Slashdot Mirror
Facebook Ordered To Turn Over Source Code
consonant writes "A Delaware District Court judge has ordered Facebook to turn over ALL its source code to Leader Technologies, who allege patent infringements by Facebook. The patent in question appears to be for 'associating a piece of data with multiple categories.'
Additionally, while the judge in question deems it fine to let Leader Technologies look at Facebook's source (for a patent, no less!) in its entirety for a single feature, it would be 'overboard to ask a patent holder to disclose all of their products that practice any claim of the patent-in-suit.'"
Looks like all those "campaign contributions" had their intended effect.
Maybe one day someone will bribe our elected officials to do the right thing.
If we're getting to the point where people are winning cases because they've effectively patented a design pattern, then we're all in trouble.
I mean, "associating a piece of data with multiple categories" -- sounds like every relational database schema on the planet to me.
Facebook should hire some of Diebold's lawyers. They're really good at keeping source private.
Anyone wanna take bets on how long until Leader Technologies comes out with their own social networking site that looks very similar to Facebook, and gets sued for having some technology that infringes on a Facebook patent?
But seriously, shouldn't the court be trying to determine infringement, rather than letting the plaintiff view every piece of code Facebook has written? That's almost like saying "Microsoft infringed on 'using a scroll bar'; let Red Hat view all of the source for Windows so Red Hat can make sure it's not infringing." - if Windows were the only product Microsoft had. It's a crazy statement to make. In industrial terms, it sounds even worse: "Caterpillar might be infringing on a patent for 'method of transporting hydraulic fluid'; give Mitsubishi all of their blueprints for every one of their products so they can make sure it's not infringing".
If you didn't catch it, did you notice the 'obviousness' factor in those examples? Associating data into multiple categories seems pretty obvious, as databases have been doing just that for a long time.
So they basically claim they have a patent on the one-to-many Foreign Key?
"associating a piece of data with multiple categories"?
Are you kidding me?! So when I create a database table that allows me associate a record with multiple categories I'm infringing on this patent? Surely this isn't the whole story... could someone smarter than me fill me in please?
I am going to go patent taking a wiz in the morning. Apparently prior art doesn't mean anything.
TFA goes on to state:
So it isn't quite as outrageous as TFS makes it appear.
Caveat Utilitor
While I agree that Facebook is the first well implemented piece of social software of its niche, what is so novel about its design but its momentum?
Does it have anything to do with PHP? Hadoop?
Facebook could be implemented with standard DBMS like MySQL right?
try login when I can be bothered - once a week.
I think there are a few Open source social web networks:
http://mashable.com/2007/07/25/open-source-social-platforms/
I find the Frontpage annoying because originally I couldn't work out how to only display things from friends I choose, a whitelist rather than a blacklist. It's actually easy:
Make a list of friends that you want to see updates for and then on the homepage move it to the very top on the left menu. Unintuitive but it works.
Slashdot needs Geekcode | Can anyone recommend any good SCIFI? My tastes: Foundation, Startide Rising, CITY, Ringworld,
Are those multiple tags I see against the summary?
Source, now!
biopowered.co.uk - catalytically cracking triglycerides for home automotive use since 2008. Just say no to big oil!
Of "associating a piece of data with multiple categories" sounds suspiciously like tags.
They'll come for slashcode next!
I've got both hands in the air.
While we're on a reform kick in this country maybe we could undertake patent reform.
Slashdot is infringing on my patent of encoding information about people, places in a binary format that uses the numbers 1 and 0.
A computer-implemented network based system that facilitates management of data, comprising:
a computer-implemented context component of the network based system for capturing context information associated with user-defined data created by user interaction of a user in a first context of the network based system, the context component dynamically storing the context information in metadata associated with the user-defined data, the user defined data and metadata stored on a storage component of the network-based system; and
a computer-implemented tracking component of the network-based system for tracking a change of the user from the first context to a second context of the network-based system and dynamically updating the stored metadata based on the change, wherein the user access the data from the second context.
