Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Patents 'IsNot', Enlists WTO
Milhouse102 writes "I was just reading an article on The Register about Microsoft's offshore patent war following Ballmer's recent outburst in Asia. I came across this little nugget, it seems MS has patented BASIC's IsNot operator."
Unless I'm mistaken, they've only applied for a patent; it has not yet been granted. Sadly, given the state of the patent system nowadays, it would not surprise me if it is granted.
"You're older than you've ever been, and now you're even older."
They have filed an application, it IsNot allowed yet.
After a quick read of the patent, it seems to say that it is a test to see if two "variables" are actually the same entity, i.e. at the same address.
That would seem to imply
#define IsNot(A,B) (&(A) != &(B))
infringes?
Surely this is done in things like memmove() to prevent overwriting of data?
A system, method and computer-readable medium support the use of a single operator that allows a comparison of two variables to determine if the two variables point to the same location in memory.
Prior art:
The C operator !=, for comparing two pointers.
Actually, they specifically admit "Is" as prior art, the example they give is:
If (Not(A Is B)) Then (Goto Z) End If
By generating an IsNot operator, such that Not(A Is B)===(A IsNot B), you're re-ordering the sentance:
If (A IsNot B) Then (Goto Z) End If
That's what they're trying to patent. The use of a keyword rather than boolean logic. I rather hope and suspect this patent will fail for insufficient inventive step.
"Elmo knows where you live!" - The Simpsons
Extract from application:
[0013] Similarly, (for example), if a user wanted to perform Z if the variables a and b do not point to the same memory location, the following code, combining two operators, "Is" and "Not" (a negation of the expression) would be required:
3 Dim a, b As x a = New x( ) b = New x( ) . . . If Not (a Is b) Then (Perform Z) End If
[0014] Such a language construction is ungrammatical, requires more typing and violates the philosophy on which BASIC rests. It would be helpful therefore, if a single more intuitive operator could perform the function that the combination of the two operators Is and Not typically performs.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
[0015] A system, method and computer-readable medium support the use of a single operator that allows a comparison of two variables to determine if the two variables point to different locations in memory, that is, the reverse of the existing "Is" operator in a BASIC programming language or a derivative of BASIC or BASIC-like programming language. In one embodiment of the invention, the memory locations represent objects. The new operator enables a user to determine if the left operand (e.g., a reference type) "is not" the same instance as the reference type listed as the right operand. The use of a single operand for this concept may increase the readability of the programming language.
Wow. They even explain that it's neither original, innovative nor useful. How can this application fail?
The world has changed and we all have become metal men.
It's not prior art because the patent application states it should be in the BASIC language, where your example is in C.
However, having said that, the patent should not be granted because it's *obvious*.
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
If ever there were an example of how completely broken and useless the current patent system is then this is it.
Before you burst a blood vessel, this appears to only be a patent application, not a granted patent.
The USPTO "recently" changed its rules (to match the rest of the world) and no publishes applications before they are granted.
It is weird and pointless, but not exactly trivial. Since BASIC doesn't expose pointers to the programmer, you need a custom operand to compare them. And this patent only covers BASIC-style languages, as you can clearly see from the claims.
UK patent application GB0312175.3, someone already tried:
"The applicant appeared to be trying to protect the use of '0' and '1' in computer technology. [...] The applicant appeared to have completely misunderstood the patent system, and had not actually invented anything."
Via softwarepatents.co.uk. Well, at least *that* didn't get through. ARM's patent on the use of pointer arithmetic in CPU emulators *was* allowed, though.
"Elmo knows where you live!" - The Simpsons
First off, the IsNot operator is not part of VB 6.0 or VB.net 2003 (I haven't checked 2005, which is still in Beta)
Second, if you undestand VB's "Is" operator, IsNot makes more sense.
"Is" is a memory location comparison commonly used to see if two variables point to the same object, e.g. . It does not compare the values of the variables, only that they are pointers to the same object.
Because there is no inverse version of this operator like there is with "=" and "", you end up with non-natural-language statements such asMuch more natural looking isWhether this is patentable is another issue. But you can certainly patent a published idea -- it's the only way to protect it.
Design for Use, not Construction!
The dependent claims (2, 3 and 4) are merely shorthand to avoid writing the entire claim out each time, but for purposes of what they cover, you should read the claims like this:
"I have a porkchop, you have a porkchop. I have a veal, you have a veal".
This is of course an attempt to patent a piece of logic. While it may be said that the whole purpose of the computer is to follow logic, we also have the problem of prior art. IsNot, a combination of 2 simple English words, does not differ from using ! as a way of symbolizing *not equal to*.
If MS gets away with this, thay will use it to destroy their compitition, as has been their habit. Can you imagine the problems created when every software developer gets a notice from MS's legal team that they're in violation of the IsNot patent?
