world non-patentable method of doing this would be to stick important copies of documents in a safe at another location. That fulfils exactly the same criteria, but I bet that can't be patented... It's all just nuts.
The "inventors" should be charged with fraud. Debian was able to do all this long before December 17, 2002.
Well, anyone is better then bush, but shouldn't we get someone who will end this ridiculous war on drugs soon?
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
It seems to be getting all to common to here about new software related patents that are not inventive, but that describe a procedure or system that is already in wide spread use. There must be some way to appeal to a right-minded government official that these things are not new ideas, that the people patenting them didn't even think them up, and that thousands of pieces of software free and commercial are already implementing things like these. In this particular case its clearly obvious that this patent was filed for one reason, to make money. I don't know legalese, but some of you do. Is there any way we as a community can fight this?
Later,
Phil
--Rick "If it isn't broken, take it apart and find out why."
Then I do the upgrade and copy back those files.
Is this in violation of the patent if I do it now?
I've done it before, but evidently it does not count as prior art, nor as being obvious to someone in the field. (I didn't publish it.)
As I said in my last post on the subject, the USPTO and their overlords need large doses of antipsychotics.
If you don't care about internet software updating and maintaning that has a database, you don't care about this. That would mean you don't have a system like apt, up2date, ports or any other software version atomation on any of your computers. If that's the case, Slashdot does not have much to offer you and you should point your licensed copy of IE someplace else. If you care about free software, stupid software patents bother you because that's how propriatory software makers intend to kill their competition.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Cause the USPTO employees must be smokin it up!
Posting anonymously because this is so far off-topic it doesn't need to be at even +1 here.
To civilised people, it does make a difference. But you're right that it cuts both sides. If it's ok for the IDF to level entire blocks to kill Hamas leaders, then it's just as ok for Hamas to blow up restaurants, buses, and nightclubs (remembering that Israeli soldiers use the bus system as their main way of getting to and from base, and that every crowded nightclub or restaurant in Israel has a fair percentage of IDF troopers, in or out of uniform, in it.)
The Pallies, fighting with scavenged materials, at least have some excuse - the years of oppression and warfare have left them without the means to wage a traditional battle, and it could be argued that they have no other choice. But the Israeli government has the very best equipped military in the world, bar none, and are quite capable of fighting in a more civilised way, or, god forbid, just ending the occupation and putting a stop to the violence. But they use it just like the US government uses the threat of Al Qaeda - to keep the population united against the external threat, so they don't notice the internal one. Neither one will willingly let the threat recede.
No, I'm New Here
EARTH, WIND & FIRE
IC 041. US 107. G & S: ENTERTAINMENT SERVICES RENDERED BY A VOCAL AND INSTRUMENTAL GROUP. FIRST USE: 19701110. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19701110
Serial Number 73120117
WIND WATER FIRE EARTH
IC 025. US 022 039. G & S: Clothing, namely T-shirts, sweatshirts, sweatpants, pants, shorts, hats, caps and visors. FIRST USE: 19950915. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19950915
IC 028. US 022 023 038 050. G & S: Sporting goods, namely, skateboards and skateboard accessories, namely, wheels, rails and trucks. FIRST USE: 19950915. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19950915
Mark Drawing Code (1) TYPED DRAWING
Serial Number 76055552
WATER, WIND, EARTH & FIRE
IC 042. US 100 101. G & S: Retail Store Services, featuring fireplace accessories, gas logs, fountains, outdoor furniture, garden accessories, planters, statuary, and house furnishings. FIRST USE: 19920000. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19920000
Mark Drawing Code (1) TYPED DRAWING
Serial Number 76144623
FIRE WATER EARTH
(CANCELLED) IC 018. US 003. G & S: luggage, namely tote bags. FIRST USE: 19940815. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19940815
Mark Drawing Code (3) DESIGN PLUS WORDS, LETTERS, AND/OR NUMBERS
Design Search Code 260103 260112 260512 260912
Serial Number 74579027
That would ruin the slashdot "You do the work, we take the money!" bussness model!
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
(1) What about thin clients? They store all settings on a server so that you can sit at any terminal you want and get your desktop. Unix has been capable of this since way before 1994 (which was when I first used Unix at university).
(2) At the school I went to they even did the same thing with the Windows 3.1 machines. Because they couldn't secure the installations, the machines were re-imaged every time they rebooted. When you logged out, your files were written to your network drive and the entire machine erased. I'm fairly sure that Windows has been capable of doing something like this (syncing with a network drive) without any extra software since Windows 95.
(3) The book "The Diamond Age" by Neil Stephenson describes a similar process whereby user settings were stored on a server (YT's mom in her federal job whereby the earliest arrivals sit at a computer close the front of the room - those who are late sit at the shameful back).
