Slashdot Mirror
Ask Nathan Myhrvold What You Will, Live Q&A April 3
He was the CTO at Microsoft, is an accomplished nature and wildlife photographer, and his cookbook Modernist Cuisine won a James Beard award, but Nathan Myhrvold is probably best known for being co-founder and CEO of Intellectual Ventures. In 2009 the company launched a prototyping and research laboratory called Intellectual Ventures Lab. The lab has hired many prominent scientists to work on a variety of inventions including safer nuclear reactor designs and vaccine research. Under Myhrvold's direction Intellectual Ventures has purchased 40,000 patents and applications and internally developed over 2000 inventions, but not without controversy. Nathan has agreed to take some time to answer your questions but please limit yourself to one question per post. As a bonus on Wed. April 3, Nathan will be doing a live Q&A from 12-12:30pm PDT.
Is the money made in patent trolling worth being that kind of scumbag?
What is your opinion on the current status of patent law in the US, which holds the Patent Office as a gatekeeper but a judge as the final arbiter of a patent's validity?
Many readers of Slashdot (myself included) feel that the patent system is broken. I haven't heard any criticisms from you or Intellectual Ventures so I'm interested in hearing what you have to say about the patent system. Is it fundamentally broken? Only a little broken? Working flawlessly and exactly as it was intended to work?
My work here is dung.
One of my favorite radio shows called "This American Life" covered Intellectual Ventures extensively about two years ago (PDF transcript here audio here) in an episode called "When Patents Attack!" They tried to visit Oasis Research offices at 104 East Houston Street, Suite 190 in Marshall, Texas but found them largely vacant. What is IV's relationship with Oasis Research and Lodsys and why are these empty offices in Marshall, Texas? What sort of partners are Lodsys and Oasis Research? Customers? Licensees?
My work here is dung.
i read that we had the same kind of patent battles 100 years ago in the last technological revolution. how are things different now than before?
were there any IP companies at that time?
"This American Life" covered Intellectual Ventures extensively about two years ago (PDF transcript here audio here) in an episode called "When Patents Attack!" And Joe Chernesky referred them to Chris Crawford as an example of where Intellectual Ventures had helped an inventor license his/her patents to customers. Since the Chris Crawford lead largely turned up to be bogus, could you refer us to a few small time inventors that Intellectual Ventures has helped license their patents to licensees without having to get into extensive litigation?
My work here is dung.
Did the recent switch this month to a first-to-file country affect you negatively? Positively? What sort of impact do you foresee that having on your business model? Was it right to move that way?
My work here is dung.
Can you explain how your legal department operates within Intellectual Ventures? How many lawyers, what kind of lawsuits to pursue, patenting process, etc.
Some people die at 25 and aren't buried until 75. -Benjamin Franklin
Are you aware that you are one of the most hated persons in the software community?
I was curious about that seeing your name. :3
Can you present examples of how IV has helped individual inventors to get revenue from their inventions? Please include specific names, specific inventions, approximate revenue seen by the inventor, and current status of the invention-related product(s) and ownership of the patent(s).
"The lab has hired many prominent scientists to work on a variety of inventions including safer nuclear reactor designs and vaccine research"
..
The 'lab' is nothing more than a patent troll factory
"Intellectual Ventures and Lodsys
"this patent also seems to cover a big chunk of what happens on the Internet: upgrading software, buying stuff online, and what's called cloud storage. If you have a patent on all that, you could sue a lot of people. And, in fact, that's what's happening with Chris Crawford's patent. Intellectual Venures sold it to a company called Oasis research in June of 2010. Less than a month later, Oasis Research used the patent to sue over a dozen different tech companies, including Rackspace, GoDaddy, and AT&T."
AccountKiller
One of the TV news magazines showed some of the things you learned about new, scientific ways of cooking food. What was the most amazing thing, in your opinion, that you discovered?
Why are you such an asshole?
How do you justify the burden you've placed on North American innovation, and the harm that's caused? Can we move past your typical defense of IV based on the ridiculous and yet-to-be-realized anti-mosquito laser system, and discuss the actual harm and actual benefits (if any) provided by IV?
How does it feel to be a pariah?
Let's say I work at a company that makes a good, useful software product, which is the best in the market. How can I convince them not to patent my solutions, so that I don't contribute to a system that rewards people like you do the detriment of people who would succeed on merit?
