US PTO Gives Microsoft Credit For Lotus's Homework

theodp writes "On Tuesday, the USPTO granted Microsoft a patent for 'Email Emotiflags' despite ample evidence of a circa-1996 Lotus Notes precedent called Mood Stamps — sender-chosen emoticons that appear next to inbox messages. Among those seemingly aware of the existence of Mood Stamps is Microsoft Chief Software Architect Ray Ozzie, who appears to have fielded questions about the feature while at Lotus. While simply Googling for 'Email Emotiflags' would have turned up evidence of this prior art (including a Slashdot discussion), the USPTO came up empty after instead going with the more-upscale Google Scholar and patent databases for its search effort. Think we can count on Ozzie to do the right thing and give the USPTO a heads-up?"

Comments

Clearly Slashdot is better than Google

[BadAnalogyGuy]

The USPTO should really rely on Slashdot more often to flush out these illegal patents.

Counting on Ray Ozzie to come to Lotus' defense is a fool's errand, though. Like all the once-luminary personalities that got bought by Microsoft, he belongs to them and will serve their interests instead of our own. :-)

Re:Clearly Slashdot is better than Google

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

Legally speaking, there is a duty to disclose any known prior art when filing a patent. In theory, we shouldn't have to depend on him doing the right thing, merely the legal one(typically a lower standard).

Re:Clearly Slashdot is better than Google

[pushing-robot]

The USPTO has already stated that they won't be doing real prior art checks themselves. And why would they? They're self-funded, and each patent they grant is more money for them.

The way I see it, the USPTO got their money, Microsoft got an extra patent to impress their shareholders, and anybody else who wants to use similar technology would have a rock-solid legal defense. It's not the way it should work, but it works.

Re:Clearly Slashdot is better than Google

[MightyMartian]

Yes, it's a self-serving, unethical system. And that's the problem.

In my world, if you knowingly filed a patent with prior art, you would be fined 10% of your gross worth, you would be forbidden for filing any patent for a period of not less than 10 years, and any officer on your company would be forbidden to file any patents for 10 years, and any other company that they sat on would be forbidden for filing patents for 10 years, and any attempt to use another company (shell or partner) would be a criminal offense that would see your company stripped of all assets, you to spend no less than 10 years in federal prison and forbidden to ever have any direct or indirect dealings with the patent system ever again.

Re:Clearly Slashdot is better than Google

[Tanktalus]

You really shouldn't post off-the-cuff like that. Put some more thought into it, and see if you can't come up with something really nasty.

Re:Clearly Slashdot is better than Google

[Will.Woodhull]

What sanctions can be brought against Ozzie if it can be shown that he withheld knowledge of prior art? Can he personally see jail time for this?

Since this would be a Federal crime, how would Slashdot request an FBI investigation of Ozzie's allegedly criminal behavior? Should we put it to a vote or will someone just step forward and do whatever is necessary to inform the FBI?

Re:Clearly Slashdot is better than Google

[dgatwood]

I think that by focusing on prior art, you are all missing the real point of this story. This shows why software patents are sometimes good. This patent ensures beyond a reasonable doubt that grotesque user interface abuses like this one never make it into any generally accepted standard....

I keep hearing it's a new Microsoft

[just_another_sean]

Think we can count on Ozzie to do the right thing and give the USPTO a heads-up?"

I keep hearing it's a new Microsoft so maybe.

Ah crap who am I kidding... I'm betting no.

Criminal charges

[Norsefire]

There needs to be tougher (and by tougher I mean "some") penalties to stop patent nonsense like this. If a patent is applied for and prior art exists there should be criminal convictions (huge, EU-like fines) as a result. Then companies would have to do their homework before they file for a patent, instead of the current situation where they use an idea that was used 10+ years ago and either the patent is rejected or the USPTO misses it and they get the patent.

If the later is true (and it seems to be, quite a lot of the time) and they try to sue and prior art is turned up during the trial, there should be penalties strong enough deter cases like that, eg. If the defendant is not guilty because the patent is invalid the CEO goes to jail.

And then you may as well hang an "out of business" sign on the doors of East Texas court houses.