(4) Microsoft Hotmail has an Outlook Express interface that works over port 80 using web services to access and read your mail. Any changes you make to your mail files locally is then mirrored on the remote Hotmail server.
You only need to substitute "world wide web" in the patents text with "LAN" or "WAN" (which is essentially the same damn thing - it's just a protocol over TCP/IP) to get a good description of 1, 2 or 3. Item 4 covers web-based access over port 80 - which, really could be applied to anything.
With these sort of patents being filed (and approved) - the patent office should be shut down permanently. It has lost it's original purpose of protecting the truly original thinkers amid a sea of pathetic scam artists and lawyers who have never done a day's real work in their lives.
I've used this basic technique to migrate machines using various remote file sharing protocols - NFS for Suns, Microsoft file server file sharing for DOS and Windows, probably even FTP sometimes. It's an obvious thing to do. Using HTTP as the protocol instead of other file transfer or file sharing protocols is also obvious to anyone skilled in the art. About the only wrinkle is files that Windows deliberately makes hard to copy, i.e. the Registry, and there's plenty of commerical and probably free prior art for things that make copying the Registry less annoying.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
Since my settings are transfered if I log in on my colleague's PC...
Apple's .Mac service does this saving of user settings/preferences and stuff like that via the web through WebDAV. And .Mac is prior art since this patent was filed Dec. 17, 2002, at which time .Mac was already operational.
.Mac, but the address book and bookmarks is also there. You could also publish iCal calendars.
I don't know exactly when the iSync capable features were added to
This patent pretty specifically says "World Wide Web". What if we use some other tool, like scp, or ftp. That's not still "the web", is it? What if this is done using with VPNs? Is that "the web?" What if the dream of a nationwide wireless mesh network actually pulls off in the future. Is that "the web," or is it something new. Is "the web" IP based network? This is all in additon to the more obvious problems of prior art and obviousness. I hate software patents!
"To lead the people, you must walk behind them"
Yeah... Amazon.com
All I want is a kind word, a warm bed and unlimited power.
anyway More palistinan women and children have been killed then isreali's in total
Yes, because numbers are all that matters.
How about taking the intent of those doing the killing into account? You know, like how the Palestinian suicide bombers and infiltrators specifically targets civilians, whilst the Israeli military does not?
Nature cannot be patented.
Natural estrogen is modified to allow for patents.
Installation via Internet is a natural product of the Internet, thus cannot be patented.
Just my 2 cents.
Given that this article is just slightly misguided, and this patent does indeed cover remote settings storage, I believe that Microsoft may have a little prior art. IIRC, Office since 2000 or XP had an option on the menu that would allow settings to be stored to MS's servers for 30-90 days or so to allow you to move between computers, or reformat and reinstall.
Would you please get rid of your so called news reporter "timothy"? His skills are those below of a regular Slashdot troll. Thank you.
Sci-Fi Rome can't last forever. It's only a matter of time before the serfs get sick of it.
I've used the product in question on a contract a little while ago. It's great for taking an entire office, upgrading all their computers to newer models.. and retaining all the personal settings from the account/profile.
5 elements - earth, wind, fire, water, nature.
also the concept of Zero.
You guys can take the rest.
If you replace the patent's text "World Wide Web" with "Internet", this would be a good description of IBM's AIX FixDist tool. It was firmly entrenched in place when I first encountered it in 1998, so I'm sure it has been around considerably longer than that.
It was a program that you downloaded on your AIX system. When you ran it, it would check in with IBM's FTP site for the list of available fixes and maintenance packages, then give you the option to download them. It used FTP to perform the downloads, and installation was not automatically performed, but the main point is that it determined what was the latest updates available and made it easy to download them.
On the other hand, what the patent sems to describe to me is more like (again substituting "Network" for "World Wide Web") is NIS, which is a fairly old *NIX software that lets you maintain user's data and setings on a central server for distribution to new machines.
Edward Burr
Having a smoking section in a restaurant is like having a peeing section in a swimming pool.
Sheesh...take something that's already well-known and established, slap "via Internet" on it, and voila, instant patent. Turning a previously manual process into essentially a backup shell script shouldn't be patentable.
They say will say will enter all proper citations into the patent file.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
Claim 18 is just wrong.
I can see now why Patent Lawyers get paid the big bucks. Though they obviously still can't afford proofreaders.
1. The patent only covers anything that does everything in the claim, just like it says. It cannot be generalized. If you don't do all of the steps, you don't infringe.
2. Claims are often narrowed by stuff you don't see in the patent itself, but which are contained in the file wrapper, that is, the documents exchanged by the applicant (or applicant's attorneys) and the patent office. These documents must be obtained from the patent office, and are often very revealing. Typically every patent gets rejected in the first instance, on grounds of insufficient novelty, and will be appealed by the applicant saying "...but we only intended application in this narrow set of circumstances, which are different from the prior art...". All those documents are recorded and form part of the validity of the patent. They are admissible in court. It usually turns out that patents are much narrower than a reading of the patent alone implies.
