Singapore Firm Claims Patent Breach By Virtually All Websites

An anonymous reader writes "A Singapore firm, VueStar has threatened to sue websites that use pictures or graphics to link to another page, claiming it owns the patent for a technology used by millions around the world. The company is also planning to take on giants like Microsoft and Google. It is a battle that could, at least in theory, upend the Internet. The firm has been sending out invoices to Singapore companies since last week asking them to pay up."

Comments

what the fuck

[FireXtol]

Wow.... This remind me of that comic with the ambiguous superhero... 'I think my common sense is tingling!'. Then below it... Common sense... so rare it's a fucking super power.

Seriously, patents are fucking stupid. So is IP(intellectual property). Get rid of these, and world peace would happen over night.

Re:what the fuck

[bmajik]

the problem with axing the notion of IP is that in a western style society, ideas are the only entities with real value, that actualy move society forward.

The difference between today and (today - 4000 years) is not that people are stronger (although they may be), live longer (although many do). It's not even that people, on the whole, are smarter than they used to be (although this is difficult to really measure).

Rather, the person of today has the benefit of thousands of years of human ingenuity. When the socio-economic conditions are ripe for someone to act upon their own ideas, humanity leaps forward. The real value in the world is not labor and is not stock, but is actually intellect.

The key then, is how to reward intellect appropriatley. As you no doubt agree, today's patent and copyright system does not appear to reward intellectual output appropriately, as it is more commonly used to stifle development than to promote it. Do not, however, get confused about what the real value in society is -- ideas are valuable over all else, and it is worthwhile to construct the framework such that valuable ideas are lucrative enough that they are pursued, and that the most able in our world are able to sustain themselves based on the value of their intellectual contributions alone (as opposed to the value of their perspiration).

Another Idiotic Patent

[chunk08]

How do you patent something that is written in the HTML spec, that is a logical combination of two tags? This is why software patents need to be permanently banned. In our world today, it does not make the same economic sense to grant patents (or copyright).

Re:Sweet

[jeiler]

What would be really sweet is if it went to court and the judge finds it technically valid but too onerous. Following the logic, it would be an open door to judicial review of the entire patent system.

But in all reality, the judge will probably just rule this particular patent invalid (for whatever reason) and refuse to tackle the larger issue.

The firm was established in 2004

[poeidon1]

and microsoft and google (and me) existed before that and *used* their technology.

Re:The firm was established in 2004

[Bill, Shooter of Bul]

If you read their patent claims on their website they aren't quite making that broad of a claim. They believe they have a patent on submitting a search and showing image (of the respective website) links as a result of that search. I agree that was done long before, and they actually state on the website that it was not in "wide use" for "enterprise websites" prior to 2000. So apparently the think they can patent ideas that have prior art, just as long as they aren't being used by the majority of large companies.

If you actually subscribe to their insane claims, or are extremely paranoid, you could get around it very easily by not having the image use a href. Their patent claim specifically mentions hrefs.

outsourcing

[nack107]

I'm glad to see that we've even managed to outsource patent trolls.

Shirts!

[IronMagnus]

Quick... someone start making shirts that say:

<a href="link"><img src="picture"></a>

... its about time those DeCSS shirts got replaced.

Re:Shirts!

[Yvanhoe]

If I sold a t-shirt for every stupid patent being claimed...
Now wait a minute ! I have a business model to patent !

Slightly Misleading

[eldavojohn]

I tracked down what I think is the patent in question and indeed it was originally accepted by the Australian Patent Office.

Here's the abstract:

The present invention provides a web-page (or web-site) search results list which includes images from the actual web-pages or web-sites identified in a user's search, or images associated with the actual organization operating a web-site. This assists a user to locate web-pages of interest or relevance to the user by providing images to assess the relevance of web-pages identified in a search, prior to the user having to hyperlink to the actual web-page itself. The invention also provides a method of assisting a user to be placed in contact with an organization, including the steps of: the user submitting a search request from a terminal, via a computer network, to a database server, the database server containing a database and a server-side application used as database searching software; the database searching software searching the database in accordance with the search request; identified database entries being transmitted to the terminal as a search results list, each entry of the search results list containing contact information for the organization; at least one entry of the search results list additionally containing visual content and/or audio content which relates to the organization. After reading the claims, this patent seems to be more targeting sites that use search engines to return images that relate to a user's query. Although this is a prime example of how the international patent system is broken, it's unlikely they could target "virtually all" web sites with this patent.

