Slashdot Mirror
Paul Allen Files Patent Suit Against Apple, Google, Yahoo, Others
mewshi_nya writes "A firm run by Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen filed suit alleging 11 technology companies are violating patents developed at a Silicon Valley lab that Allen financed more than a decade ago. Named in the lawsuit: Apple, Google, AOL, eBay, Facebook, Netflix, Office Depot, OfficeMax, Staples, Yahoo and Google's YouTube subsidiary. The suit doesn't name Microsoft, Amazon.com or other tech companies in Seattle where Allen is based, and it doesn't estimate a damage amount. The suit lists violations of four patents (PDF) for technology that appear to be key components of the operations of the companies — and that of e-commerce and Internet search companies in general."
For what reason has he waited all of this time to file said suit? It's not like the timing is great.... economy is still down, if he had waited a bit longer, perhaps the companies would have more money?
...or do the patent lawsuits that show up on /. seem frivolous to the point of absurdity?
If so, is that sample bias? Or are all patent lawsuits intrinsically ridiculous?
"I'd just like to emphasise that taking a million years isn't a metaphor here..." -Rich Bradshaw
I think this is a great idea. I hope he wins, and internet search and ecommerce are shut down en masse by injunction. Whee! Then we could have a nice look at this business of patents and how we feel about them.
I wonder, is there such a thing as an inverse class action - by which I mean, could a whole raft of internet companies join the defending side as a show of solidarity, claiming that if the current defendants are violating, then they are too?
That Allen was the non-evil guy from MS. Guess I was wrong.
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
Does he really need another ivory backscratcher that badly?
I like music
So Paul is running out of money, huh?
A snippet from the suit:
I haven't tried to follow all of the claims in that patent, but I did skim the first page. Based on what I read there and the summary in the snippet, I suspect that nearly every web site on the internet is violation. Going after Apple et. al. is a blatant attempt at a money grab. Not naming other companies that probably violate the same patents the same way is blatant favoritism.
Talk about a misuse of the system (which is already sorely misused, I know).
He's sued AOL, Apple, eBay, Facebook, Google, Netflix, Office Depot, OfficeMax, Staples, Yahoo and YouTube (so Google ... again!). For some strange reason he did not sue Microsoft. Here are the two primary super-genius patents representing ideas no one else could have come up with:
Having alerted you users all to these items of interest, I will now proceed to pay Paul Allen.
I read these patents as:
* Patenting text summarization.
* Patenting rating systems.
The idea that either of those is a patentable invention is absurd. Specific algorithms to do either one, sure, but you can't patent general concepts.
Yeah.
All of those companies certainly are violating Allen's patents. The problem is, those patents (completely irrespective of how you feel about software patents in general) should never have been granted -- there's just far too much prior art for each of the four.
I have patented suing for patent damages. And I won't license it to him.
Read for yourself:
http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PG01&p=1&u=/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=%2220080270152%22.PGNR.&OS=DN/20080270152&RS=DN/20080270152
This space for rent.
What gives him the idea he can take on a dozen major tech companies out of the Valley?
Good. Cheap. Fast. Pick Two.
TL;DR summing up
But the first patent '507 seems to be for "browsing audiovisual data" or a web browser
Patent '652 and '314 are patents for "Attention Manager for Occupying the Peripheral Attention of a Person in the Vicinity of a Display Device" or Advertisments.
Patent '682 is for "Alerting Users to Items of Current Interest." or Targeted Advertisements.
Yea you legally filed patents
No you can't patent advertising or web browsing
Sorry your claim is BS go back to your bridge you troll.
If Obama and Congress want to stimulate the US (and, really, the whole world) economy, the BEST thing they could do would be to invalidate all copyrights and patents that are more than 10 years old, and abolish ALL "business practice" patents, and ALL software patents.
Assignee: Halliburton Energy Services Inc.
I'd like to run this through my legalese relationship parser to generate some relational diagrams between the methods and the claims.
Something tells me there are some sploits to be found..
On July 17, 2001, United States Patent No. 6,263,507 (“the ’507 patent”) was duly and legally issued for an invention entitled “Browser for Use in Navigating a Body of Information, With Particular Application to Browsing Information Represented By Audiovisual Data.” Interval was assigned the ’507 patent and continues to hold all rights and interest in the ’507 patent.