Neat!
Now if Facebook doesn't pay up, a leaked copy of its source code will appear all over teh interwebs.
It's in your best interests to pay, see?
The nations leading farmers have sued facebook over Farmville applications and their use of HBGC hormone (human butt grown into chair).
Don't anthropomorphize computers: they hate that.
Having a judge presiding on a case whose technical details he is wholly ignorant of strikes me as terribly dumb. A judge in this case is basing his understanding of the facts upon the testimony of lawyers and expert witnesses. It's very likely both sides are lying their fucking asses off --excuse me, I mean shading the facts through a bias filter.
Judges these days make Night Court look like the gold standard for jurisprudence.
Kwisatz Haderach
Sell the spice to CHOAM
This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
Cause if so, I definitely am intersted in getting ' paws upon that source... ----'The Spice Must Flow'---
I'm going to file a patent on "A series of tubes( not a big truck) that are designed to handle enormous amounts of material in a serialized manner, so that when you put your message in, it gets in line and it's going to be delayed by anyone that puts into that tube enormous amounts of material. "
After reading through the '761 patent, any operating system which initiates a user working-space at login, e.g., a shell, will fall under the main claim of this patent.
I do not understand why Facebook's legal team has not been able to invalidate this patent via the presentation of prior art.
This patent should have never been issued and should not be defensible.
-Todd
Omne ignotum pro magnifico.
Seeing these patent-trolling tards walking around downtown Wilmington.
WTH? If the patent is truly worded "Associating pieces of data with different categories" Then why the heck isn't this a prior work. Every database since the dawn of databases is about associating pieces of data with different categories.
Due to the extreme harm of allowing a potential competitor access to its family jewels, Facebook might try for an interlocutory appeal or asking that a court appoint an independent special master to examine the source code and determine if there is any code that is potentially infringing, and only allowing Facebook access to that code.
Interlocutory appeals aren't easy, but a special master might be easier to get, especially if Facebook offered to foot the bill.
Even if that fails, Facebook can ask that those who see the code be under NDA and be prohibited from doing anything related to software development for the plaintiff for a period of time without court supervision.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
If this is part of Discovery, then the requirement to turn over the code should be to the plaintiff's attorneys, not to the plaintiff. And the plaintiff doesn't actually get to see it themselves.
At least, that's how it worked in SCO vs IBM.
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
Tagging posts here in ./ is clearly associating a piece of data (the post) to multiple categories (the tags). CmdrTaco, prepare yourself to disclose all ./ source code and to pay a hefty check to Leader Technologies.
I'm looking at the patent now, and while it's not rocket science, it's nowhere near as simple as "associating a piece of data with multiple categories". In fact, that quote is from the article, not the patent. The patent mentions nothing of the sort. The patent seems to be about maintaining metadata across multiple application contexts and updating the context appropriately. It seems pretty wishy-washy, and I think it is too broad for a patent. But it's nothing like the mirage that has got everyone here foaming at the mouth. It's NOT a patent for associating a piece of data with multiple categories. It's more like a patent for a web application API framework, if I understand the gobbledy gook at all...
LS
There is a fine line between being a cultivated citizen and being someone else's crop. - A. J. Patrick Liszkie
"associating a piece of data with multiple categories" Seriously could that be anymore vague? Perhaps they should sue the W3C for creating the SELECT > OPTION dropdown box in HTML while they're at it.
"During My Service In The United States Congress, I Took The Initiative In Creating The Internet." -Al Gore
"citations to more than 100 screenshots, making it illustrative." That's the key. I can imagine some 80 year old judge in East Texas who thinks Facebook is like a high school year book presiding over this. Leader Tech had to dumb down all of this so the judge can understand. Therefore, they make a lot of screenshots and make use of a lot of pointing/hand waving. (See this button here that says "find friends"? This button infringes on our patented button on our webpage that says "find relatives") Meanwhile the judge is thinking "Oh, that button is like the other button on that picture and they WERE granted a patent for this button so obviously Facebook stole it!"