Failed plaintiff case should compensate defenders

[cryfreedomlove]

I've been involved in a few patent litigations. They almost always settle out of court or the plaintiff loses outright in court. The problem is that even when the defense 'wins' the case, they still spend millions in that defense. Why not force the plaintiff to compensate the defense for causing them to waste so much money?

There Is a Possibility You Overlook

[eldavojohn]

Among those seemingly aware of the existence of Mood Stamps is Microsoft Chief Software Architect Ray Ozzie ...

Isn't it possible that (since he worked on the Lotus Notes project) Ray Ozzie is the originator of this idea and Lotus Notes did not have the foresight to patent this technology when he worked for them? Isn't it possible that he thought this idea patentable and in a better late than never fashion he patented it?

I don't think this is a novel idea and I think it should not be patentable ... I just find this summary to be very short sighted and subjective:

Think we can count on Ozzie to do the right thing and give the USPTO a heads-up?

What is "the right thing?" He works for a company with the priority to rake in cash. It's "right" in his boss' eyes, I'm sure.

Re:There Is a Possibility You Overlook

[Imagix]

Among those seemingly aware of the existence of Mood Stamps is Microsoft Chief Software Architect Ray Ozzie ...

Isn't it possible that (since he worked on the Lotus Notes project) Ray Ozzie is the originator of this idea and Lotus Notes did not have the foresight to patent this technology when he worked for them? Isn't it possible that he thought this idea patentable and in a better late than never fashion he patented it?

However his employment contact with Lotus likely had clauses about how Lotus owns the ideas since he came up with them in the context of being employed by Lotus.

Re:Failed plaintiff case should compensate defende

[shentino]

That's known as "loser pays" and will have such a chilling effect on frivolous litigation that the legal lobbies will not let it happen without a huge fight.

Merely suggesting it is political suicide.

that's not why the US patent system is broken

[viralMeme]

"It is a system where I can invent something, only to be told that I have to pay someone else if I want to use my own invention, because someone else thought of something just like it too. If being the first to develop something doesn't give you the edge in the market, then no patent will change that"

Filling in a bunch of forms isn't exactly inventing anything. That's not why it's broken. The reason the US patent system is broken is it allows anyone to patent nonsense such as the above, then wait until someone develops something tangible and then sue their asses off in court. It's known as the submarine patent ..

Once AGAIN, the summary leaves out key patent bits

[Janthkin]

First, the linked article doesn't render properly in Opera. Grrr. Second, here's the actual claim:

1. A system comprising:
a processor;
a memory;
an email application maintained in the memory and executed on the processor to perform a method, the method comprising:
receiving an email message having an associated emotiflag specified by the composer of the email message to indicate an emotion the composer intends to be associated with the email message as a whole wherein:
the email message comprises: a message body;
and header data, the header data comprising an email subject;
the emotiflag is separate from the message body and the email subject;
and the emotiflag comprises: a graphical icon;
and a text tag;
and a display device for rendering a representation of the received email message such that the emotiflag is rendered as part of the representation, wherein rendering the emotiflag comprises rendering the graphical icon and the text tag.

Looking at the (brief) summary of "Mood Stamps" linked by TFA, I don't see the emotiflag comprises: a graphical icon; and a text tag;, and I don't see wherein rendering the emotiflag comprises rendering the graphical icon and the text tag.

New article summary: "Microsoft receives a very narrow patent on an incremental improvement over Mood Stamps."

Re:Failed plaintiff case should compensate defende

[Desolation Row]

The US has a very strict "loser pays" structure, where "loser" is defined as taxpayers without their own personal lawyer and lobbyist militia.

Same feature was in MagicCap

[DdJ]

Essentially the same feature was built into the mail client of the MagicCap operating system, if I'm understanding what's being claimed.

I have a Sony PIC-1000, a Sony PIC-2000A, and a General Magic DataRover 840, and they all have this feature. Basically, when you're composing email (or in fact any other message -- email is not all that's supported), you can open a "stamp drawer" and drop "stamps" on the message to indicate any number of things. This could be done for purely cosmetic reasons, but it was also how you added metadata to the message. Particular stamps had code attached to them and could actually do things. And I think this goes all the way back to 1994.