On March 7, 2000, United States Patent No. 6,034,652 (“the ’652 patent”) was duly and legally issued for an invention entitled “Attention Manager for Occupying the Peripheral Attention of a Person in the Vicinity of a Display Device.” Interval was assigned the ’652 patent and continues to hold all rights and interest in the ’652 patent.
On September 7, 2004, United States Patent No. 6,788,314 (“the ’314 patent”) was duly and legally issued for an invention entitled “Attention Manager for Occupying the Peripheral Attention of a Person in the Vicinity of a Display Device.” Interval was assigned the ’314 patent and continues to hold all rights and interest in the ’314 patent.
On June 29, 2004, United States Patent No. 6,757,682 (“the ’682 patent”) was duly and legally issued for an invention entitled “Alerting Users to Items of Current Interest.” Interval was assigned the ’682 patent and continues to hold all rights and interest in the ’682 patent.
Thank You Mr. Luthor!
Where would we be if Wheel had hid her round rock in a cave instead of showing everyone how it rolls?
I killed Paul Allen with an axe in the face, his body is dissolving in a bathtub in Hell's Kitchen. TRY GETTING A RESERVATION AT DORSIA NOW YOU FUCKING STUPID BASTARD! YOU, FUCKING BASTARD!
I think software patents are pure, unadulterated crap, but I think the most likely reason that MS is not named in the suits is because MS licensed them already. For a penny.
If the USPTO continues to grant idiotic patents like these, very soon every company will start patenting everything all the time.
If they thought they have a backlog now, they have exciting times ahead.
"The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
Times must be tough if Paul Allen is running out of money too.
XKCD:Xeric Knowledge Comically Dispen
http://speechable.com/view?p=jl08790r
Microsoft and all of its previous cohorts / comrades / skinheads / nazis / etc.. have taught us that you can not take a shit with out a law suit. mostly because in the fine print somewhere in that damn eula it says they have already patented the mechanism for shiting. therefor and there hence no shitting; or we sue you.
and we thought just the microsoft boyz were bad...
more to come at 11:00
Eventually, either the economic conditions in the US will become so risky that it drives businesses elsewhere or there will be some sanity introduced.
Who want's to bet that the "sanity" further consolidated power and becomes worse that the current situation?
Regards.
If you skimed the first page, then you can't possibly know if anyone violates it. All of the claims in a patent have to be matched with the infringing product, otherwise its not infringed.
Violate one of his patents by using your browsers to highlight some disguised goat.cx links, Rick Astley videos and annoying sites with a million pop up windows with background music and send them to Paul Allen and his lawyers.
Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
Paul cant make any money off his old stock anymore
I mean, the '507 patent is absurd. It has no citations to pre-existing web browsing technologies, web sites or even mentions such prior art. It claims to invent a "news browsing invention", yet CNN was already online by 1995. Including AOL must have been gut wrenching as well - as they have had a graphical interface, news interfaces, and other graphical "browser" technology which had been developed since the Commodore 64 was a viable home PC. Plus AOL probably still holds some of the original Netscape patents as well.
I find it absurd that such an invention could even be a patent. The claims are useless, anyway.
The 6,034,652 patent might be positioned to reap some rewards - except is was filed in 1999! Online Advertising had already exploded onto the internet, early content management software already started blossoming (FatWire, Open Market) and advertising managers (Goto/Idealab/Overture) not to mention the numerous ad networks already in place since the late 90's (DoubleClick 1997; HotWired/GNN 1994;Google, 1999; Prodigy, 1992)
Overall there's nothing new in these patents, they're badly cited and IMHO there's too much pre-history to capitalize much money.
IP lawsuits begin when IP creativity departs. So long Paul, we hardly knew ya...
I have a feeling these comments would be completely different if Paul Allen was never associated with Microsoft. He has the right to go after people for violating his patents. Who cares if people are "patent trolling" ? The point of patents are to protect your inventions and ideas, otherwise he may as well just have burned all his money and companies like Microsoft and friends would just be stealing more and more than they already do from people and getting paid.
You said "number 2". HEE HEE hEE!
If one side can not assure the destruction of the other, they either settle for a lot more or go to court, where they're referred to as "The Mommy."
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
So they patented browsers, menus, and news..... how original.