Read the claim carefully. It applies only to "web" transfers, and you must upload from an existing computer and download to a "new" computer. I'd be willing to bet that there are specific circumstances contained in the file wrapper also.
I don't think this is very alarming, in summary. It's probably a much narrower patent than it first appears. Really, this kind of thing happens all the time and it isn't a big deal. Move along, nothing to see here.
Krill
Maybe this crazy patent will wake some peopel up? This patent is a joke and there are litterally thousands of applications that use this method. Adobe Acrobat checks for new versions, Windows update, Red Hat up2date, apt-get, Norton, Symantec, ZoneAlarm, etc. You name it, most software has some online update feature. Finding prior art in this case will be very easy. However, I bet this company will go after the "small fish" companies who cannot afford to fight the court battle and just pay the license fees. You gotta love the current implementation of Capitalism in the USA!
If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land,
it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. -James Madison
This pales in comparison to Sen. Trent Lott, who invented the paperclip.
Sounds like trouble for users of Micro$oft's Windows Update. Or for the *NIX users of apt-get and similar utilities. Of course, coming up with prior art should be no problem and the rich Micro$oft will fight this for you.
Ah, a post that points out the obvious and succumbs to petty gimmicks while doing so. Why is this interesting and insightful?
n/t ^_^
You know, like how the Palestinian suicide bombers and infiltrators specifically targets civilians, whilst the Israeli military does not?
Gimme a fucking break. You don't honestly believe that, do you? Say that again the next time Israel levels an entire neighbourhood because there may or may not have been some 'terrorists' hiding there.
Haida Manga
Because I am not going to use the "World Wide Web" (HTTP?), but rsync, CVS, Jabber, IRC, FTP or some other protocol.
It's also rather like how our Win2K user profiles work.
Or I don't remove it from my local PC after I upload it, I'm also OK with that.
If the abstract is accurate, it iooks like they wasted their money...
Xix.
"Everything is adjustable, provided you have the right tools"
Damn I wish I had some mod points, parent is on point. This patent basicaly describes any web services transaction, and makes the US unsafe for pretty mutch every webservices maker, open and closed source. Also apt has been doing something similar since 1999 or longer if you count the unstable tree.
Did Glenn Beck rape and kill a girl in 1990? gb1990.com
i, for one, welcome our new bluecurrent overlords...
-what no sco today?
*bah*
IANAL, But -
Prior Art, Pre-existing... been done by
about everybody for over 10 years...
If the Israelis wanted to kill civilians, they'd do a far better job of it. 2000lb bombs from F-16s hitting every block would probably do it.
Israel doesn't go into a Palestinian restaurant/mall/university/bus and kill all the people there just because they're Palestinian.
I have had dealings with Bluecurrent in the past. In all aspects, they are a bunch of anus-tickling cock wombats.
If the Israelis wanted to kill civilians, they'd do a far better job of it. 2000lb bombs from F-16s hitting every block would probably do it.
That's exactly what they're doing now!!!
...but not parent's parent?
(Oh, that's right, one post glorifies the genocide on an entire people, whereas the other does not. How silly of me.)
Is this truly the only Earth I can live on?
Sincerely,
Pan Tarhei Hosé, PhD.
"Homo sum et cogito ergo odi profanum vulgus et libido."
Read, L
As anyone ever seen a valid software patent? I mean a software invention that doesn't just copy an old idea or isn't just a business method. I sure haven't ever seen such a beast, not that I have looked that hard.
I'm willing to ignore just for a moment that in my opinion software shouldn't be patentable to begin with. I'm just interested if anyone has seen a software patent that made them go: "Hey, that's interesting idea."
--Flam
Computers are useless. They can only give you answers - Pablo Picasso
Dead is dead, gone forever, and irretrievable by no amount of 'intent'. You might be interested in checking out the commentary on the Khartoum bombing given by Noam Chomsky in the March 31st "New Yorker".
I by no means agree with everything he said, but it's food for thought.
YLFIOne god, one market, one truth, one consumer.
In the tradition of BlueCurrent being over general about everything, here are some of their more specific META Keywords:
internet, store, pc, inexpensive, box, computer, computers, notebooks, laptop, desktop, monitor
Just to name a few things that I'm sure not too many people search for on the internet
Nullum magnum ingenium sine mixtura dementia (There is no great genius without a mixture of madness) - Aristotle
im gonna patent "the method and technique of patenting stupid patents"
Actually, they're uploaded to a remote storage medium. When you receive something, you are downloading. When you send something - well, what's the opposite of down? - uploading.
