Altnet Threatens P2P Companies Over File Hash Patents

devil_doll writes "I saw over on p2pnet that Altnet is trying to 'mug' a number of P2P companies with seemingly bogus patents. One of them is titled 'Data processing system using substantially unique identifiers to identify data items, whereby identical data items have the same identifiers,' and appears to be nothing more than a simple hash table."

Comments

What's a bogus patent?

[artifex2004]

If it's not a real patent, wouldn't they get accused of fraud and fraud with the intent to extort, or whatever?

Or do you mean it's a real patent, but one that should be indefensible? That's a different matter.
If this is the case, maybe they're doing the standard trick of going after people too small to challenge the patent in court, who will settle quickly.

Re:'Bogus patents'

[mumblestheclown]

Tell that to somebody who has spent years developing a new algorithm for something like facial recognition. Explain to me again why a clever person who comes up with a novel algorithm (note: I said NOVEL - I am NOT denying that there are horrible abuses in the patent system, esp. wrt software - I am just countering your claim that software patents shouldn't exist at all) to produce something useful and novel shouldn't enjoy a temporary monopoly from the fruits of his labour and research just because his invention happens to be in software rather than being hydraulic or pneumatic?

/ incidentally, any "all patents must be abolished" responders need not bother. go visit economic history 101 instead.

Copyright

[CarrionBird]

Software can and should be protected by copyright rather than patent. Perhaps if it's something truely novel, then I can see getting a patent for it. But that's not how the system is being used. Companies are patenting simple ideas rather than novel implementations.

With some patented hydraulic invention, I am still free to come up with a better way of doing the same thing.

With these software patents, I'm prohibited from making anything that accomplishes X, even if I have a novel method, because company Y has a patent on software that does that.

Re:'Bogus patents'

[_KiTA_]

Tell that to somebody who has spent years developing a new algorithm for something like facial recognition. Explain to me again why a clever person who comes up with a novel algorithm (note: I said NOVEL - I am NOT denying that there are horrible abuses in the patent system, esp. wrt software - I am just countering your claim that software patents shouldn't exist at all) to produce something useful and novel shouldn't enjoy a temporary monopoly from the fruits of his labour and research just because his invention happens to be in software rather than being hydraulic or pneumatic?

The counter of course, is that you shouldn't be able to shut down ALL Facial Recognition innovation by patenting the idea of "using a computer to digitalize and analize a human face, therefore allowing the computer to pick that face from a database of other faces.". In the same way I can't patent a cog, a piston, or (wait for it) the wheel, you shouldn't be able to get a blanket patent on ANYTHING in software. Period. Specifics may or may not be ok -- But honestly, copyright handles "distribution of a literary, musical, dramatic, or artistic work". It does not grant you exclusive use of a mere idea.