I work for one of the companies named and just want to correct the submitter's claim that the 11 companies in question are technology companies. They obviously all have websites, but that doesn't make them technology companies.
I am frequently reminded here that I do not work for a technology company. ;-)
I was going to start a thread along the lines of "Patented Death of the Economy"
With this insanity, the powers that be will sacrifice, a running working part of the economy, for some profits of some greedy scum.
These patents are nothing but mind control, and control of the masses choices.
What a waste .. in place of innovation they use short term ideas ..lawyers.
(..)
Well, none of these are actual inventions, so I'm not sure why patents were issued, but even beyond that, if you were to allow the patenting of "ideas", Interval Research Corporation didn't originate these ideas...
Interval Research Corporation was founded in 1992. NCSA's Mosaic browser was invented in 1992 with the first public release in 1993. Most modern browsers owe their foundations to NCSA not Interval Research Corporation. NCSA also had the first web sites to host bodies of audiovisual information as well. So this claim seems to be unfounded.
The second and third claims are even more ludicrous. There have been "attention managers" that display alerts on video displays for as long as there have been video displays. I was programming them before Al Gore invented the internet and I was programming them on the internet before Interval Research Corporation was a gleam in Allen's eye...
Nothing to say about the 4th patent...
Exactly what proof do you have that he hasn't already reached an agreement with Microsoft?
I have patented suing for patent damages. And I won't license it to him.
Read for yourself:
http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PG01&p=1&u=/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=%2220080270152%22.PGNR.&OS=DN/20080270152&RS=DN/20080270152
You claim you've "patented" this, but it clearly is merely the publication of a patent application, and in fact, has not been granted. Accordingly, by claiming you have "patented" it, you are in violation of 35 USC 292 which makes "false marking" illegal, and levies a charge of up to $500 for every such offense.
I leave a settlement offer to you. A donation to Slashdot would certainly be appropriate. Cheers.
Disclaimer: I am a patent agent. I am not your patent agent. Nothing in this post should be considered legal advice, nor should be relied on. This is merely for the purposes of [my] amusement.
http://wapedia.mobi/en/Domestic_Violence_Offender_Gun_Ban#3.4
3. 4. Effects on law enforcement officers
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) sent a notice to every law enforcement agency when this law went into effect. Police officers with prior misdemeanor convictions of domestic violence from years earlier were no longer permitted to possess firearms under the new federal law. Several officers were fired for such past misdemeanor offenses. Several of the gun magazines printed a copy of this new ATF order at the time.
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
You do realize that Paul Allen still owns a reported 138 million shares of MSFT?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_allen#Microsoft
This is amusing. Here's some history on the company. Interval Research was an R&D outfit that Paul Allen founded back in the 1990's. You've never heard of it, because they were incredibly secretive. So hush-hush that when they went belly-up no one outside of the company knew about it. Literally. It took months before the Press finally got wind of it.
The place was a great place to be if you were doing research. Literally "let a thousand roses bloom". Unfortunately, they were horribly mismanaged. Allen blew hundreds of millions of dollars, mostly over budget, before he finally realized that he wasn't getting anything out it. They wanted to be the next version of SRI. Unfortunately, that didn't turn out.
Top management was, at best, incompetent. At worse, downright crooks. They hired some people on certain terms, and then shortly afterwards said "Opps - we really meant to hire you at a lower level". Truly a boneheaded move. Fortunately it didn't happen to me, but the look on people's faces when they found out was unforgettable.
Interval did some really amazing stuff; years ahead of its time. But they could never get the products out to market (though they tried), mostly due to amazing incompetence on the part of the lead engineers. You know the type. Big egos and no talent. Perhaps there was an exception to that rule, but I don't recall it.
I'm not surprised that Paul Allen has turned into a Patent Troll; it will be the only way he can get his money back. The only thing surprising is that it took him so long. But he never impressed me as being the sharpest knife in the drawer. As for other history, they had a number of big names there, from many fields. In tech, you may have heard of Lee Felsenstein if you're familiar with history. Their office was in the Research area of Palo Alto. Near Stanford, down the street from the Wall Street Journal, between Page Mill and Hillview
Despite that unfortunate ending, I still look back fondly on Interval. They paid well, too. I made lots of money off of Paul Allen. Thanks, Paul!