Now it's possible that when the technician contacts the remote system that it installs a daemon which the other system then connects to and downloads the data, but I think it's far more likely that even if some app or applet is downloaded and run, that it contacts a remote server, and uploads.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
As far as I can tell (especially looking at the diagram), this patent is about upgrading. It's for a program that uploads software and prefs, and then redownloads them to a single new machine.
Read the actual patent, the patent refers to creating a backup of current data on machine "A" which is uploaded via the web, then when allowing you to download the backed up data on machine "B" via the internet. Probably for their lifecycle services, which most likely will allow you to do what the patent refers to.
cant this be claimed public property or whatever. organizations, corporations, and individuals already widely use this 'type' of technology. heck, in a sense slashdot would be infringing in this techonology by my computer submitting this post as information, being stored on slashdot's remote storage units and my user settings being updated. This is pure bullshit. btw /., you will now have to pay a royalty of 10$ per post. Have a good day and keep inventing technology so i can charge you for it!!
"...Earth, Fire, and Water"
I didn't know you could patent music...
errr wait..
This is ludicrous. I implemented an Internet-based software download/install system in 1994 while on a contracting job with NASA. If you google, you'll find references to my system, called Cicero. There were probably others before me, though I don't know of any. I hope this patent gets revoked.
Check out my eclectic infosec blog at InfoSecPotpou
Just don't use the World Wide Web.
This seems to be just an obvious way to upload, via WWW, all the data, program settings and customisations done to an old system; later downloading all data, program settings and customizations to the new computer. Finally, downloading updates and further customizing the new computer.
My opinion: This Patent will not stand.
Explanation: The method is exactly what most people do when they get a new computer except for using the WWW part.
US Patent Office strikes out again.
Codifex Maximus ~ In search of... a shorter sig.
I upgraded a machine over the weekend - I used a 30c notepad & pen to write down user settings such as /etc/fstab, grub.conf, iptables additions, etc.
After upgrading the disks, I installed a clean OS on the machine, and then proceeded to RE-APPLY-THE-SETTINGS-FROM-REMOTE-STORAGE remote storage being my 30c notepad.
Since I was charging for my time, this was a commercial activity, which may place me firmly in violation of this patent, and a good candidate to be sued.
My only defence could be that when transfering information from the remote storage (paper notepad) to the computer (via the keybord), the WWW was not involved.
Regarding the transmission of data from the paper notebook to the PC, this involves using an unsual physical medium involving the passive reception of reflected ambient light parsed by an OCR device, and converted to a sequence of mechanical actions (ie. reading the notes off the paper pad, and typing it in).
Despite this, it could well be argued that this mechanism involves a complex set of SYN/ACK like packets that closely resemble TCP/IP. (ie - the same OCR device which scans the reflected light from the paper also scans the emitted light from the monitor, to check that the keyed in letters match the original source).
So, at what point can something be called part of the WWW ? My paper notepad is world-viewable, can store data from a computer. Surely this is a pretty fuzzy thing to define in legal terms.
We call it cookies where I am from
At the very least, I suggest everyone take the same route suggested by Debianites everywhere whenever a licensing/patent issue comes up: until it's resolved, stop using it. Guess this means a lot of GNUbies will stop using computers now.
> a tiny Austin, TX company called Bluecurrent that has been awarded patent No. 6,636,857 covering the Internet installation of any software or settings on new computers.
It only applies on New computers, me runs off to patent it on all Old Computers. woohooo i'm rich.
Dosen't this patent cover applications such as distributed.net and other such distributed processing technologies?
IANAL, but wouldn't that count as prior art to this patent?
If you look at it, it seems like they only cover backing up files on a remote location and downloading the files to a new computer so you can update settings (like coppying a httpd.conf file to a server and then downloading it to a new server that will use the httpd.conf file for it's apache settings.)
But I've been thinking, it can be bent to include downloading of software updates. It fit's into all of those steps perfectly,
Accessing the World Wide Web using a user's computer-related hardware device;
A developer goes online on a computer
transferring information from said computer-related hardware device through said World Wide Web to a remote storage medium;
Upload's information (a self extracting exe containing updates for software) to a remote storage medium (any server online, like a ftp site)
transferring said information from said remote storage medium to a new computer-related hardware device;
The file gets downloaded from the site to a different computer (it could be a regular users computer)
and using said information from said computer-related hardware device on said new computer-related hardware device to update said user's settings on said new computer-related hardware device.
Using the said information (the self extracting exe file) from the site, on the new computer (the regular user's computer) to update the computer's settings (they could claim that settings includes whatever a patch might include.)
They're not going to get any money from it, even if it is just for uploading and downloading settings there's so much prior art. Using norton ghost to make a drive image, uploading that to a server through the internet, and downloading it on a new computer (also through the internet) would be prior art.