This cannot be allowed to stand, and is clearly an abuse of the system.
Hhhmmm Can I patent cannot?
HexaByte - he's a square and a half!
10 DIM A 10 ... ... ...
15 REM this is equivalent to A=malloc(10)
20 B=A
100 IF BA THEN
So this tests to see if two variables point to the same memory location, in a variant of Basic which has been in use since about 1982.
BBC Basic supports pointers, proper indirection, indexed indirection and dynamic allocation.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
http://www.panopticoncentral.net/archive/2003/11/1 7/243.aspx#Comments
And he writes that they "had requests for this in the past", so they did not even invent it, but some users suggested it.
Finally check out the comments of the VB users below wetting their pants for this little feature. Now isn't that really sad?
Signature deleted by lameness filter.
The patent claim makes interesting reading. Specifically:
2. The system of claim 1, wherein the compiler is a BASIC-derived programming language compiler.
3. The system of claim 1, wherein the operator is IsNot.
Most of the other claims simply describe how a compiler goes about producing executable code.
IANAL, but does this mean that any language which wasn't BASIC derived would be free to implement this? Similarly, you could work around it simply by calling the operator Isnt.
So, just sent a registered letter to the patent examiner with a registered copy to the attorneys pointing out that there is prior art for claim one. this 1998 ISO comment, this 1997 IBM document or a few zillion others.
You're right, its a completely level playing field. Anyone can have a patent.
Basic filing fee - Utility $790.00
Utility issue fee 1,370.00
Due at 3.5 years 940.00
Due at 7.5 years 2,150.00
Due at 11.5 years 3,320.00
Groklaw has an interesting article on MS and its FUD about OSS and patents.
Umm... no, it doesn't.
The Python 'is not' operator does, but to get the same effect in C/C++ you must, as another poster noted, do the equivalent of
&a != &b
to determine if they're the same object. It's not an equality test, it's an identity test.
If you check the PTO web site, it is for "published patent applications."
Microsoft applied for a patent on "IsNot" on May 14, 2004, and the patent was published 18 months later on November 14, 2004.
This doesn't mean that the patent will issue and that Microsoft will receive patent protection for the operator. The author is getting ahead of himself...
You're under no obligation to enforce patents. Submarining a la Unisys is perfectly legal. Trademark law is different
U.S. trademark law has a rather strong doctrine of use it or lose it, but U.S. patent case law has something similar but weaker called the doctrine of laches. If a patent holder harms an alleged infringer by delaying legal action, the patent holder cannot recover damages for infringements prior to legal action; about the best the patent holder can hope for is an injunction against further infringement and some negative press.
Seems to me that Lisp had just such an operator in the 50's. That's right, the eq operator! Oh wait. I guess you'd have to prepend a not to that, wouldn't you.
All hail Microsoft's brilliant innovation!
If my enemy's enemy is my friend, what happens if my enemy is his own worst enemy?
Other than using IsNot as an operator, in what way is this defined to be any different than the != operator which would test the same thing?
Is this a statement which works in a different way or on a particular object in memory that makes it unique?
Since pointers in C work more or less the same way, how exactly can they claim to have invented anything which exists in all other languages?
Doesn't this all come down to the equivelant of the BNZ (Branch Non Zero) which is used to check this stuff down at the machine code??
I just don't get it.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Then this is absolutely trivial to find prior art for:
- Kevin B. McCarty
Suggested use of the exact same syntax is here. There are numerous other examples of Jonathan Allen suggesting and requesting this exact same feature.
Maybe he should sue for not being mentioned in the patent application! Or maybe he just didn't read the EULA for Microsoft newsgroups...
This *is* an assault on GNU. I'm glad he pointed this out.
GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
This is a published patent application. It most definitely IsNot a patent...
Sorry to spoil the MS-bashing party kids, but there's really nothing to see here.
It hasn't even been reviewed by an Examiner yet. If you're concerned or curious about the progress of this application (or any other), you can monitor changes here: http://portal.uspto.gov/. Just plug in the application or publication number. The "Transaction History" tab has a timeline of things that have happened with the application, and the "Image File Wrapper" tab (if there is one) links to images of every paper filed in the application.
The "isnot" operator was proposed for the D Programming Language as a replacement for the !== operator already in use in D. The !== operator determines if two references are at the same address or not. Both the "isnot" reference and the !== operator well predate the patent application.
isnot proposal
earlier D specification
You can't use iSnot, this patent is case-insensitive.
Bender sez: Bite my shiny, metal ass!
Sorry to reply to my own post . . . when, oh, when will we get the ability to edit our posts?
Anyway -- it seems someone has already written a Prior Art HOWTO, as I would have discovered had I thought to run it through Google before hitting the "Submit" button.