Location-Based Search Was Patented In 1999

greenbird writes "Another patent fiasco has begun. Wired reports that a patent on location-based Internet searches was filed in 1996 and granted in 1999 (patent is here). A patent troll company name Geomas acquired the patent and has filed suit against Verizon in none other than Marshall, Texas. They claim this is the first in what will be a long line of lawsuits. Geomas has amassed a $20M war chest in venture capital to use for getting rich off of a clearly obvious idea."

Comments

Now is when I'd like to say...

[Overzeetop]

if the patent isn't defended within (name your short time frame - I say 90 days*) from the first commercial, non-licensed implementation, the patent automatically expires and falls into the public domain.

Show of hands on the proposal?

*For those who say 90 days is too short, let me preemptively reply that if you are so involved in a particular industry that you can patent something in that field, you damned well ought to notice when someone announces or commercially uses that idea _in your field_ within three months. Otherwise, you really are just a troll.

Slashdot exercise: prove it was an "obvious idea"

[reebmmm]

Let's put slashdot's money where its mouth usually is. Here's the very first claim:

A system which associates on-line information with geographic areas, said system comprising:

• a computer network wherein a plurality of computers have access to said computer network; and
• an organizer executing in said computer network, wherein said organizer is configured to receive search requests from any one of said plurality of computers, said organizer comprising:
  • a database of information organized into a hierarchy of geographical areas wherein entries corresponding to each one of said hierarchy of geographical areas is further organized into topics; and
  • a search engine in communication with said database, said search engine configured to search geographically and topically, said search engine further configured to elect one of said hierarchy of geographical areas prior to selection of a topic so as to provide a geographical search area wherein within said hierarchy of geographical areas at least one of said entries associated with a border geographical area is dynamically replicated into at least one narrower geographical area, said search engine further configure to search said topics within said selected geographical search area.

To invalidate it as obvious, you have to find one or more documents/patents or example of a system that contain all of the elements of the claim (or enough sources that show that it was obvious to combine).

Remember, you have to be able to find documents that existed on or before the date of filing Jan 31, 1996.

Frankly, it would probably be easier to show that the disclosure was not enabling. But, let's have at it.

Re:Obvious When?

[grcumb]

How obvious was this in 1999 when the patent was granted?

Really obvious. Blindingly, mind-numbingly, stupefactifyingly obvious.

I was writing geographically-based search functions (in a non-web context) in 1998. They were just another feature of the search applications we wrote. The products I was supporting had been in use since 1994.