[text from the patent]
"SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION:
The present invention addresses the need for an improved method and system for replacing, implementing and managing computer-related assets. The present invention provides a method of asset management in which a technician accesses the World Wide Web through a user's computer. The information resident on the computer, including information regarding the computer and the user's preferences, is downloaded to a remote storage medium through the World Wide Web. Once the information is downloaded, all information may be removed from the user's computer. Subsequently, the technician accesses another computer such as, for example, a new computer that has been assigned to the same user. The technician accesses the World Wide Web through the new computer and downloads the information previously stored on the remote storage medium. This information can then be used to install the user's prior applications, settings and preferences on the new computer."
[end quote]
Two words: Roaming Profiles. I know some people in Redmond who are going to be pissed.
"Jesus saves, but everyone else in a 10 foot radius takes full damage from the fireball."
I think it's time for someone to file a patent on Earth, Fire, and Water."
James Taylor already has a patent on Fire and Rain. And with a patent on "Sunny Days", I think he might very well have fire (whose energy is derived from a very intense flame-based process called fusion) covered, too.
Patents like this are starting to prove that the US patent office has become irrelevant. I feel redundant so mod me down.
OH THE SHAME I fell off the wagon and use sigs again!
TridiaVNC Java installer
MS Update
Symantec Live Update
United Admins' Cheat-Death Auto-update
Mandrake Update
Redhat Update
Debian's apt-get
That's just a few I could think of. Those that specifically cover updates for installation of new devices, are of course: WUpdate, Mandrake update, Redhat update and Debian apt-get.
Windows update definitely matches the functionality shown in the patent, as you can tell the device wizard to check on-line for drivers. Looks like MS "innovated" something after all.
Fred
"A fool and his freedom are soon parted"
-RMS
Any backup software that allows someone to backup part or all of their system including settings and preferences is prior art for this patent.
Also, this is highly obvious. Patents are supposed to be non-obvious.
The problem is that English is such a powerful and flexible language that there are many ways to describe the same technique. While there are many ways to describe it the base method of utilizing it is the same.
1. Save your data to remote computer or alternate disk drive.
2. Do something that could loose data on original computer.
3. Restore data.
4. Be happy (if restore worked).
If only people patent examiners would learn the nature of software, computer technology and complex equilivant meanings in English. Maybe then we'd be spared this.
I seem to recall reading somewhere about patents being for, oh, what was it... oh, yeah: "Promoting the progress of science and the useful arts." Oh, who cares about the constitution anyway? I mean, it's only the supreme law of the land. I mean, if I get more money by spitting on it both in letter and in spirit, then let's start spittin'! This makes me sick.
I used to work for BlueCurrent. They used to be called Lincoln Financial. Their business was refurbishing and reselling companies' old PCs and laptops. As I was leaving the company, I think they were getting some sort of contract with Dell to do warranty service for them. I have no idea where this patent would fit into their business model unless they have made some significant changes in the last 4 years or so.
If you mod me down, I shall become less powerful than you could possibly imagine.
im going to patent posting on a web forum.
i'll settle with you lot for $699 each, since you are writing another cheque for that much anyway.
send to paypal account h4h4_5ux0r5.
I wonder if I can patent the dried up itchy dignleberries on my hairy ass?
up2date, apg-get, yum, and dozens of other applications (some in old-time unix for a dozen years). Attempting to enforce this will turn the paper the patent was issued on into faster than you can say (in the words of Speedy Gonzales) Arrrreeeba Arrrreeeba, EEEEEEEHaaaaa, Andele, Andele.
Wrong. Since very few slashdot readers can be bothered to actually read the patent before complaining about it, it covers this process:
This little game of outright lying about the content of a patent and then joining in a chorus of ignorant bleating about the awful, awful patent system accomplishes nothing. I hope that no legislator or decision-maker ever reads this drivel, as he'll be convinced that patent reform is championed only by cretins.
The patent covers a way of moving user settings from an old computer to a new computer. So it's a logical fit for a company that upgrades desktop PC's in an organization.
Kind of like Slashdot! Your user settings, or 'preferences' can be created on an 'old' computer and then downloaded, when you load the page, onto a 'new' computer. See how easy the prior art game is? If only the patent office and courts recognized obvious prior art, patented or not.
on communications between hierarchical levels in an organization.
I call it "business".
Think it'll catch on?
As the parent noted, as would anybody who actually took the time to read the patent abstract (which apparently does NOT the original poster), this patent is for using the web as a place to migrate settings and data from one computer to another.
Anybody who reads an abstract and draws conclusions about the scope of the document deserves everything they get. Someone with a clue would know that the abstract, by regulation "will not be used for interpreting the scope of the claims."
