Slashdot Mirror
WordLogic Patented the Predictive Interface
Packetl055 writes "Have any of you heard anything about this company, WordLogic, with a soon to be granted/issued patent with 117 claims for predictability software? They recently received a patent approval/allowance letter from the US Patent and Trademark Office. Their patent application was submitted in March 2000. If I read this correctly, any software that gives you any prediction after you type something is infringing on their patent — e.g. vehicle navigation systems, cellular telephones, PDA's, Google with their 'Did You Mean' when using Google for a search, the new Apple I-Phone, Blackberry, Sony Playstation-3, etc., etc. If true, this is going to be huge: lawsuits after lawsuits." Their stock trend over the last few days suggests that somebody was paying attention to the the USPTO news from August 9. WordLogic makes products (assistive input software) and doesn't seem to be merely a patent troll.
that they wouldn't get anywhere with a lawsuit.
Would she infringe upon their patent? 8)
Karma Whoring for Fun and Profit.
Prior art from 1996, anyone. Thank you, Bill! ;-)
I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
I hope they enjoyed the intellisense autocomplete feature in Visual Studio when they developed the software that their patent is based on.
Don't assume that there's prior art just because the Slashdot summary seems to be similar to things you used in the past. The only measure of valid prior art (other than actually going to court) is when a patent lawyer looks over both the letter of the claims and the claim of prior art. Often, in that light, the prior art turns out to have no relevance.
Patent submitters typically know about the most obvious examples of prior art, so most patents are worded to carefully carve out a niche in which the patent almost, but not quite, describes existing technologies.
Eeco flight navigation system, some time in the '80s or '90s. Contact me at mailto:sol@linker.com for expenses-only expert or factual testimony if anyone sues you on this nonsense. I've been sued on this sort of nonsense before (and won), and I'll do whatever I can to abate it. Maybe /. can set up an area where patent-fighting experts can help out /.ers on this stuff.
Why is it that prior art must be exactly what the patent is claiming, but infringing work just needs to be similar to what is claimed?
Of course it's not merely a pig. It's Dancer Pig!
Dancer Pig! Dancer Pig!
Does whatever a Dancer Pig does!
Can it dance
In ballet?
No it can't,
'Cause it's a pig.
Look out!
Here comes the Dancer Pig!