EFF Busts Illegitimate Subdomain Patent

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."

Comments

The obvious question.

[Thanshin]

Just one clarification is needed.

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

Is it just me...

[GreenTech11]

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

Donate to us, because we got a patent revoked.

Re:Is it just me...

[Ltap]

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.

Re:Is it just me...

[qortra]

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.

Re:The EFF isn't entirely protecting our rights

[russotto]

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.

The list of the shameless "inventors" is

[slashdotmsiriv]

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 ...

Re:Finally!

[clone53421]

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

Re:The EFF isn't entirely protecting our rights

[bughunter]

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...