Please, don't give us this horseshit by "reading the abstract." The claims define the patent, and the claims are informed by careful reading of the specification and the relevant prosecution history. Seriously, the legal advice offered here is absolutely hopeless.
Time will tell what is the scope of the patent -- but no fair reading of the claims may conclude that this patent covers a scope of behavior as broad as that set forth in the parent. No reading credibly informed by a review of the specification will reach that conclusion.
Just stop it, guys! If you aren't really going to bother to learn what these claims are, don't whine about them. It makes us all look silly, and takes away from those of us who ARE interested in limiting the scope of bad patents.
The abstract neither broadens nor limits the scope of claims of a patent. By regulation, it "will not be used for interpreting the scope of the claims."
The claim is the thing, and must be read carefully in view of the specification and prosecution history.
Just for the record...'Earth, Air, Fire and Water' are already copyrighted by Harlan Ellison.
;)
It's a name of a story which was made as an episode of the 1970's televsion series Ghost Story/Circle of Fear.
Just shows who actually reads the articles and who doesn't. This won't affect Windows Update or apt-get. Did you forget that apt has supercow powers? A dumb patent can't destroy it:) Any way... this appears to have nothing to do with what people have been complaining about.
Earth, Fire, and Water
;)
Don't forget wind, don't let it slip away so easily. Then all you need is the 5th element and you've got it all covered
You can have those three. I'll even toss in Wind.
But no patents allowed on Milla Jovovich!
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
When is the authorities gonna put an end to this idiotic patents? I fail to see the point of the whole thing, why can people make a patent on "what" something do rather than "how"?
It is like getting patent for
"four wheel vehicle that can move forward/backwards and with steering capability"
and then be able to sue every car manufacturer....
I remember the old days when you could code whatever you wanted for the internet without getting sued.
Just because people *looks* civilised, they are not. As the americans are killing civilians in Baghdad (and creating more and more riots and freedom fighters), the Israli military is wellknown for its non-care for civilians too. Many fanatic families put their son/daughter in the military, to take even more lands away from the original inhabitants. I see a parallel to the native americans here (lets educate the wild with guns).
...has been awarded
Yes! It is indeed a lottery.
I could be wrong. I'm always wrong...
Or is the USPTO hiring "Will work for food" people to do patent examinations now? Rubber stamp patents for minimum wage and all the cheeseburgers you can eat?
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
But the US Patent office had too much prior art on that.
in my life God comes first.... but Linux is pretty high after that
Francis Smit
The 'web' is not strictly defined, but it is unlikely to be interpreted as just HTTP/HTML. What about XML over HTTP? What about FTP accessed from a browser? What about intranets, web protocols used over a LAN? What about accessing your own hard disk via a browser?
Strictly speaking, any URL-able resource is part of the web. This is what makes the patent meaningless: LAN connections, even local files on your own disk could be seen as being part of the 'web'.
But custom TCP/IP protocols are most definitely not.
Ceci n'est pas une signature
oh my god somebody should take a patent on such humor... (a moron can do this with a firewire drive)
I saw the week in which this patent was published is week 42. So that's it, that must be the question:
In which week are you stupid enough to award a patent that is so obviously and mind-boggingly similar to everything else, including digital watches, that it makes people laugh ?
Slashdot: stuff for news, nerds that matter, matter for news, stuff that nerd
I just checked and it looks like we use this process.
;)
Click the icon 'Backup Personal Settings', and it shows up an IE page with the stuff you want backed up to the server:
Internet favourites
Office settings
Desktop shortcuts
Choose what you want backed up, and away it goes.
Log onto any computer in our company, click the icon 'Restore personal settings', and another IE page opens to ask what you want to restore (from above choices).
Bang, there's all your stuff again.
Guess I'm lucky we aren't in the US
And if they do it the SCO way(tm), Microsoft licences the technology and that money is spent on suing Linux companies and threatening to sue individual users for updating their systems using the web! This would also probably quadruple their stock price, if they happen to have one.
But wait, for $699 you will not be sued, even if your Linux system contains infringing code!
http://codeandlife.com
The author of a Debian package prepares the information required to install that package as-is on a new machine. This package is uploaded to the Debian archive (a WWW site).
Debian GNU/Linux is available for many different platforms.
Public Debian archive or private copy (eg: CDs mounted on loopback, published through Apache server).
The Debian Packages file and friends are exactly covered by this claim.
The depends/suggests relations turn the dpkg database into a relational database.
If you subscribe to the security updates, you match this claim. If you are using unstable or testing, you match this claim.
What detail of report are they looking at? Debian's apt-get utility will provide interactive reports of how far through the update you've come. Right at the end, it gives a summary of how long the process took.
