Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Subdomains Part Of The Patent Frenzy

Posted by timothy on from the march-fools dept.

Colonel Angus writes "Web Hosting Industry is carrying a story about a company called Ideaflood that has been sending out letters to web hosting firms claiming that they own a patent on subdomains and are claiming a license needs to be purchased to continue to use them. This is reminding me of the hyperlink patent from a couple years back." Maybe Frank Weyer will ask them to wrestle.

9 of 356 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Over and Over and Over by SirGeek · · Score: 4, Interesting
    The problem is that if it isn't patented already, then they can patent it. Screw any "prior art" that isn't in the patent database. That is the ONLY source of data that they use.

    They can't fathom that someone wouldn't patent something even if it is totally trivial/common sense.

    --
    UPS Sucks
  2. The future of patents by Openstandards.net · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Does anyone see this rising to a boiling point anytime soon? When will people start lobbying for patent reform?

    I've read comments on this subject from IBM, the largest patent holder in the world, indicating they might even endorse patent reform. Their stance has been that they use patents primarily as a defense, adding that until the system is fixed, they don't have much of a choice.

    This is also putting a rush to patent everything, worse than a gold rush, not so much to profit like these annoying cases, but to build a defense, like IBM does. Only, as we all know, the little guy has little defense. Thus there is both a chill and imbalance on innovation today.

    Is anyone lobbying congress for patent reform? I'd like to know what we can do.

    --

    Open Standards Portal
  3. uh? Patent office just screwed themselves. by teamhasnoi · · Score: 4, Interesting
    http://tarr.uspto.gov/
    http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=login&p_lang =english&p_d=trmk

    etc.

    Dummies. Isn't that like firemen practicing on their own house?

  4. FUCK THE LAWYERS by the+gnat · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Jesus, with people like the IP lawyer they quote at the end, it's a wonder there's any innovation left at all.

    "Industries, especially in the information technology space, often develop more quickly than the applicable patents come to light."

    Well, don't you think that this means it's a good time to reform the system? Doesn't the fact that innovation occurs so rapidly negate the value of a first-come-first-serve approach to granting patents?

    "This can be a rude awakening for companies that have not already factored into their business plans the likelihood that someone will come knocking with a patent they may infringe."

    IT companies should not have to operate in fear of frivolous lawsuits from greedy do-nothings. Quoth Bill Gates:
    "If people had understood how patents would be granted when most of today's ideas were invented and had taken out patents, the industry would be at a complete standstill today."

    Forgive me if I'm taking this personally, but I'm starting my PhD in molecular biology (and doing significant amounts of software development at the same time), and at the rate the lawyers are moving in on my field, by the time I graduate I'll probably have to take out a patent license to publish my research.
  5. Read their site, they spell it out! by Monkelectric · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Here." "if even a small fraction of these applications are granted, a huge number of business methods and technologies that are now widely deployed across the Internet shall in effect become commodities which the patent holder can leverage to extract licensing fees or, in the alternative, damages from infringers."

    They basically say their business model is to crapflood the patent office and see who the can fuck.

    --

    Religion is a gateway psychosis. -- Dave Foley

  6. Maybe it's a good thing. by YouHaveSnail · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Let's put this particular patent and its validity aside for a moment and consider that the USPTO does seem to grant quite a lot of patents that it probably should not, and which will eventually be shown to be invalid.

    In some sense, the more this happens, the better. A large number of bad patents diminishes the authority of the USPTO. After a few dozen of these make it though the courts, there will be a fair body of case law that defense lawyers can point at and say "Your honor, the Patent Office has a long history of granting patents without doing appropriate research, and this case is just one more example." At least one of the following will happen:

    • Courts will give less weight to patents, and patents will become easier and cheaper to invalidate in the courts.
    • Holders of significant numbers of patents will start to police the system, pre-emptively challenging bad patents and leaning on patent abusers to knock it off.
    • Congress, in an effort to appease pissed-off businesses, will attempt to reform the USPTO.
    • Congress will make it artificially more difficult to invalidate a patent, thus making the problem worse.


    Any of the above except the last item would be an improvement. Of course, the last item seems the most likely, but it would really just delay the necessary and inevitable patent reform.

    Business right now relies on patents like an addict relies on his chosen drug. Withdrawal will be painful and reform will be difficult, but it will ultimately make the nation much healthier and more productive.
  7. Expertise of examiners by crucini · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Actually, examiners work in pretty narrow areas. Check out other patents allowed by the same examiner. They're mostly computer/internet patents.

    And it's not a patent on subdomains. Given that rather basic misunderstanding, isn't it possible that the guy who examines patents all day is right, and the slashdot crowd is wrong?

  8. Re:Over and Over and Over by Rogerborg · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Excellent point.

    The solution then, is to sue the crap out of USPTO. No, I don't mean just overturn the patent. That's a lose-lose. You pay money to undo the idiocy. I mean to go to court and say "The USPTO's negligence cost me money. I want reparation, and I want punitive damages."

    Hell, given the scope of patents, it's begging for a class action. And I think we may have found a contender.

    --
    If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
  9. Looks like porn to me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Somebody tell me if I'm hallucinating. Go to the site in the story, and change the URL from apps.asp to lameapps.asp. Guess what is on their 404 page: an ad for porn passwords!

    If you have mod points please mod this up so it will be seen.