Microsoft Deems Emotiflags Patent-Worthy

theodp writes "Microsoft said you could count on them to improve patent quality. For an example of how they're raising the bar on innovation, check out this just-published patent application for Emotiflags, which Microsoft explains solves the problem of indicating an emotion associated with an email message. At the risk of infringing on the patent, this one Makes Me Mad!"

Comments

Re:Prior art at Google Groups....

[oohshiny]

They're patenting something that involves the association of emoticons with iconic images, also involving mechanisms like X-Face. It's still not new, it's still not their idea, it still shouldn't get granted, but if you're going to cite prior art, cite the right one.

I'm not sure what sickens me most...

[Joce640k]

I'm not sure what sickens me most, the fact that this can be patented or the fact that somebody out there thinks "Emotiflags" are a neat idea.

emotiflags

[DavidD_CA]

Say what you will, but:

1) "Emotiflags" is a brand new term. A search on Google only showed 5 hits, all of which were emoticon flags (as in country flags), not emotional flags like :) and :(

2) One of the biggest problems people have with email is that it doesn't convey emotion. If the use of this concept becomes commonplace, it could mean good things for email. Being able to look at the emotion prior to opening the message will mean a lot less miscommunication.

3) While message forums have been doing this for ages, this is the first time I've seen it applied to email as some kind of header deta along with the to, from, subject, importance, etc.

And for what it's worth, the patent was filed almost a year and a half ago.

Re:emotiflags

[trianglman]

1) I can call email electro-letters but that doesn't make it new.

2)This will potentially have the opposite effect since when MS has a patent for it they will start charging people to use it, rather than people freely including emoticons in their emails like they currently do.

3) Given, but nothing reads this header yet and if they have to pay MS for the right to do so, they probably won't

Re:A weird twist...

[camperdave]

You underestimate the quality of patent applications. Someone holds a patent for a razor with five blades. Someone holds a patent for swinging from side to side. Someone holds a patent for assisting childbirth using centrifugal force. Someone holds a patent for a motorized ice cream cone. Someone holds a patent for playing with a cat using a laser pointer. If the patent system hasn't collapsed under 10,000 of these a year, Microsoft won't be able to dent the system.

Re:Grounds for patent?

[Silkejr]

Even if it's just an application that doesn't make their actions any less despicable. Destroying innovation of competitors so they can make more money, they should be ashamed of themselves.

Re:Grounds for patent?

[morleron]

Competition is good and I'm all for it. However, taking advantage of a badly broken patent system, while at the same time claiming that they are working towards fixing that system, is simply one more example of the hypocrisy of Microsoft and is not an example of fair competition. If His Billness and Company are truly concerned about frivolous patents then this is the sort of thing they should not be doing. The fact that they have filed the application tells me that the loudly proclaimed moves to improve the system were nothing, but another marketing ploy designed to improve the company's image, while making no difference to the way it actually functions. Our only hope now is that the USPTO will find examples of "prior art" in its own emails as they seem incapable of noticing it in the outside world - as we've seen too many other times.

Just my $.02,
Ron