Other tools allow generation of reports of how many files are installed and managed by the apt utils, what status any of the known packages are in, and there's even a report which allows you to install exactly the same set of selected packages on a different machine.
dpkg can put packages on hold - that's a means of filtering out unwanted packages. tasksel can filter out unwanted packages. The web server itself might have spam filters in place - just because they don't affect the download, doesn't mean the filters aren't in place.
When performing an installation or update, the Debian package management system allows the user to read about changes to configuration files as suggested by the package maintainer. eg: decisions about running suid programs, adding new options.
That's exactly what a package management tool is for. That's exactly what dpkg and the apt utilities do.
"Internationalisation" is what it's called everywhere else. Debian has many options for local languages - you can have all of your software configured for English or even German, for example. One common language for the whole system.
Claims 14 through 35 reiterate the above.
The only point I can find where Debian is not exactly covered by the patent is where the patent talks about the entire process being carried out by the one person (in claim 1 the user is mentioned, then in subsequent claims, reference is made to "said user") or at least on that person's "new computer-related hardware device."
Am I casting a long line here?
Can someone explain what this means (im not in America)? theres obviously prior art examples of software installation, updating and settings everywhere does that mean someone can just patent an idea thats not even new and then no-one else can use it? or am i missing something, because that seems like the most stupid law ever?
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
... if i specify that it has to be put in a yellow envelope?
"By the way if anyone here is in advertising or marketing... kill yourself." -- Bill Hicks
When we see BS patents awarded, I think we should do something about it. Let's send emails and letters to the party seeking the patent to let them know we know it is bogus. We should also send letters and emails to the USPO and the patent issuing officer to inform them of this bogus patent. Of course we should include info on prior art to both parties. We should be rude about it, noone will take us seriously. It's like teh USPO is living in a bubble and that bubble is not anywhere in this world.
the software patent was filed in 2001, which means it shouldn't affect what we've all been doing since at least the midnineties.
From the summary of claims one has to wonder how this was ever granted. First, as other posters have pointed out, the person who posted the article misunderstood the claiims. But the applicants and the USPTO also demonstrate ignorance.
/.'ers know, the PTO is completely incompetent when it comes to vetting SW patent clains. Sigh.
Before the date of the filing, there were online backup products which met the claims presented here. They let you store information and settings and then restore them on new machines. There are products that did software distribution that also included the claims present here.
Maybe there is something novel here, but if so, it is minor and the claimants didn't really identifiy it and the PTO should have done a better job of rejecting this amd making them refile a decent application.
But, as
(a): I then go to my Apache web page and
(b) use an upload script to transfer this information to my server's file system (i.e. remote storage).
(c): I then log on to my new computer at work and go to my web page, and download these files from my server.
(d): Finally I unzip the files and use them to configure my "user settings" for outlook.
Absolutely no brainer prior art found. This patent broadly covers any use of HTTP upload/download scripts in the event that the files transfered are used to configure user settings. Surely you can all find prior art for that! Its a joke, and their lawyers are suckers for settling for contingency fees.
There are already patents on Earth, Fire, Water, and Air. They're #3, #4, #5, and #6, respectively, right after 'patents'(#2) and the 'time machine'(#1). That's why you have to pay a third of your income to the government every year, for the use of those elements.
And for how many years has apt done this?
The issue with these software patents is not only that they contain land mines for programmers to wade through... they also contain bullshit that we waste our times talking about.
Surely the USPTO is vulnerable to some form of control. Surely there is some form of accountability.
We live in the new age of insanity I guess.
What do we call it? the age of neostupidity?
arrgghhh!
So, in other words, does it mean that Debian is safe after running:
Right?
Sincerely,
Pan Tarhei Hosé, PhD.
"Homo sum et cogito ergo odi profanum vulgus et libido."
That definition says that the disnction between downloading and uploading is hazy, that usually a transfer form a larger computer to a smaller one is considered a download, a trasfer from a small to a big system would be an upload. Who writes these definitions! Seems to me that the common usage of down/upload is just like the usage of import/export. When you download, your computer is recieveing information. When you upload, your computer is sending data to another computer. What's so hazy about that?
Since business methods seemingly can now be patented, why don't we patent "AA moethod of doing business by filing bogus patent claims".
Then when ever one of these bullshit patents gets granted we can send cease and disceast letters and demand licensing fees and so forth.
This way we'll be able to tax every company that loses a patent case in court, right?
This is a new business model? This is non-obvious right?
What about Microsoft roaming profiles? NIS? Netscape remote preferences? Seems to me that they've just specified a different port/protocol.
...they require encryption, and they require "continuous updating" of information from the user to the server. Hence would a one-time download or other request not be covered.
This sure looks very similar to how I set up the computer lab at my kids school about 5 years ago. I created the first machine, Ghosted the image to a network file server, and then applied the image to all the other machines. All that then had to be done was to give each machine a unique name and IP address. Sure seems like prior art to me, and I know I was far from the first one to do this.