From working at big bad Microsoft to founding a patent-focused lab, you seem like an ideal person to answer a question I've had for a while: What's it like working in companies that are constantly under attack from those who try to claim a moral high ground?
To clarify, I don't mean to imply that you are evil, or that Microsoft or Intellectual Ventures are harming society, but rather I recognize that such accusations are common, regardless of truth. On the one hand, I don't assume that the FOSS fanatics (including myself at times) are always right about how bad Microsoft is, or the free-IP crowd is always right about how patents are crushing us, but at the same time I find it hard to believe they're always wrong, too. I'm curious what kind of moral dilemmas you encounter in this respect, if any, and what insight you might be able to provide as to life on the receiving end of the activists' assaults.
You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
What products have Intellectual Ventures developed and brought to market?
As you've already made your fortune, I'm curious as to why you choose to get involved in controversial patent licensing, rather than, say, Bill Gates style philanthropic work ?
Hypothetically, if Intellectual Ventures were to vanish as an organization, and its IP holdings were put into the public domain, what would be the net effect for society? Do you believe that it would be detrimental to society, and if so, how?
(Have been lurking on Slashdot for 14 years, but it was a chance to ask Dr. Myhrvold a question that motivated creating an account).
Some interesting cooking talk: Chefs at Google: Nathan Myhrvold.
What's do you think is going on since the transition to Ballmer that's making it seemingly (much) harder for Microsoft to regain, never mind keep it's momentum? (Note: momentum is more than innovation, it's generically "industry torque").
What do you personally think about Linux . . . ?
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
In 2007, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation asked Intellectual Ventures to create new technologies that will not only fight malaria but will eventually eliminate this scourge of humanity altogether.
Basically IV is the other half to fat cats scratching each others' backs and the public is eating it up. Where are the measurable results? Why can't $40 billion stop malaria? Because it's mostly ending up in IV's pockets and being invested in Bill's cadre of companies, if the products actually work that's just an extra bonus.
As a software engineer, I produce solutions to different problems every day which are then implemented and used by people. If my resulting software was not used by anyone, I would not gain much fulfillment in my work. Considering that much of the work done by Intellectual Ventures does not result in actual tangible products, do you still get a sense of accomplishment? Are you prouder of the ideas which actually get implemented? Or are you satisfied with the ideas that are developed, independent of whether they result in viable products or not?
Nathan Myhvold will be our guest and it would be bad manners to ask rude questions
What, exactly, is rude about the original questions?
Mr. Myrhvold, you are undoubtedly aware of the almost continual patent battles surrounding video, image, and audio codecs for the past several decades, with stop-ship lawsuits being filed against products that attempt to use them on what seems to be a regular basis. Even codecs recognized by international standards organizations following several years of industry review have not been immune to claims by so-called patent trolls. Do you see this as an area that can be improved with different patent laws or government policies, or are vendors and consumers stuck with the status quo?
is it really that hard to keep track of this stuff?
And why? Is the dark side really stronger?
Myhrvold is a sociopath that looks for cracks in the system to exploit. He never asks "is it wrong?". He only asks "will I get away with it" and "will it make me richer and more powerful". These types of people are the most dangerous amongst us. Betas are actually encouraged to worship them as 'gods'.
Do you hate anti-social hackers that flood the world with trojans and the like? Do you hate serial killers? Do you hate people who abuse animals and children when they are alone with them? Do you hate 'banksters' who steal billions and destroy whole corporations just because they can? These are all identical examples of criminal psychopaths/sociopaths.
Everyone involved with 'Intellectual Ventures' should be locked up for the rest of their natural lives. Society has a right and duty to protect itself from 'meta-criminals', criminals that seek to operate at maximum anti-social effect beyond the rate at which laws can keep up.
Hint: It's this guy, Jeremiah Cornelius. Have fun.
This is the REAL APK. Note to self - the quickest way to eliminate someone impersonating me would be to create an account and stop posting as anonymous.
Hah! nice find. His comments are awful and with an ID of 137, he obviously isn't a teenager, but probably still lives in his mom's basement.
Really, kill yourself.
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
...did he learn that at Microsoft?
Sacred cows make the best burgers.
I was going to buy your book set but then I found out that you had it printed in China. Also, IV is a scumbag company so that's another factor in my decision not to buy your book. My question: when you're sucking on a cock, do you ever reach around and stick your finger up your partner's asshole?
Do you even lift?
These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.