Force everyone to disclose source code in order to gain patent or copyright protection. If all protected code is in plain view, it wouldn't hurt any particular patent or copyright holder, and it would be much easier to detect illegal use.
After all, it's not like it's impossible to copy even the most obfuscated code. Those in China selling Windows for $3 don't seem to be deterred by it, and the vast majority of users have no interest in compiling the code anyway.
This should be tagged with goodluckwiththat.
Excuse me, but isn't there a TON of prior art in this arena, for example, RDBMS and object oriented database systems have done this from the very beginning. What the heck is an RDBMS good for if you can't actually use or display associated objects?
ZOMG! It's being done on a community building site! We'd better patent it because it's a revolutionary concept!
It should fail litmus tests for patents on several grounds:
* Prior art
* Obvious to those skilled in the trade
* is pretty much the whole point of HTML and RDBMS in the first place
* is the whole point of SQL
* is the whole point of being able to test variables if strcmp(strInformation1,strInformation2) {then do something with the result}, etc.
That the patent office granted a patent for associating related data objects at this point is an epic fail underscoring the need for real patent reform.
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
... on a computer!
Looks like the patent judge through the book in Facebook's face. And they'd better face up to it, or they'll surely be booked. Unless the judge does an about-face to save face, but I'm not going to call my bookie just yet. This whole issue is facetious, but I'm going to bookmark it for teh lulz.
Be relentless!
Did ANYONE even read the patent? I'm looking at the patent now, and while it's not rocket science, it's nowhere near as simple as "associating a piece of data with multiple categories". In fact, that quote is from the article, not the patent.
It's a software patent, and therfor, to all of us not living in the United States, laughable.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
Next they'll want the source code for GMail to see if it's infringing on their patent by associating e-mails with multiple "labels".
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
"associating a piece of data with multiple categories"
Uh, yea, it's called meta-tagging. Does this mean every website, every search engine and every ECM solution that meta-tags or employs a common taxonomy or folksonomy is infringing on this patent?
What if I told you we patented Facebook, LinkedIn and all the like back in 2001? Would that be prior art even to this patent?
That's soooo funny how can they even use there code as code is code in the end they can always say this function is exactly the same as my function that is BS as all code when you break down is just push and pop.
That's an insane patent to have been granted. The fact that the patent holder is asserting that Facebook is infringing it without having seen their source code is extremely telling - the patent holder appears well aware that the patent (which should never have been granted) is so broad as to cover functionality rather than implementation and therefore anyone who appears to be doing what the patent covers is almost certainly infringing it.
It's as is the patent office granted someone a patent on cracking nuts as opposed to a specific nutcracker design, and the lucky patent holder would then be in a position to go after anyone selling shelled nuts on the grounds that they must have shelled them, ergo they must have violated their patent. Of course nuts, unlike software claims decribed in obfusctated legalese, are easy to understand. I'm 100% positive one could describe assigning a value to a variable in such a complex way, accounting for all possible implenentations, semantics, etc, etc, that some moron at the patent office would think it sounded like a highly technical and specific discovery and no-doubt patent worthy. I think I'll go apply for a patent of comments right now ("in the 42nd embodiment, a source code file, stored in EBDIC format on a USB storage device, embeds self-descriptive components, that will be automatically stripped by the FORmula TRANslation language lexical analyzer, ...").
Given how complex software is, and how difficult it is for lay people to understand it, and given that the patent office in granting things like this make it obvious that they do not have software experts examining these patents, it seems that the whole notion of software patents needs to be reexamined. They are really doing more harm than good, and the intent of patents to encourage innovation is being subverted rather than helped by software patents. The patent office doesn't seem to understand the process of software design/development at all.
Well, my source code does that too. Here it is for all to review:
main ();
function main() {
printf("FUCK YOU\n");
main();
}
Many judges clearly don't have the required tehcnical knowledge to make informed decisions in cases like this.
