Slashdot Mirror
Halliburton Applies For Patent-Trolling Patent
An anonymous reader writes "Halliburton, the company many folks know as Dick Cheney's previous employer, has apparently taken an interest in methods of patent trolling. In fact, according to Techdirt, the company has applied for a patent on patent trolling. Specifically, it's applied for a patent on the process of finding a company that protected an invention via trade secret, figuring out what that secret is, patenting it ... and then suing the original company. Hopefully, the patent office rejects this patent, because I somehow doubt that Halliburton is trying to get the patent as a way to block others from patent trolling."
This is hilarious on SOOO many levels. I don't even know who to root for in this story! Help me Slashdot, should I go for Hallburton, the Patent Office, the trolls?
If he explores all forms and substances Straight homeward to their symbol-essences; He shall not die.
No, they can't do this because it violates MY patent on patenting patent trolling!
Nonperiodic Central Trajectory
...I would think that the very act of finding "prior art" (the very fact they found an invention) as described in this system would invalidate any patent attempt of the trade-secret...
and sue the guy above me.
I'm reminded of something that happened to me a few years ago in a Circuit City or Sears or someplace. I was looking for a radar detector for my car. The salesman was trying to upsell and said "You know, cops can detect radar detectors now, so you should get this upgrade with a radar-detector detector." I said, "Why do I want a radar-detector detector? Obviously I want a radar-detector-detector detector." The salesguy did not appreciate my point. I ended up just buying my original level of detection.
Nonperiodic Central Trajectory
The methods of figuring out trade secrets are almost always illegal, and can be sued over.
So basically halliburton is trying to patent being a dick... I think there's some prior art for that...
-Taylor
Worldwide Military budgets: $2100 billion. Worldwide Space Exploration budgets: $38 billion. Really, world? Really?
This is a silly business-methods patent application that will certainly be rejected by the PTO after Bilski. And no, a trade secret certainly does not qualify as prior art in the US. Nor should it.
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
Wouldn't it be nice to see a principled opinion for a change? An opposition to a bad idea regardless of who is proposing it and why?
I mean, if it were, uhm, the Red Cross, or the ACLU, or a some cooperative, trying to patent patent-trolling, we'd have no problems right? Because they would only use it for The Greater Good and would never sell it — not even if they went bankrupt and had to liquidate all their property (including the "imaginary" kind)?
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Actually, I'm not sure what else it could be used for. A patent on patent trolling can only be used against other patent trolls. If Halliburton wanted to be a patent troll, they wouldn't need a patent to do it. Besides, patent trolls typically don't have any other source of income that can be threatened by their "business", so Halliburton wouldn't really qualify.
Looks like someone's stab at a defensive patent to me.
===== Murphy's Law is recursive. =====
"Hopefully, the patent office rejects this patent, because I somehow doubt that Halliburton is trying to get the patent as a way to block others from patent trolling."
It's in the USPTO's best interest to grant this patent because their revenue is largely driven by trolls patenting prior art and mechanisms/methods which are obvious to those skilled in the trade/art/science.
Take DAC (digital analog converters) for example: radio was there, then someone came along and said "Zomg! I'm gonna patent using a DAC to send voice over the radio waves using digital" and "ZOMG! I'm gonna use a DAC to send ethernet over the radio!" and so forth. The DAC is a physical implementation and ought to have been given a patent, but the uses for which DACs are implemented are obvious to anyone skilled in the trade and ought to not be granted patents.
But, if the USPTO rejects such patents, where is their job security? Or, if their jobs would still be secure, why, not rubber stamping a patent would require actual WORK. They can't have that now, can they? Just rubber stamp the patent application and let the courts sort it out, letting the little guys go bankrupt in the process.
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
It's not "patenting patent trolling" that needs to be non-obvious, it's the action they're trying to patent - "patent trolling". Patent trolling, although it may not have been obvious back when it became a major problem, is now so common as to be laughably obvious. Unfortunately, prior art exists everywhere.
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
If the company being targeted by this method has documented their trade secret, even if only internally, they can instantly shut down any infringement litigation by producing said documentation.
Of course, this "outs" their trade secret, but that's not usually fatally crippling.
Hopefully my new patent to patent the patent application process will be approved first, so I can sue Halliburton for applying for a patent with my patented process of submitting a patent application to the Patent Office. Otherwise, I can sign a deal with Halliburton to work both ends of the issue - I will sue any new patents when they are submitted, and Halliburton can clean out any patents already granted! IT CANNOT FAIL.
This sounds like a process that could be done mentally, meaning it involves no technology of any kind. Just recently these types of patents were ruled to be unpatentable, so my guess is this is not a patentable process /IANAL
You cannot find them because I send thousands of DMCA requests to slashdot to have them removed for infringing on the copyrighted document we had containing the patent idea.
Our lawyers will be contacting you shortly as well.
---- Liquid was a patriot ----
This idea was invented by Shampoo!
Well, IANAL, and in /. tradition I didn't RTFA, but what's the point of applying for patents in cases where you specifically know there's already prior art?
That's a rhetorical question - I don't even want to know the answer.
Although patents normally go to the first inventor under a first-to-file system, an inventor who keeps the information secret or just does not publish generally loses the right to the patent and also does not establish prior art. Without prior art, a later inventor can get a valid patent on the same invention and then apply it against earlier inventor(s). All this is easily prevented simply by recognizing the invention and applying for a patent, or by publishing details of how to practice the invention, thus creating prior art.
Emphasis mine.
When you get to the level of paranoia where you want this, perhaps I could interest you in my radar-detector-detector-detector-detector-detector-detector-detector-detector-detector detector.
It consists of a black box with a little red light, which always blinks to indicate that you're always being watched.
Halliburton, you magnificient bastard! Making patent trolls pay you license fees for violating your patent trolling patent? I revel in your sheer self-referential evilness. My hat is off to you. That takes huge balls — I think I saw one of them chasing Indy in a Peruvian temple.
This is ALL your fault, mqduck!
Adidas To Bring Back Sneakernet
Actually, patent applications are public documents. How else would someone be able to check whether or not an invention was already patented? Though it would not surprise me if the DMCA somehow allowed that kind of take-down request, as it appears to have been written by some variation of the infinite monkey theorem... I think I will call it the "Finite Legislator Theorem": if a legislator types random words for long enough, it will eventually produce a document that can pass as a law.
If "prior art" actually prevented someone from getting a patent, "patent trolling" would be impossible...
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
Awww, isn't that cute? mqduck's little offhand comment has grown up into a real live business plan!
Ahh - My eye!
The doctor said I'm not supposed to get Slashdot in it!
Just to maybe save you some time, this advertising strategy won't work all that well here, as the moderation system will quickly hide your posts for most users.
Besides, do you really want to spend your life being a shithead?
Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
It can't be done mentally. To make sure of that, they included the magic words "with a computer". Truly their lawyers are more cunning than a fox with a PhD in cunning from Oxford University.