As an early owner/adopter of your physical book, "Modernist Cuisine: The Art and Science of Cooking", I have to say that the searching system (in particular, the index and table of contents) is unusually poor and the books are somewhat unwieldy (they are larger and heavier than my Larousse Gastronomique and the box they arrived in my country in came marked with a "warning: heavy" label), therefore making the information contained less-accessible while the books themselves are clearly pushing the boundaries of practical usability.
You have said that you do not plan to publish an e-book which has led me to prefer and use an electronic PDF over my own physical copy. Can you explain your reasoning behind that decision and, more generally, where do you see the future of cooking "books" and other resources going?
King John of England is a very ironic figure who ended up doing a lot of good that he did not intend. It is through his oppressive rule and heavy taxation that he drove everyone to form a coalition against him, to spell out more precisely just what powers the king did not have. This was codified in the famous document, the Magna Carta.
I wonder if Myhrvold might help manage the same thing with patents. He doesn't have as much authority as King John, so I hardly think he could do this singlehandedly, but he may contribute to the downfall of the patent system. Myhrvold may be sophisticated enough to realize this. In which case, is it intentional? Is he sly? Or does he think the patent system is unsinkable? Or maybe he doesn't care one way or the other, and is ready to ride patents forever or switch horses should patents founder.
How about it Myhrvold, are you trying to make patents so burdensome that it causes a big enough backlash to spur some badly needed changes, or do you think the patent system isn't going anywhere, or something else?
Intellectual Property is a monopolistic, selfish, and defective concept. It is "tyranny over the mind of man"
In the Air
Far from critical but gives some insight into how IV does what it does.
Basically, Myhrvold gathers some of his rich and smart buddies in a room where they brainstorm furiously. Then the notes are passed onto his team of PhDs and lawyers to work the ideas up into patents. Occasionally they might build a prototype of something but it's mostly just very lucrative breeze shooting.
Do you believe that it would be detrimental to society, and if so, how?
It would be detrimental to society. Without the extra profit that temporarily gets generated by patent protection, many inventions would never get developed into actual products. They are just too marginal to justify the R&D, without patent protection.
A good example is pharmaceuticals. We're all better off because billions are poured into research and development of new drugs. Without patent protection, the profitability of new drugs would plummet, and so would the R&D efforts. Don't cut your nose off to spite your face: having to wait a few years for a generic equivalent to make your drug more affordable, is vastly preferable to your drug never having been developed in the first place.
That that is is that that that that is not is not.
The question was specifically about if IV were to go away, not all patents. IV is qualitatively different than a pharma company holding IP on a drug target.
forgot to add, Myhrvold is on-record stating that IV generally doesn't invest in pharmaceutical type patents: http://leavingthesunbehind.blogspot.com/2012/11/part-ii-ipcheckups-intellectual.html so the whole drug-to-market issue isn't germane to the question as phrased (though it is interesting).
... or, like many NPR listeners, I listened to it when it first aired. I also was in the thread here on Slashdot that we had about it, two years ago when it first aired.
That is quite peculiar that you would post this then because that episode linked them all quite thoroughly:
If IV isn't related to Lodsys and Oasis Research, then I don't see how Myhrvold could possibly answer this question. Is this a witch hunt or a real question?
Hint: Calling someone a troll to invalidate their claims is an ad hominem. You relied on that multiple times.
How does it feel to be an utter dickhead and a net waste to humanity?
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
As a patent troll, you are both evil and a douche. As a "molecular gastronomist," you're just a douche. Do you have any plans to put your efforts toward something neither douche-y nor evil? Bill Gates has, isn't it your turn?
It says your an accomplished chef.
what are your recomendations for frying free speech, open source, and good will?
captcha: scatters
Truly, I'm fascinated by Dr. Myhrvold. On one hand, he's one of the most infamous figures in the software industry. On the other hand, he's clearly a brilliant individual who has done a number of things for the advancement of science and culture, including the "Modernist Cuisine" books which were written largely out of passion and funded out of pocket (from what I understand). (And they're fantastic books, too: the science is top-notch, the photography is incredible, and it's just really fun to read about all the crazy techniques that modern chefs are coming up with.)
From interviews, it seems that Myhrvold really believes that Intellectual Ventures is advancing an ethical cause. Maybe I'm naive, but I find it difficult to believe that he's secretly in it for the money. So I'm very curious how such a smart and accomplished person could believe in something that's so at odds with what the rest of his peers believe, especially when there's mounting evidence that patents are harmful to software innovation. But I guess that's not really a question we can ask him!