What we need is an addition to the current court system, to provide special courts with tech-savvy judges to hear cases that are technical in nature.
All they need to do is hire an expert, that will make sure that
a) trial goes on for many, many years
b) no source code is ever published
c) Microsoft buys several of their licences, without actually gettting anything in return
I'm gonna get a "First Post" patent and bring slashdot to its knees.
"Why, of course you can see the source code. But no, you can't view it out of this courthouse room. And yes, it's all printed out for you in three ring binders. No, no real organization -- we pretty much just dumped the precompile code and libraries at random into the printer and broke it into 250 page binders. I realize there's no room for a desk with all these boxes of binders, but there's plenty of space for your reviewer to step into the room and close the door. He can make annotations on a clipboard."
Don't copy that floppy!
Can Facebook simply provide the source code in obfuscated form? As long as the compiler can parse it then it counts as source code right?
People who are in any way involved in software development should NEVER read patents. Only a patent lawyer is allowed to have an opinion on whether you violate one, only a judge can say for sure, and it triples your liability.
I wish they would shut that shit down. Tell all of the assholes using fuckbook to go get a life.
Didn't SCO try this?
Where I can ignore the insane US patent system.
Seriously, someone needs to explain the process of object-oriented
domain modelling, analysis, and design to the USPTO, and explain
how virtually every outcome of such a process is "obvious to a qualified
practitioner in the field." These patents on every "complicated-seeming"
computer system that uses basic symbolic modelling of a domain and
implements a few obvious methods on the objects, are ridiculous
beyond belief, and one can take no position on these patents
except to studiously ignore them.
Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
Oh dear, /. is in violation. Imagine that, /. without tags.
Her lips were softer than a duck's bill, but her quacks
Software patents is pure nonsense. We have patents for one reason - to stimulate innovation. It is not about fairness or about protecting anyones interests in particular. Societies protect patents out of self interest, because it stimulate research in some areas. This would be the case in an area such as medical research where it cost billions to research a new drug. This is mostly not the case for software For most innovations in software research is dead cheap. You more or less need a PC and you have your own lab. Software patents do not stimulate innovation they curb innovation. No software patents please.
for i have patented breathing. pay up or choke
You know, it goes to show, how little the judges making decisions on these types of cases really know about technology, let alone software technology, where simply put, someone could easily swipe whatever facebook developed, and resell it on the open market...
Facebook did (like so many other companies) use many copy and paste code lines from about everywhere they could find, however, ...a song which belongs in the rock category and metal category, would make windows media player go through the same thing as facebook, should they ever want REAL money for their infringement.
for someone to say specifically it belongs to them, I know many different applications which uses categories to a piece of data.
It really is not something you can patent,
not mutually exclusive
Don't forget about IBM: http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/10/20/1031236&from=rss
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
So the patent, and problem, is with associating a piece of data with multiple categories. Wouldn't a 1-to-many relationship in an RDBMS be exactly that - rendering any such ridiculous patent moot due to prior art? Or is every database designer and user about to get sued by these clowns?
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
user-defined data created by user interaction of a user
Just in case user you didn't user get user it user user user user ...
First, the problem that they're attempting to address with this patent: when you create a document or receive an email, it's up to you to categorize that document or email by whatever context (category/job fuction/etc) is appropriate...like sales or engineering. Usually this is done by creating categorized folders to stick the files or emails or whatever into.
Their solution: When you're working on something on your computer (using their technology), you're doing so within a certain context. For example you might be working on Sales, Marketing, or Software Developement, etc. So if your current working context is Marketing, everything you create while in that context is automatically associated with Marketing. If you send someone an email, it's automatically tagged as related to Marketing, so there is no need for you or the recipient to stuff it into a Marketing folder for filing. When you switch contexts from Marketing to Sales, all the content you create is then tagged as Sales, so once again, there is no need for the user to organize their stuff.
