Company Claims Patent Over XML

Aviran Mordo writes "News.com reports that a small software developer plans to seek royalties from companies that use XML, the latest example of patent claims embroiling the tech industry. Charlotte, N.C-based Scientigo owns two patents (No. 5,842,213 and No. 6,393,426) covering the transfer of 'data in neutral forms.' These patents, one of which was applied for in 1997, are infringed upon by the data-formatting standard XML, Scientigo executives assert."

Comments

I don't get it...

[SimReg]

Do these companies just forget they have a patent on some technology/feature and then 8 years later when their patent is included in a standard and a huge part of the community they say "Hey, didn't we patent that 8 years ago?"

There really needs to be some reform that states a company has 90 days, 1 year, or some short fixed period of time to bring a suit against a product, starting from the time it hits the market and is available to the public, the industry, or something.

The idea that you can silently sit on patents waiting for the world to embrace an obvious idea is an abuse of the system.

Re:I don't get it...

[BeJil]

Close, Lemelson had to do with something called "prosecution laches," and dealt with a patent strategy of keeping a patent from even issueing until the underlying technology becomes widespread. This practice is less problematic now than when Lemelson was originally filed due to changes in the length of a patent term (now a patent term is 20 years from the date of filing, when Lemelson was filed a patent term was 17 years from the date of issue). However, the broader concept of "laches" is relevant. In property law in general, "laches" is the doctrine that requires that a property owner must actively guard their property rights or they will lose them. For example (and this is a simplified example that is not 100% technically accurate), if your neighbor builds a fence that slops over onto your property and you do not make them remove it, after a long enough time period has passed your neighbors will legally own the property encompassed by the fence. The problem is that the application of laches in the IP realm is still an undeveloped concept and the courts have not adequately set out guidelines for determining when a patent holder has forfeited her rights.

USPTO - Again

[geomon]

This fact:

Charlotte, N.C.-based Scientigo owns two patents (No. 5,842,213 and No. 6,393,426) covering the transfer of "data in neutral forms." These patents, one of which was applied for in 1997, are infringed upon by the data-formatting standard XML, Scientigo executives assert.

combined with this fact:

Daly noted that companies or even individuals often make patent claims on XML. For example, Microsoft, which uses XML as the foundation of many of its products, was awarded a patent for programming techniques related to XML.

shows me that the USPTO hopelessly is fucked up.

These people are either overwhelmed by the number of claims and have no time to do the proper research before granting a patent, or they are are just plain stupid. I'm going to be generous and assume that these examiners are given a quota that they have to have resolved each week and that they haven't the time or resources to validate every claim. There is probably also a lack of expertise in the USPTO to properly vet the claims made in these applications.

Re:USPTO - Again

[geomon]

... there is no good way to run a patent office.

It seemed to run just dandy before the flood of business method and software patents hit the system.

Perhaps we need to define what is "patentable" rather than just throw up our hands and resign ourselves to bureaucratic mediocrity (of the system, not the examiners).

These insane patents are a good thing...

[RexRhino]

These insane patents are actually the best thing that could have ever happened. The way things are going now, there is going to have to be a major overhaul of the patent system. The instane patents have made it dramaticly clear that there is something wrong with the system (these are the tech equivelents of suing McDonalds because your kids are fat).

Had companies been less aggressive in patenting and litigating nearly anything possible, the system might go on how it is now for decades. These people are making the patent system collapse in a way that those against software patents don't have the power to do.

Re:Invalid Claim

[RexRhino]

Yes!

Now all you need is two years and $5,000,000 for the legal fees to prove it in court!

Re:XML predates this patent filing

[divisionbyzero]

Well, Channels are dead but "Pull" isn't. It lives on as RSS, but that's neither here nor there.

Shouldn't they have defended their patent earlier?

[SilverJets]

Why isn't there some sort of time limit on how long you can sit back before choosing to file lawsuits against companies over patent infringement? XML has been in widespread use for at least 2 years if not longer. This company had to know it was out there and being used. So, they had to know it infringed on their patent.

Why didn't they stand up and say anything earlier? Oh yeah...because back then it would have meant alot less money to be gained. Doesn't this amount to blackmail? Or borders on racketeering?

But does it matter?

[sterno]

The thing that's bad about this is that assuming these guys have enough money to front the lawyers they can sue their way into riches regardless of whether it's a valid claim. All they do is send nastygrams to a bunch of small companies they believe to be infringing on their patent seeking royalties. Invariably a number of those companies will pay up to avoid the potential of open ended legal battles.

So in the 90's it was:

1) Do something cool
2) ...
3) Profit

In the 00's it's

1) Do something somebody else did before
2) Sue everybody who already did it
3) Profit

Re:How abstract can a patent be?

[Optic7]

Hmmm... sounds like a kung-fu movie dialog:

cut to Shaolin Temple:

Master Li:
One skilled in the art will appreciate that preferred embodiments of the method of the present invention may take on many different forms depending on the particular application intended. In light of this, the preferred embodiment presented here has been designed primarily to teach many of the important aspects and implications of the method of the present invention in a context which can be readily learned.

Grasshopper:
But Master, how will I use these techniques?

Master Li:
Once taught the method, one skilled in the art will appreciate many alternative and preferred means for implementing individual aspects of it, depending upon their specific purpose.

Re:Antother word perwill...

[Taladar]

And SGML is just a minor syntax change from Lisp S-Expressions which should be even older.