Huuh?? Software vendors have been doing this for about 10 years. Does this mean that SuSE is going to drop the online update feature or pay the extortion.. I mean licence fee?
"I bow to no man" - Riddick
Whoever decided to let this go through as a valid ./ article is a moron and didn't read the link in the posting. The article is about a backup/restore procedure using the internet to access the storage medium. This has nothing to do with updates.
;)
I wasted 5 minutes on this because I deal with this kind of tech at my company... geez..
"In theory, theory and practice are the same; in practice, they are not."
I'm not so sure this is a problem. The patent mentions that data has to be encrypted when transmitted (presumably with SSL) and that the data has to be stored in a relational database.
MS primarily keeps data in config files (.inf, etc.). The old Windows update just used data out of these files with the ActiveSetup control to update components. I actually haven't checked into the "new" one (the one that was released with XP).
Of course, if they broaden the scope of "relational database" to start covering filesystems and loosely-related sectioned files like INF files, then, yes, I suppose they're screwed...
...except prior art exists. Then again, when has that stopped the USPTO from being utter morons with a bad business model?
And ether!
Assume I was drunk when I posted this.
If there's a parallel to the Native Americans, does that mean that it's OK to wipe most of them out and then stick the rest of them on semi-soverign Isreali reservations?
Original inhabitants is sort of an irrelevant term here. This is a piece of land that has been taken over, contested, and taken over again -- over and over for the last 5000 years. Original inhabitants does not apply here like it did for the Native Americans...not to mention that nearly all land in this world was divided up by some type of military conquest (which again, makes it difficult to turn anything over to anyone.
It's a complex argument about a complex problem with no simple solution (which reminds me, your Americans killing Iraqi citzens quip is a weak one). But it's important to understand that both the Isrealis and the Palestinians are fucking assholes for allowing this problem a global one.
has /.ing already been patented?
I just patented a "method of using one's diaphragm to forcefully ingest air into said person's lungs", and then subsequently patented a "method of using one's diaphragm to forcefully remove air from said person's lungs." Now you all owe me 25$ every time you inhale, and 25$ more every time you exhale. All your lungs are belong to me.
To the darkened skies once more, and ever onward.
apt-get update /bin/true already installed
apt-get install apt-patentfree
Error:
What is sorely needed in the current system is a method for peer review to be brought in early. The patent examiner should do very brief checks that the patent isn't completely stupid, before granting a 'preliminary patent' thingy. This thing should not be enough to force licensing or stuff, but should be made public so that companies can see that the patent application is there.
Exactly how the procedure should work is not entirely clear, but this is the though I have every time I see a stupid patent. (Think what happens to quack-mathematical papers or reports on the already-known dressed up as new science.)
John_Chalisque
Sorry I don't have any mod points. ;)
Marimba was founded in 1996, and was doing internet delivery and updates of software. So wouldn't that be prior art, since it looks like the patent was submitted in 2001?
Windows Update ...
apt-get
MacOS Software Update
Nope, no prior art here.
There are no tiger attacks in my area and it's all because this rock I'm holding keeps the tigers away.
Because I've just been awarded a patent on settling violations of patents out of court.
less is more
Is that information stored specifically on the computer's hard drive or just info stored on the computer (e.g. RAM). NFS allows for users' preferences to be stored on a remote storage system, the preferences removed from said computer (usually by turning power off) and the user can go to a new computer and download the preferences.
Ummm.
Silly me - I forgot one slight detail - NFS does this automatically - the patent requires a technician to activate the transfer.
A Shadeless room is a brighter room.
Ron
9/11 Eyewitnesses to Explosive WTC Demolition 1 of 2
How about taking the intent of those doing the killing into account?
What's the point in that? Dead is dead. An unarmed man with a family to feed, a woman, a child. What difference does it make what was going through their attackers head when it happened? What difference does it make if they were targeted or just ignored?
whilst the Israeli military does not.
Yup, they just ignore them completely and slaughter thousands.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
What difference does it make what was going through their attackers head when it happened?
So the killing of, say, an SS officer about to shoot civilians in WWII is the moral equivalent of murdering a two year old?
If you believe that intent has nothing to do with it, then there's no sense in arguing with you - I can't help ya.
Wind is already patented?
The patent on Wind expired. Wind technology is now in the public domain.
How about patenting the patent system itself? Everyone except the holder of the meta-patent would be prevented from filing a new patent. If they did, they'd be infringing the patent on the patent system.
Unfortunately, it wouldn't work, because there is prior art. But will the patent officers at the USPTO notice?
Or use a variation of the same: Patent on a new way of abusing the patent system to make money. Just rename it so something more technical, and peng, you may be lucky to have this patent granted. Then start spreading FUD :-)
cpghost at Cordula's Web.