The Photonic Fence project was proposed with much fanfare about six years ago, to rid Africa is disease-carrying mosquitoes. Rumor has it that the Gates Foundation has cut funding. The project appears to have developed nothing of practical use, although the project leaders responsible appear to still be in control. Is there going to be a serious forensic analysis of how the project went south?
But in case I am wrong I am always ready to piss on his grave.
Where's our f@!&# flying cars?
Table-ized A.I.
For young people in the United States who have a general interest in techology, what kind of advice would you give them in choosing the most rewarding and future proof career? Would you encourage them to study STEM subjects, with a view to becoming engineers or scientists, or to study law and follow a legal career which perhaps opens other doors?
Oh Noes! The Hon. Leonard Davis tossed this case out of his court!
Troll: zero. FOSS: 1
Comments?
Try to disgorge a reasonable answer. Please avoid responses along the lines of
This was an example of a patent that should never have been granted. IV only sues based on the right kind of patent.
Please falsify the hypothesis: IV is an NPE
A related, less pejorative expression is non-practicing entity (NPE) which describes a patent owner who does not manufacture or use the patented invention.
Wikipedia
epic
Mr. Myhrvold: I know you are sold on traveling wave reactors, and I hope they prove their worth. But, I was wondering; have you given up on thorium-powered reactors? I saw an article in Forbes not too long ago where the author actually argued that, because it would turn thorium from an expensive-to-dispose-of-waste-product into a valuable resource, building thorium reactors could make electronics cheaper. This is because thorium is usually present in rare earth metals used for electronics and often have to be removed prior to processing. Have you considered running a similar kind of reactor to traveling wave on a thorium-uranium mixture (that would also deal with the problem of thorium being "fertile" as opposed to "fissile")? If thorium-powered reactors reduced the price of manufacturing electric vehicles, you would have the added benefit of cheaper EVs. This would not only reduce carbon emissions even further and faster; it would put more demand on the electricity grid as more people switched over to EVs from internal combustion powered cars. This would mean we would need even more electricity generation and less fossil fuels; we could build more of both the thorium reactors like LFTRs and traveling wave reactors to meet the demand. Finally, as everyone knows, thorium is far more common in the earth's crust than uranium. It seems to me using thorium-powered reactors to compliment your reactor concepts like traveling wave reactors would speed up the process you are trying to create, namely, the decarbonization of first the United States first, and then the world. I see no reason why both uranium and thorium reactors are not necessary. What are your thoughts? And is Intellectual Ventures pursuing R&D on thorium, as well?
It's clear from your past interviews that you honestly believe that IV is working toward the greater good of the business community. But what about the Lodysyses of the world? They too make the case that they are serving the business community by "reducing costs" and such. Do you buy it? If not, how do you contrast the behavior of the "bad actor" NPEs to IV?
Are there any popular figures from the past who you see as having been in a situation similar to yours -- almost universally loathed, but for reasons that you think weren't justified?
Per my subject-line: Good job, you "nailed him" doing it under his reg'd "luser" account here too of Jeremiah Cornelius... it's a GOOD start!
So, does this mean you now believe me when I tell you that this was not my doing? I am speaking the truth. I am not stalking you, trolling you, or impersonating you, I have merely responded to your original question. Well, besides this post, obviously.
I have not lied to you APK; I do not need to sink to that level to make my argument. If I have anything to say to you it will be from my own account.
..Mullah or Pope, Preacher or Poet, who was it wrote: "Give any one species too much rope and they'll fuck it up"?
Obviously you're one of Jonathan Coulton's many sockpuppets, Sakurafish86.
Am I doing it right?
Small companies with their own submarine patents are starting to raise their heads to enforce their patents - yet being tainted with the stink of "behaving like a patent troll" if they dare exercise their rights under the law.
How can these small companies pursue licensing their patents without being stained as "Patent Troll" thus throwing everything into court before a judge?
How can small companies realize coherent valuations of their IP without cartels of "trolls" engaging in market-fixing at IP auctions??
TIA
J
How do small companies avoid being tainted as "behaving like a patent troll" when they dare to enforce their own patent rights? USPTO often takes upwards of 8 years to render decisions. How can small companies auction their IP without cartels of patent trolls rigging the bidding?