Easy to Prove

[Phantombrain]

Filing date: Oct 3, 2001
Issue date: Jun 20, 2006

Wayback machine: http://www.archive.org/

http://web.archive.org/web/19961017235908/http://www2.yahoo.com/

What's that? An image? Linked?!?! That is what one might call prior art.

Re:Patented A href?

[Waffle Iron]

I have patented the carriage return linefeed combination.

That's obviously invalid. One important requirement for patentability is that an invention must be useful.

Re:Sweet

[Anonymous Coward]

The absolute shamelessness of these people is what amazes me. They don't care how badly they are hated.

Don't they have friends and family they have to face? Or do they only associate with other criminals like themselves?

Depends

[mpapet]

Technically? Depends on how much of the intellectual property is recognized by American courts. WIPO is supposed to be the global venue for patents.

Practically? No chance in hell. Even if they aren't laughed out of court, a little retroactive immunity legislation will fix that.

FYI, the American banking industry kneecaps patent holders that make it through the courts with retroactive immunity clauses with startling frequency. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/13/AR2008021303731_pf.html

If only americans took an interest in their government. Most of it is too good/bad to be true.

Re:Sweet

[spun]

You know what else would be sweet? If a judge decided that supermodels refusing to have sex with me was technically valid, but too onerous. Following that logic, it would be an open door for judicial review of the whole "super models not having sex with nerds" system. That would be super sweet for all of us.

Re:Sweet

[t33jster]

I wonder if US companies will honor this patent. While it's not clear from the article, it looks like this patent exists in Singapore. US companies with operations in Singapore may come under pressure.

IMHO, this will probably be struck down, as Singapore is generally friendly to businesses. Also, it is akin to patenting a method to exchange carbon dioxide in blood with oxygen in the air. With a patent like that, you could pretty much sue all animal life.

Now where's that patent application?

Why this is happening

[dnwq]

This is probably why this is going on (WARNING: speculation!):

The SG govt. is extremely business-friendly, to the point of screwing over its own citizens if there's a risk of scaring off investors. As such, they've become singularly enthusiastic about "Intellectual Property" in general - witness them pulling out four riot trucks to suppress a protest by seven people against an anime distributor.

Some smartass has realised this, and decided to play off the govt's policy against itself - the government would hesitate to suppress patent trolls, for fear of scaring off foreign investors. In the meanwhile it rips off thousands of dollars from scared Singaporean small businesses.

A pretty effective scam, I'd say.

Re:Sure it is!

[Jesus_666]

Actually, the Israelites had a patent on a method of living in that particular region. When they were swept off the map, however, the Paletinians went and patented the same thing. Now the Israelites have redefined themselves as a new brand (the Israelis) and demand that thir patend be counted as prior art (and, if possible, reinstated). The Palestinians decline, the Israelis don't care and what follows is one of the uglier copyright wars of the recent past.

So, here's the plan everyone...

[Spy der Mann]

we claim a patent on web browsers and hold the world hostage for... ONE MILLIONS DOLLARS!

but there *IS* a US patent...

[akahige]

Here's a link to US patent #7065520.

It was filed October 3, 2001, by an Australian guy who also holds patents in Oz and NZ.

More info re. their legal claims.

Here's a couple of choice quotes from their FAQ page:
Q: My site is worldwide, will I need licences for other territories?
A: Yes. Vuestar licences territory by territory â" VUESTAR System â.

Q: What happens if I donâ(TM)t pay?
A: You will not be granted the VUESTAR User Licence and will be unable lawfully to use visual images to access the worldwide web. Our collection agencies will recover unpaid fees.



So this is what happened to all those SCO execs...

Re:Sweet

[Anonymous Coward]

"usually by working out , losing weight, and getting in shape."

That doesn't make any sense.

1) 'working out': As in 'dining out'? Are there any specific requirements for such non-default work location? How to prevent job-loss when engaging in this results in not being present at default work location (any forms available to submit to boss/hr?)? Does it pay well at those locations? What are the benefits? If the default work location specs are within tolerance, is it still required to seek alternate location? If so, elaborate.

2) 'losing weight': Does it count if the weight is not lost, rather discarded. Weight of what item ought to be 'lost'? How much distance, or elapsed time is required for said 'weight' to be considered 'lost'?

3) 'getting in shape': What shape (round/square/etc)? How to instantiate said shape to be able to get into it. Finally: Where, and how to enter said instantiated shape?

Finally: When the above modifications are unsuccessful, how to discover which modification was incorrect (false, overcorrected/undercorrected)?