Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

EFF Busts Illegitimate Subdomain Patent

Posted by kdawson on from the method-and-device-for-breathing-in-then-breathing-out dept.

eldavojohn writes "Unlike a lot of community support protection programs, the EFF's Patent Busting Project is starting to bear real fruit instead of just leveling the finger at offenders. The USPTO is revoking an illegitimate patent granted in 2004 that sounds like automatically assigning subdomains. Sites like Wordpress, LiveJournal, or basically anyone with generated subdomains have been doing this for quite some time. If you have some extra cash, now's the time to pony up a few bucks so the EFF can carry on as one of the few organizations genuinely protecting your interests."

20 of 96 comments (clear)

  1. The obvious question. by Thanshin · · Score: 5, Funny

    Just one clarification is needed.

    Will donation money be used to send ninjas to the offending party?

    1. Re:The obvious question. by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 2, Funny

      Legal ninjas, yes.

      You sure about that? I don't think ninjas are legal, not even in Japan!

      --
      My blog
    2. Re:The obvious question. by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 2, Funny

      -1 Too early.

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    3. Re:The obvious question. by Xtifr · · Score: 3, Informative

      will the patent examiners who approved this one be fired for incompetence?

      Probably not because they probably weren't. The patent was issued in 2004 under the guidelines that obtained at that time. KSR v Teleflex, which redefined the rules for determining obviousness, was only decided in 2007. If they issued this patent today (or at any time post-KSR), then we might be able to make a case for gross incompetence, but as it is, I think the examiners were just doing their job as it was defined at the time. Blame for the messed up state of affairs we used to have goes much higher up.

  2. their next patent request by Ritz_Just_Ritz · · Score: 3, Insightful

    A method to autonomously direct the expansion and contraction of lungs for the purpose of oxygen extraction.

  3. Is it just me... by GreenTech11 · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Is it just me, or is this essentially a fundraising article?

    Donate to us, because we got a patent revoked.

    --
    Laughter is the best medicine, except if you have a broken rib.
    1. Re:Is it just me... by Ltap · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Not to me - it's proof that they can actually do what they say. Although, depending on how you look at it, every article is a fundraising article.

      --
      Yet Another Tech Blog
      (but so much more, including game and movie reviews)
      http://yanteb.peasantoid.org
    2. Re:Is it just me... by qortra · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It didn't read that way to me either.

      But it occurs to me that even if it did, that wouldn't be such a bad thing. Any organization that exists through donations really ought to prove that they're worth a donation. This is once piece of evidence that the EFF is worth your money.

      Moreover, to those people who have already donated, this is a form of accountability. Articles like this tell those people that they have not wasted their money - it is being put to good use doing the work that organization was created to do.

    3. Re:Is it just me... by eldavojohn · · Score: 3, Informative

      Is it just me, or is this essentially a fundraising article?

      As a regular submitter, I assure you that when I wrote the fourth sentence as nothing but a request for donations I had no idea anyone would bother to read that far into the summary.

      Disclaimer: I do not work for the EFF but I do send them a twenty every now and then.

      Donate to us, because we got a patent revoked.

      I was hoping it would sound more like "Donate to us because we can get more patents revoked." And really, who else is working towards that? Once the USPTO grants a patent, it's done. They don't get as much from me as I give to public radio or open source software but I'll give them some change to fight that fight.

      --
      My work here is dung.
    4. Re:Is it just me... by qortra · · Score: 3, Insightful

      [GP] it's proof that they can actually do what they say.

      [P] One case is hardly proof

      If they say that they can successfully thwart illegitimate patent, of course it is. If I say I can do 'X', and I do 'X', have I not proved my claim? Do you think that there's some larger claim that they can thwart 42 patents? I haven't seen any.

      I just think that this rather blatant advertising.

      By whom? Infozine? Did you even read the article, or are you saying this purely based on the summary? I see you already got a response from the submitter himself, so I won't bother explaining to you here the difference between advertising vs advocacy.

    5. Re:Is it just me... by The+End+Of+Days · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It only counts as a Slashvertisement when the hivemind is upset that it doesn't promote the locally accepted viewpoint. When it's the EFF it's just good community thinking because all right-minded people agree with them.

  4. The EFF isn't entirely protecting our rights by Jay+Maynard · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'll donate to the EFF when they get a clue about spam. Their official position is that spam is protected free speech, and measures to fight it are far worse than the problem. They don't understand that spam is highly destructive to the net as a form of communication.

    --
    Disinfect the GNU General Public Virus!
    1. Re:The EFF isn't entirely protecting our rights by russotto · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'll donate to the EFF when they get a clue about spam. Their official position is that spam is protected free speech, and measures to fight it are far worse than the problem.

      Perhaps because in many cases, they are. Anti-spammers often end up "destroying the village in order to save it", doing things like blacklisting legitimate mail users and then refusing to talk to them on the grounds that they are spammers. The one actual spam case I recall the EFF getting involved in, was one where sending an e-mail to a company was ruled to be a "tresspass against chattels". That sort of ruling would be far more destructive to communication than spammers; it would mean you'd committed a actionable offense any time someone didn't like an e-mail you sent them.

    2. Re:The EFF isn't entirely protecting our rights by MobyDisk · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The EFF is not there to fight spam. It has nothing to do with their mission. That's like a gun owner refusing to donate to the NRA because of they don't do anything to stop spam.

    3. Re:The EFF isn't entirely protecting our rights by bughunter · · Score: 4, Informative

      I'm giving up mod privileges to post this. But nobody has made this point, so I need to.

      The flaw in your argument is your failure to recognize that the spam "solutions" that the EFF have opposed were worse than the spam problem. Solutions that restrict rights online or which are so vague as to permit abuse in non-spam situations are more dangerous than a few hundred pen!s oil ads.

      The EFF are one of the few NPOs that I give to, because they actually are effective and coincide with my values. If they don't coincide with yours, fine. Don't give. I also advise that you don't trash talk them either, at least not here...

      --
      I can see the fnords!
  5. Any chance at getting money back? by davidwr · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If someone licensed the patent for a period extending past the date of revocation, can they successfully sue for a pro-rated refund?

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  6. extra cash? by sdaemon · · Score: 2, Funny

    what is this "extra cash" of which you speak?

  7. The list of the shameless "inventors" is by slashdotmsiriv · · Score: 5, Informative

    Brian Shuster, Johnson Leong, Matthew Price, Brian Lam, Desmond Ford Johnson.

    So that their names show up in this /. post every time somebody googles them ...

    1. Re:The list of the shameless "inventors" is by fpgaprogrammer · · Score: 2, Informative

      If you actually do a google search for "Brian Shuster Ideaflood Inc" you find this article about a porn-baron with a patent for pop-up ads. Truly a modern day Nikolai Tesla...

      (From http://www.out-law.com/page-3551):

      Ideaflood Inc. is an intellectual property holding company owned by Brian Shuster. He previously ran porn web sites that were accused by the Federal Trade Commission of deceptively charging customers. While he is said to have made millions from internet porn, with which he is still involved, he now sees Ideaflood's patents as his best potential revenue source.

      His pop-up ad patent application was filed in 1998 and granted in 2002. Last week, Shuster modestly told MSNBC news, "I apologise for being a pioneer."

  8. Re:Finally! by clone53421 · · Score: 4, Funny

    You're referring to the fact that kdawson actually posted a worthwhile article?

    --
    Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.