Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Bittorrent and uTorrent Sued For Patent Violations

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the i'm-patenting-patents dept.

dutchwhizzman writes "Bittorrent and uTorrent have been sued for using certain techniques in their clients and the bittorrent protocol. From the article it appears technologies are being used that were submitted in a 1999 patent that was subsequently approved in 2007. This itself is not uncommon, but given the technologies involved, HTTP could very well be prior art, or it could violate at least part of the same protocol."

6 of 182 comments (clear)

  1. Why is this still news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Software patents need to die. End of story.

    1. Re:Why is this still news? by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It has been solved, in many countries where software patents are not accepted. In this case it really is black and white.

  2. Blizzard Updates by what2123 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Would this not also include Blizzard and their new way of updating/downloading games? They would seem to have far more wealth to go after than either of the two torrent providers.

    1. Re:Blizzard Updates by jonwil · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They are also VERY large and might actually have the resources to fight back long enough to get the patent overturned.

      Suing people who are likely to settle because they cant afford to fight is a common tactic of patent trolls.

  3. In My Opinion, Protocol Patents Are Much Worse by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Software patents need to die. End of story.

    I can't access the article but, if I'm understanding this correctly, the part about the protocol is worse than a software patent. Protocol patents are very bothersome to me because in my mind they totally destroy the chance a competitor has to interface with your product. And in doing so it really hinders innovation and integration. It's very easy to see how a simple ploy can result in people being "bought in" to a line of products even though a better competing line may come along. This vendor lock-in or competitor lockout (whatever you want to call it) is a very serious problem in my line of work (ever had your boss demand that you "decrypt" .doc files from years ago?).

    Now, the common counter argument is that people would simply just buy products without patent laden protocols ... but I think there have been many examples where this simply hasn't happened. Even now people don't realize/recognize this problem when they look for a solution to their needs. Massive companies seem fine with using proprietary protocols because they are of higher quality than the more open competition. I've seen cost/benefit studies where openness (protocol or software) doesn't even factor into the final scores of the products.

    I think a good concrete example would be if Samuel Morse had patented not only the telegraph machine (his particular device design) but also the Morse Code protocol and sued anybody using that alphabet to send messages. Do you think telegraphy would have progressed as quickly if that had been the case?

    --
    My work here is dung.
  4. Re:Demanding a jury trial? by Haedrian · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "If you're innocent get a Judge, if you're guilty get a Jury"