Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Crowdsourcing Site Offers Rewards To Bust Patents

Posted by timothy on from the here-you-get-valuable-mod-points dept.

holy_calamity writes "Article One Partners is a new startup that offers $50,000 rewards to people that find prior art for certain valuable patents. The company's founder told New Scientist she thought the initiative would improve 'patent quality' by increasing scrutiny on poor patents. She aims to profit by selling the information contributors collect, or trade stocks based on it. Current patents they are looking for help to bust include those being used by Konami to sue Harmonix over Rock Band and Guitar Hero."

12 of 96 comments (clear)

  1. It's probably like any other reward. by AltGrendel · · Score: 3, Insightful
    "Leading to the arrest and conviction of ...."

    The patent will have to be revoked and beyond legal appeals to get the reward.

    --
    The simple truth is that interstellar distances will not fit into the human imagination

    - Douglas Adams

  2. Maybe I'm missing something . . . by catbertscousin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why not go after patent trolls (there's prior art to his 'prior art'!) instead of companies who actually developed a product and patented it?

    --
    No good deed goes unpunished. - Avon, Blake's 7
    1. Re:Maybe I'm missing something . . . by mpapet · · Score: 5, Informative

      Why not go after patent trolls

      The problem with that is that most companies with enough spare money to pay have created ridiculous patents.

      For example, the Telco's have ridiculously vague patents they've used to crush innovators like Vonage. A while ago, Microsoft was using language like, "[Insert OSS project demon] violates 23 Microsoft patents."

      The unfortunate among us know that Patent litigation is a way to bankrupt under-capitalized competitors. The beauty of this tactic is that most of it stays out of the media and the litigant typically repeats the litigation a variety of ways until the competitor is bankrupt. My definition of "patent troll" would include the fat, lazy and well-capitalized.

      So, "patent troll" is a pretty big umbrella.

      --
      http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
    2. Re:Maybe I'm missing something . . . by Asic+Eng · · Score: 3, Insightful
      I'd be nice to go after patent trolls; but there really isn't much to get them on

      Sure there is:

      • Troll sues or pressures a company X to get money
      • "Article One" approaches X, and offers to invalidate the troll's patent
      • Profit! (really)
  3. Re:Great by zappepcs · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Not quite like ambulance chasing. This is a reward for helping to see that the patent system gets the information it needs to work as it was designed. That is like outsourcing patent examiners, in an after the fact mode.

    --
    Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
  4. Make Money Fast by dattaway · · Score: 3, Funny

    Its the Prior Art Generator. Its only fair. They have infinite computers to generate infinite patents, but now you can hit reload until you win that $50,000:

    http://thesurrealist.co.uk/priorart.cgi

  5. Re:Great by $RANDOMLUSER · · Score: 3, Informative

    Like outsourcing patent examiners after the fact that the real patent examiners have failed to do their job and issued a patent for something that had prior art.

    --
    No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
  6. Re:Great by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In an alternate universe where ambulance chasing improves the quality of patents, sure.

  7. Annoying Corporate Buzzwords by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny
    That's it! 'Crowdsourcing' just made the list!
    1. Synergy
    2. Paradigm
    3. Web 2.0
    4. SOA
    5. [some application] Killer
    6. Governance
    7. Cloud Computing
    8. Crowdsourcing
  8. Anti Patent Trolling by troll8901 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Another organization: Peer-to-Patent (aka Community Patent Review)

    Currently a pilot project, renewed once per year, as long as it's useful.

  9. Then it's not Prior Art by pavon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    For something to be considered prior art it must have been publicly available in some form. For example, a released product is prior art, a prototype or in-house product is not. A paper published in a journal is prior art, a internal whitepaper or lab notebook is not.

    While the courts to accept internal schematics, code and documentation as evidence that a released product is implemented in a certain way and thus prior art for a certain patent, they would not consider a product that has never been released as prior art.

    That is what the first-to-file rules changed - when multiple people apply for overlapping patents all the other internal documentation that is not considered prior art is now only looked at if it was created within a year before the patent was filed. In the past it was looked at much farther back to determine who invented a product first, but only in the case of multiple filers. Even before the change, it wasn't prior art, and thus couldn't invalidate a patent if the other party never filed for a patent.

  10. Re:Great by kosty · · Score: 3, Informative

    Off-topic, I know, but in response to the rhetorical question: "Do cops get a percentage cut of any drug money they capture?" Personally? Not exactly -- legally, anyway -- but ...

    Cops rake in millions from drug busts
    Report: Cops Keeping Drug Money

    --
    "Democracy." It's just a slogan.