MS Patent Applications Reveal Search Technology

eldavojohn writes, "In the roughly 90 patents they applied for on November 2, 2006, Microsoft reveals that it is apparently pushing its research in the search engine market. There are a few patents that reveal improved ranking methods and document classification but the real interesting ones revolve around linking related queries, optimizing search, identifying results that are spam, and using a Bayesian classifier to measure feedback from the user. If that's not enough, there's even a few I don't quite understand. Another notable Microsoft application for a patent is the model for assisting children in authoring stories so you can't accuse Microsoft of not thinking of the children. Microsoft regularly applies for many patents but never so many revolving around search."

Comments

Software patents must go, period

[Pecisk]

Software patents are proved that they are needless and very anticompetitive. They must go. Period.

I decided to post this under EVERY article about software patents, because no matter how good or bad example is, truth usually is that this patent will be never used in it's meant way. Can call me a troll, but after all sharade of Microsoft/Novell deal, after EU/EC fiasco, after all copyright extentions I have enough.

I call for political change in this field. Like it or not, guys, we must fight. And no more arguing that some software patents must be good, otherwise such silly concept would be never put into realisation, right?

And no more buts and "ohhs" and "but lobbies are too strong". I have never seen sysadmins and other IT people marching and protesting about ANY issue. We just wine and cry and when everything is happening in bad way, we all say "I told you so."

Not any more. At least, for me. Let's do it guys. Let's work for a change. You can support fight in Europe (http://swpat.ffii.org/) or you can try to build consensus and inform people in your home. Inform people in polite way about the issue, don't force point of view. Describe what consequences are here for all that.

Re:Software patents must go, period

[donaldm]

I can read the frustration in your post but IMHO you are not a troll. Sorry have not read your URL yet but will do after your post (looks interesting though).

In many ways I agree with you because I think the average person feels so powerless in the face of Mega/Giga dollars that companies like Microsoft wield to push through patents in software that to people in the field feel are trivial and obvious.

I am very anti software patents because they are based on maths and logic which should not (IMHO) be patentable. Patents based on maths and logic do reduce the ability of human mind to innovate or even think freely for that matter. Yes I know the arguments that companies like these use and in nearly all cases they are just FUD, unfortunately the Law listens, because in many respects most Lawyers and Judges don't have the technical knowledge and work on precedent.

The main problem I see with software patents is that the patent is written in legalese and the actual science would be poorly understood by the patent lawyer although it just may be possible that the lawyer has a degree in Law and Science (hands up if you are one). Many software (and also many non software ones as well) patents are fairly vague but all encompassing and can be interpreted in a variety of ways but always to the advantage of the person/company who had the patent written for them in the first pace.

Even a person who understands the science finds a patent difficult to read because it is written in a language they are not normally familiar with, so it can be difficult to determine if you are infringing.

Unfortunately patent law reform will only come from the judiciary with the support of the appropriate companies and I don't see this happening anytime soon since they have so much to loose at the feeding trough.

Re:What Happening in Microsoft

[b0s0z0ku]

. It is actually better than google in that the results are about equal but you get less spam ads and there image search leaves googles stuff for dead.

You mean the "look" of the image search site or the content returned? I see very little difference in the content returned. But the look of the site sucks. It's much more data-intensive, and thus slower, even over a broadband connection. And who the hell needs images that expand in an animated manner when you mouse over them or flashy menubars? The only thing that M$N search might have going for it is the search macros feature that allows for the creation of more customized searches. Google, OTOH, is fast and viewable on any (even ancient) browsers. M$N search seems like more bloatware from a company that specializes in it.

-b.