Slashdot Mirror
USPTO Issues Provisional Storyline Patent
cheesedog writes "The USPTO will issue the first storyline patent in history today, with two others following in the next few months. Right to Create points out that this was anticipated several months ago in a story by Richard Stallman published in the The Guardian, UK. With the publication of this not-yet-granted patent, its author can begin requiring licensing fees for anyone whose activities might fall within its claims, including book authors, movie studies, television studios and broadcasters, etc. The claims appear to cover the literary elements of a story involving an ambitious high school student who applies for entrance to MIT and prays to remain sleeping until the acceptance letter comes, which doesn't happen for another 30 years."
RMS: If patent law had been applied to novels in the 1880s, great books would not have been written.
USPTO: Ooh, good idea!
Seriously, the US patent system is very broken, and it appears they are moving in a direction to expand, rather than contract, the amount of things that are patentable. They clearly have no care for whether the patents they grant are stifling innovation. Action is needed to reverse this, but I doubt we'll see it while Bush is still in power.
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
- E. Debs
Hopefully someone will patent reality TV shows. I am rather sick of those.
Wait no, this wont work. You need to have a story to be able to patent it. Soon all that will be on the air is reality TV. Noooo!
I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
Claim 1: a communication process that represents, in the mind of a reader, the concept of a character who is so shocked and enraged by the concept of patenting a storyline, that he "snaps" (see USPTO #12006213391)
Claim 2: a communication process according to claim 1, wherein said character subsequently goes to his bedroom, where he keeps a loaded Glock 32C, and racks the slide.
Claim 3: a communication process according to claims 1 and 2, wherein said character subsequently flies to DC and unloads his plastic fantasic on an unsuspecting USPTO in a singlular act of biblical fury.
Claim 4: a communication process according to claims 1 2, and 3, wherein said character subsequently returns to his hometown and has a slurpy, cosmic justice being served.
trustedworlds.net - gaming, security, and the gunk that lives in between
Get it right. Even the article does. These are patent applications that are being published because of a recent statutory change requiring publication of all patent applications 18 months after filing. This has nothing to do with whether or not letters patent will be granted.
There was Cowboy Neal at the wheel of a bus to never-ever land.
In his book Palm Sunday Kurt Vonnegut talks about a project he completed in school where he graphed the happiness curve of the main character over the course of the book/story. He examined many popular stories and found out that all of the stories he looked at shared only a handful of common graphs. It's been a while but I remember him saying that the book of genesis has the same graph as cinderalla for example.
Whoever patents the five or six storylines that are the basis for virtually all books will become richer then Bill Gates.
The neat thing about this is that you don't have to actuall write the books yourself. The patent office punishes the people who get off their ass and do things while rewarding people who get in the patent line early and patent things they have never built or made.
evil is as evil does
Nah, they're obligated to accept it, so long as the paperwork and bribe are all proper.
You misspelt bribe. I corrected it in my quote for you.
Are you kidding? The MPAA will pee themselves with delight over this. They will support this wholeheartedly.
Analysis:
The issue of, "Who owns the story," is a thorny one in Hollywood. Professional screenwriters -- many of whom, by the way, are unionized because the studios kept abusing them way back when -- often retain the copyrights to their stories. Among other things, copyright affords the author the right to enjoin performance of their story in most media (since those are derivative works). However, copyright's scope is limited. You only have a case against a studio if the copying was direct. If the studio's work was substantially similar, then you get to sit in court for years and argue exactly how similar it was, and whether the studio's work A) constitutes plagiarism, and B) whether the degree of plagiarism is sufficient to warrant punishment by the courts. See Buchwald vs. Paramount for an example of how messy this can get.
Further, if a writer feels that s/he's being maltreated by the studios, s/he can vote with their feet and simply choose to work for someone else under different, hopefully better conditions. (In practice, this is more difficult than I'm making it sound.)
However, if plotline elements can be patented, then there will be a mad rush by the studios to acquire as many patents as possible. Once done, screenwriters will no longer be able to ply their trade without being expressly licensed by the studio to do so. The balance of power will shift massively to the studios, who will wield absolute veto power over who may write screenplays, and under what circumstances. ("I want to retain rights to the story." "I'm sorry; we don't offer plot element licenses under those conditions.")
This will also effectively kill those pesky independent screenwriters and film studios, since the large studios will simply refuse to license the plot elements. (The large studios won't have any difficulty; they'll merely cross-license with each other.) The studios could also, if they so wished, break the screenwriters' union overnight.
And, of course, you'll hear a bunch of self-serving blathering about how film production is massively expensive, and successful film plots are already hard to come by, so successful plot elements should be afforded the maximum protection possible because, darn it, it was expensive to develop. This "reasoning" is, of course, complete bullshit, but it'll play well in the trade magazines and the halls of Congress.
Schwab
Editor, A1-AAA AmeriCaptions
Seriously fucked
What sickens me is your sickness is going to seep into Canada. I'll fight this one tooth and nail.
Really, at the risk of being redundant you are deeply badly fucked.
"Academicians are more likely to share each other's toothbrush than each other's nomenclature."
Cohen
A textbook wouldn't have a storyline so the answer could not be (a) or (c). However, whether you are violating (b) depends on whether the page you photocopied was from a textbook printed on paper or an electronic book which displays text encoded digitally. In the first case, the old and established Fair Use Act covers this and no violation has occured. In the second case, the DMCA comes into play and you would be subject to penalties on par with those for second degree murder.
Liberals call everyone Nazis yet they are the closest thing to it.
Hollywood will die slowly as a new Hollywood without patent restrictions will emerge in Europe or Asia.
Maybe it'll be the end of the Oscars as a bonus.
home
>> see it while Bush is still in power.
>
> I'm not a Bush fan in the slightest, but I don't see it
> being the kind of thing a Democrat president would give
> a crap about, either.
So long, and thanks for all the fish — Douglas Adams: