Twitter Faces Patent Infringement Lawsuit

Digital Dan writes "Twitter is being sued for patent infringement. Surprised? OK, probably not, but you'd think the plaintiff would at least wait for Twitter to actually make money before striking. According to TechCrunch: 'Twitter is being sued ... by TechRadium, a Texas-based technology company which makes mass notification systems for public safety organizations, the military, and utilities.' The abstract to patent #7130389 describes it: 'A digital notification and response system utilizes an administrator interface to transmit a message from an administrator to a user contact device. The system comprises a dynamic information database that includes user contact data, priority information, and response data. The administrator initiates distribution of the message based upon grouping information, priority information, and the priority order.' Two other patents are involved as well."

Comments

Ummm....Robo-callers perhaps?

[Gorm the DBA]

I would think automated Robotic Calling programs, which have been around for...sheesh...at least a decade now...would qualify as prior art here.

I acknowledge that at least the suing company is in the market of actually selling something to 911's, EMS's and the like, and the increasing use of twitter for "Follow me for important safety updates" is probably cutting into their business...dramatically....but...I don't think this lawsuit deserves legs.

Re:I for one...

[zrelativity]

What you think is irrelevant. Read the patents in question, read the claims (and how it is refined by the body), then let us know the relevant prior art. Better even, draw up a claim chart with every single element of the claim, as I am sure TechRadium would have done.

Re:pager?

[MightyMartian]

Fuck, it sounds like the text messaging on frickin' cell phone.

Message/alert systems have been around for decades. I remember working on a Xenix box with a half a dozen dumb terminals attached and we could zap messages back and forth.

When will everyone come to their senses and start making fraudulent patent applications criminal offenses with crippling fines and jail time?

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Look at claims, NOT the abstract

[AliasMarlowe]

Here's a clue for all of you that posted so far: The abstract of a patent is not the patent, and means diddly-squat in court. It's the CLAIMS that are important (how many times does this need to be repeated here?). In fact, abstracts are NOT supposed to describe the exact material that the patent claims as an invention, but to describe generally the area of the patent.
Here's the second clue: the patent has one independent claim (claim 1), and all other claims are specificly narrowed cases of claim 1. Here's claim 1:

1. A digital notification and response system, comprising:
a. an administrator interface for preparing and transmitting a message from an administrator to at least one user contact device;
b. a dynamic information database for storing the message, wherein the dynamic information database comprises;
i. user contact data comprising:
1. user contact device information; and
2. user selected priority information that indicates a contact order for the user contact device;
ii. user selected grouping information comprising:
1. at least one group associated with each user contact device; and
2. a priority order for contacting each user contact device within the group;
iii. response data comprising:
1. user response information that indicates individual user contact devices have received the message; and
2. response information that indicates when insufficient user contact device information exists to contact the user contact devices;
wherein the administrator initiates distribution of the message using the grouping information, priority information, and the priority order, and wherein the message is transmitted through at least two industry standard gateways simultaneously, wherein the two industry standard gateways are selected from the group consisting of: a SMTP gateway a SIP, an H.323, an ISDN gateway, a PSTN gateway, a softswitch, and combinations thereof, wherein the message is received by the at least one user contact device, and the at least one user contact device transmits a response through the industry standard gateways to the dynamic information database.

Now, to interpret the meaning of the claims, it is necessary to read the specification, to see if the terms used have special definitions. Studying the exemplary embodiments described in the specification may also be informative (or not, depending).

Re:I for one...

[Smidge204]

People who are pressured to meet review quotas despite being severely understaffed, underfunded, and severely backlogged all while not being - or having access to - anything approaching an expert in the appropriate technologies.

The USPTO has been unable to keep up and apparently resorts to strictly procedural methods for approval. Dot your "i"s and cross your "t"s and I bet you could get anything patented nowadays.
=Smidge=

Has /. become ...

[neonprimetime]

... the official newsite for ridiculous lawsuits?

Student Sues cause she's unemployable
Student Sues amazon
Touchpad patent holder sues everybody
Family Sues Genie
Wells Fargo Sues Itself
Rosetta Stone Sues Google
City Sues Man for rotting meat


Keep in mind those stories were all in the last 30 days!