It sounds like their idea also provides for things to be associated with multiple contexts, and workspaces can be created that cover multiple contexts, so things get tagged accordingly. Also, it allows for manual tagging.
I can't really think of how this applies to Facebook...and Leader Technologies doesn't appear to have an active product that does any of this. What do you guys think about my interpretation?
Don't take life so seriously. No one makes it out alive.
Last time I checked, facebook isn't a trade secret. Hello, 1993 calling, they want their glorified forums shoutbox back.
The Pointrel system, using contexts to associate triadal data, is a project I first put on SourceForge in 2001, but has roots going back much longer:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/pointrel/
http://pointrel.sourceforge.net/
"The Pointrel Data Repository System includes a triadal data storage system. A triad is an object with three links defined in a context. These links can point to arbitrary strings. When strings (especially uniquely generated ones) are treated as nodes, triads can build arbitrarily complex structures, as well as add to these structures at any time. Using triads, one can build arbitrary complex networks of relationships. These dynamic relationships can define the equivalent of records or objects in a database."
A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
i dont want the source code protecting my privacy given to some jackshit company i do not know.
"leader the intellectual capital company" after reading that outloud my coworker says "might as well label yourself 'patient troll'"
Notwithstanding the usefulness of the above-described methods, a need still exists for a communications tool that associates files generated by applications with individuals, groups, and topical context automatically.
Automatic association of files with users and groups has been a common feature of file systems since the beginning. The most notable file system missing this feature is FAT, used by DOS and older versions of Windows. As to the topical context, I know most file systems support user/application defined metadata. So that is covered as well.
As to the patent claims, it sounds like they are describing Google Web Apps.
Request a Linux Shockwave player here: http://www.macromedia.com/support/email/wishform/
Im sure someone can find prior art for this and get it tossed out. Data normalization is, um, well normal practice.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
We? Is you royalty? Or art ye Borg?
Choice schmoice, the outcome is the same.
What you're saying comes down to this: if you commit suicide you're less dead than if someone murders you.
Sorry, don't think so. But if you wish to prove it experimentally, don't let me stop you ... just check there's nobody below you when you jump - their genes might be worth preserving.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Gee, I guess that they're going to have to go after the publisher of PackRat (AKA Tornado Notes), because it did the same thing way back in 1985, on MS-DOS, with no GUI. Oh, waitaminnit.... That pre-dates the patent by nearly a decade.
Time for that judge to retire. Hes a clueless fool who has overstepped his boundries.
Wouldn't it be just awful if they "accidentally" deleted all of their source! Here ya go Leader, decompile and reverse engineer all you like.
Meanwhile, the source just happens to be on a flash drive along with The Sword of a Thousand Truths.
Homonyms are fun!
You're driving your car, but they're riding their bikes there.
The order doesn't state what format they have to send the code in.
Convert it to EBCDIC, dump it to punch cards, then send them by fax... in the wrong order.
It should only take about a thousand years.
fix the problem.
Unfortunately, somebody has patented it, so I can't discuss it here without fear of getting sued. So sorry...
If this kind of crap is allowed to continue, then sadly I hope that the world does come to an end in 2012. There will be nothing left for humanity to do but twiddle our thumbs if the patenting thoughts and ideas is allowed to continue like this (oops too late...).
And both the patent lawyer and judge get paid either way. Either way you loose. Stick with software development outside this US...
In other news Facebook relocates its servers outside the US.
The Grey Goo disaster happened 3 billion years ago. This rock is covered in self replicating machines!
Tell the judge to fuck off.
Tell him "put my ass in jail, but you have NO FRICKING CLUE what you're talking about."
When a judge is as fucking ridiculous as this one, there should be no charge of contempt of court: the court IS contemptible. Period.
Too bad you can't fucking patent that.
Who are these asshole moron judges?
Or maybe Americans involved in developing software should start looking for the exit. There are doubtless many countries out there with less insane & draconian intellectual monopoly regimes, that would be happy to have an influx of talented programmers.
Otoh, I haven't yet followed my own advice....