Is it just me or do most /. News involving m$ are about patents? The last legitimate patent that ms filed for that was reported was page flipping on mobile devices. Take a look at the trends. Ms is not able to come up with original thoughts because of it's inner intricacies. They could indeed wipe the buget deficit just by taking down patents and putting a few of general interest such as solar panels and batteries out in the open. They might even reelect Obama for this.
There should be a rule against stupidly broad generic patents, maybe legislation or armed thugs.
There are already two filters in place before it reaches /.
/.
First of all, the clear cut patents will not even go as far as a lawsuit.
If it then is really unclear who is right it may have very low news value because "its just another lawsuit". There are probably a lot of these lawsuits. Depending on the company involved these lawsuits may have news value though.
Then there are the "Holy crap WTF are they thinking" lawsuits. They will probably reach the newspapers and then maybe end up here on
So sample bias seems very likely IMO.
Another case of lack of imagination or creativity, an idiot called Paul Allen wants to get rich without being productive for society.
To much couching seems to me it is.
By the way dear Paul Allen, sue me for difamation if you can
Listing licensees is normal procedure because doing so shows that the "patents" have at least enough validity to make others cave in and pay up.
So, have you got any evidence that MS have licensed and paid for that license?
The guy is 57 and has $13.5 billion dollars according to Wikipedia.
So he has more money than he could reasonably spend and has 20 years tops before his body really starts to fail him. Actually probably much less than that since it was announced in 2009 that he has been diagnosed with cancer again.
He could do literally anything with his remaining time and resources and he has decided to spend it acting as a parasite, exploiting weak spots and loopholes in the law to do damage to society in the hopes of getting an extra billion before he drops dead. I guess his dick stopped working so this is the only way he can continue to fuck people.
I wonder if it's the personality type that is more likely to become a billionaire, or if it's the act of spending a big chunk of your life accumulating wealth that causes these people to turn into mindless, selfish, pointless money collecting machines.
If it's a verb, noun, adjective, adverb or article you can patent it.
Now if they'd read some of the "written descriptions" of the non-inventions they obsess over the "claims" invented in accompaniment with, we'd likely have less stupidity like Allen's neo-NTP scam.
Well... maybe this could be the result that Bilski should have been and SCOTUS will hold that software is not patentable subject matter.
(fingers crossed)
JAGga.me ----> Producing video games addressing emotional health and wellness issues affecting teens.
Do you mean you actually made a thousand roses bloom?! How did you do that?
I am not against software patents, but Allen patents are simply ridiculous. Actually the majority of software patents are like this. I think the problem is not software patents by itself but the regulations and the people who are reviewing these applications. Me for one I would simply not grant a patent to his application to start with. But of course I need a legal context to do that. Someone need to change the patent granting rules or this ridiculous charade will continue on.
The patents described here have existed for years prior to the patent. The big difference was they weren't in a browser, they were in windows applications, or dumb terminals, etc. Being in a browser just changes where it runs. Well before the internet, there were dial-in systems, host sytems and private lans that offer this type of functionality. Library systems that ran on mainframes, customer service systems used by sales people, account reps, Executive information systems, Artificial Intelligence systems... Just look at any stock quote/broker system as far back as the 70’s. This all seems like prior art from the 80's being brought forward to browsers...
Innovation vs Litigation
One of these activities leads to new discoveries, knowledge, wealth, and increased productivity for the benefit of mankind. The other leaves us with nothing more than a society of modern day Mandarins arguing over pieces of paper and obfuscated indecipherable tripe describing who owns the remaining property of a once prosperous and productive society. Our society is failing precisely because it is governed by those who write the laws and purchase the politicians to legislate them. Laws which keep them as the gatekeepers to advancement, but lacking the imagination, intelligence, skills, and knowledge to create anything which benefits our lives.
I hope you have a nice day! Very good article, well written and very thought out. I am looking forward to reading more of your posts in the future. xiaoxiao123 08 30 Juicy Couture Omega Watches breitling navitimer heritage a href="http://www.newstyleomega.com/goods-1245-
I suspect that someone like Paul Allen would not have filed this kind of patent infringement suit unless he thought he had a pretty good chance of winning. And, of course, he can afford top-notch legal counsel. My main question is, will Mr. Allen's pledge to give away most of his fortune apply to the (likely pretty hefty) damages if he prevails in this case?