Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Software Installation/Update via Internet Patented

Posted by timothy on from the 35-claims dept.

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. ;-)"

4 of 519 comments (clear)

  1. Re:It Gets Worse by BenFranske · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

  2. Just one example of prior art by corebreech · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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?
  3. Re:RTFA! by LoadStar · · Score: 4, Interesting
    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.

    Agreed. Reading the patent, one sees that they describe a web-based process where one can access a web page, back up files comprising a user's environment, go to a new workstation, and restore said files.

    What they describe is essentially a web-based version of Microsoft's FAST (File And Settings Transfer) Wizard from Windows XP.

  4. Maybe not... by ClubStew · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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?