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."

16 of 219 comments (clear)

  1. Is it just me... by magsol · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...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
  2. Lots of companies, obvious patents by Random+BedHead+Ed · · Score: 4, Informative

    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:

    • 6,263,507, "Browser for Use in Navigating a Body of Information, With Particular Application to Browsing Information Represented By Audiovisual Data"
    • 6,757,682, "Alerting Users to Items of Current Interest"

    Having alerted you users all to these items of interest, I will now proceed to pay Paul Allen.

    1. Re:Lots of companies, obvious patents by straponego · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And yet Microsoft goes to great lengths to convince people that, this time, we can trust them not to sue (see the story on .NET/Android). They learned to protect their image better in the 90s; now they use proxies like Allen's company and SCO to attack their enemies. And if some company is dumb enough to take them at their word, they can always pull out the knives once their patents are used in successful products.

  3. Patented inventions by roothog · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

  4. Re:Why now? by Locke2005 · · Score: 4, Funny

    He's not trying to get damages out of them; he's trying to get them to settle by buying "licenses" to make the problem go away. Plus, he's suing companies that HAVE money, while they still do have some assets. If I was trying to get money out of AOL, I'd be in a big hurry too!

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  5. He can't win by recoiledsnake · · Score: 5, Funny
    --
    This space for rent.
  6. Re:Trial by fire by TheEyes · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ah, but did you notice that Paul Allen did not sue Microsoft? Yup, he went down the list of the top search engines--number 1, 3, 4, 5, etc--but "somehow" forgot about Bing, the number 2 engine.

    No, allowing this lawsuit to succeed will play right into his hands. It's SCO all over again: Microsoft can't compete in the free market, so they trot out another sleeper cell patent troll with its portfolio of submarine patents to try to sink their competition in the courts. And they'll keep doing it, as long as they have the money and software patents continue to be as stupid as they are.

  7. Re:Why now? by 1729 · · Score: 5, Funny

    If I was trying to get money out of AOL, I'd be in a big hurry too!

    Me, too!

  8. Re:Want to stimulate the economy? by hoggoth · · Score: 4, Informative

    Obama and Congress will do what their bosses tell them to do.
    Their bosses are the ones who WROTE the current patent laws. Congress doesn't write laws. Corporate ghost writers write laws and Congress signs them.

    --
    - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
  9. Re:Really? by Idiomatick · · Score: 4, Funny

    He's hoping to get an asian one to go with her.

  10. Re:Why now? by tomhudson · · Score: 4, Informative

    The 507 patent ()2001) falls to prior art - RoboBoard, bbs that downloaded graphic primitives and let you navigate through a virtual world (never mind just audio-visual data). Also the Space Quest and Kings Quest games, etc.

    The 602 and 314 patents "Attention Manager for Occupying the Peripheral Attention of a Person in the Vicinity of a Display Device." is preceded by, among other things, those annoying tickertape displays that have been around for decades, wall clocks for anyone sitting in front of a computer at 4:55 PM, etc.

    The 682 patent "Alerting Users to Items of Current Interest." (2004) is anticipated by the flag on your mailbox that lets you know you have mail, your doorbell, TV Guide magazine, the front page of any newspaper sitting at the news stand, etc. And of course, "You have mail".

    Maybe this will the the one that finally puts the end to stupid software patents.

  11. Re:Why now? by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Having licensed a few of my own patents to big companies, it's very likely he's been in negotiations for 3-4 years and they finally broke down. It's not at all uncommon to take 2-3 years to negotiate a license agreement, and that usually only starts after the patent is actually issued AND the potential licensee has had 6-12 months to read and fully comprehend the issued patent.

    --
    Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  12. Re:Trial by fire by dkleinsc · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's probably because he's using this to demonstrate to the Microsoft Board of Directors that he's shameless enough to be Microsoft's CEO after they boot out Ballmer.

    --
    I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
  13. Prior art? by joeyblades · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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...

  14. 35 USC 292 by Theaetetus · · Score: 4, Funny

    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.

  15. OMG! Interval Research! I used to work there. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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!