If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Wired)   Maximum Trolling - Man claims he actually invented the internet and sues Google, Youtube, Yahoo and Amazon for using his invention   (wired.com) divider line 103
    More: Amusing, YouTube, Google, Yahoo, Amazon, Tim Berners-Lee, software patents, Rent-A-Center, East Texas  
•       •       •

14177 clicks; posted to Main » on 08 Feb 2012 at 10:53 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



103 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-02-08 02:29:18 PM
You could work hard and make a little money, or exploit the legal and financial systems and make a ton.

Something is very wrong with our society.
 
2012-02-08 02:29:55 PM

Magorn: Having spent some time this summer employed inthe patent troll wars, I've come to the conclusion that tech patents, in particular, software and "business method" type patents need the following, immediate reforms

1) They need to be shorter than regular patents: No more than 5 years. 5 years is a full generation in the tech world, the patents shouldn't be for longer than that absent some truly special circumstances

2) The need to have a "use it or lose it" clause. Unless you are actively trying to market the idea or implement it on a commercial basis somehow, you patent expires as soon as someone else does.

3) There needs to be a "burden of notice" similar to the one for Copyrights. You have a reasonable duty of Due Dillegence relating to your patent and if you become aware that someone is using/selling something you have to notify them IMMEDIATELY or you either a) lose the patent altogether or b) are forced to license it to them at set, standard rates; none of this waiting until years later when billion-dollar industries now depend on your "patent" to sue


I would also add...

4) If someone else, through clean room engineering, is able to come up with the same invention, then that endevour should be allowed as strong evidence that the pantent in question is obvious, and should have never been granted in the first place.
 
2012-02-08 02:32:48 PM
I work in I.T. for a small-"ish" online ecommerce site where we do all our own development in-house with a software dev staff of around 3 people. NCR threaten to sue us for patient infringement over having a shopping cart function:
Not my company in article (new window)


Way to go NCR, try to ruin a small company barely surviving.
 
2012-02-08 02:34:10 PM
 
2012-02-08 02:50:35 PM

imashark: I scanned quickly through the patent, and it literally is a claim to have invented the internet as it exists today in its entirety, including the basic interaction between browsers and servers and the inner workings of how browsers handle requests for information.

My mind is boggled that such a broad patent was granted. Was the patent office sleeping on the job? Or is this just an indictment of how the patent system is flawed?


The problem with this case is the early filing date. It's can be hard to find publications prior to the instatement of PGPubs in 2000, which caused the quantity of applicable prior art to skyrocket.

It's passed reexam which means you likely won't find a non-product-based prior art. And by that, I mean there's different ways to find relevant prior art. The most common and easiest is to find a non-product based prior art, which would be a publication that literally describes the features being claimed. 99% of all applications are rejected this way.

The much harder way is to search for prior art by example. That is, find a product that actually performs the functionality claimed. This is hardly ever done because the examiner has to already know of a product that performs the functionality. And that isn't even the hardest part, which is proving the particular product performed the functionality prior to the applicant's filing date.

So while it's all well and good to say "Gopher clearly did this prior to his filing date." To you I say: please prove this. And unless you can go back in time, you'll have a fun time doing that.
 
2012-02-08 02:51:05 PM
1993??



i491.photobucket.com
 
2012-02-08 02:52:57 PM
Time for the offer of "jack shiat and go fark yourself."
 
2012-02-08 02:55:18 PM

Buckyballs: MythDragon: I totaly submitted this article first, AND with a better headline. I am going to sue subby.
I am seeking 23 Kajillion dollars. But if you wish to settle out of court, I will except one (1) TotalFark sponsership.

Err, I can't afford $5 / month!


debtor's prison then? Do we do that in the US?
 
2012-02-08 02:55:58 PM
 
2012-02-08 02:58:59 PM

Random Discord: 1993??



[i491.photobucket.com image 640x503]


This x 1000.
Seriously, how is this even getting to court? And why....FARKING WHY did 8 companies *settle*?? Seems like they've paid out several millions of dollars on a case that is utter bullshait. This is why people do this crap. A company doesn't want to take the time to fight it, so they just settle to get it done with. Must be nice to run a company whose only business is suing other companies.
 
2012-02-08 03:23:33 PM
You realize that, contrary to the headline, they are not claiming they invented the internet.

They are claiming to have invented the "interactive internet" ... pretty much the multimedia web parts of the internet.
 
2012-02-08 03:29:52 PM

Random Discord: 1993??
[i491.photobucket.com image 640x503]


Tried to fix it for accuracy:

i1036.photobucket.com
 
2012-02-08 03:35:02 PM

landimal: cannotsuggestaname: Gopher predates his patent claim. If he is specifically only talking about interactive graphics within a browser window then Mosaic predates him by a lot.

Violawww and Arena also predate his claim.

I can think of at least 5 things that would predate this claim, even the phrasing of the protocols involved. The issue is that they picked the best spot to file this claim where prior art will mean less than "Playboy paid us because our patent was valid"

I wish we could patent products only and not just vague ideas.


This and this. Patents were supposed to work only for products. That was a long time ago.
 
2012-02-08 03:49:59 PM

landimal: I wish we could patent products only and not just vague ideas.


that's the way it's supposed to work, the patent office is just really really bad at their job and has a habit of approving anything they don't understand no matter how absurd
 
2012-02-08 04:01:27 PM
I gotta get me a patent trolling lawyer. You see I invented the lung and have a patent to prove it. You all use lungs, so you owe me a royalty. So pay up. Don't make me have to cut your lungs out.
 
2012-02-08 04:17:39 PM

MythDragon: Random Discord: 1993??



[i491.photobucket.com image 640x503]

This x 1000.
Seriously, how is this even getting to court? And why....FARKING WHY did 8 companies *settle*?? Seems like they've paid out several millions of dollars on a case that is utter bullshait. This is why people do this crap. A company doesn't want to take the time to fight it, so they just settle to get it done with. Must be nice to run a company whose only business is suing other companies.


You settle for two reasons:

1. The legal costs of fighting it are greater than the settlement, so even if the patent is invalid, it's still cheaper to settle.
2. The fact that maybe the patent is actually valid, and if so you will owe a lot more than the cost of the settlement.

Without knowing the specific details of the patent and all possible prior art, it's impossible to say whether or not a patent is valid. Just because something is common today doesn't mean it existed prior to the filing of the patent.
 
2012-02-08 04:30:33 PM
 
2012-02-08 04:30:53 PM
That's OK. I've developed and patented a technique for viewing the internet.

It requires a bottle of 17yr old scotch, a 2lb bag of licorice, 3 large Biore pore strips and a 2002 Ikea catalog.
 
2012-02-08 04:31:26 PM

vudukungfu: OH YEAH? Well I'm his biological father, and I copywrote my DNA and any thing he invents is Mine Mine Mine by default, as I'm the parent coporation.

So there!


Don't be silly. People aren't corporations.
Therefore, they can't have the same rights as corporations.

/won't be funny in a few years...
 
2012-02-08 04:35:42 PM

Geotpf: Without knowing the specific details of the patent and all possible prior art, it's impossible to say whether or not a patent is valid. Just because something is common today doesn't mean it existed prior to the filing of the patent.


If you file a patent and then sit on it for years, waiting for something that looks vaguely similar to become common practice and THEN sue everyone, your patent should not only be invalidated, but you should have to pay the targets of the suit and the taxpayers for wasting everyone's time.

If you're not actively taking reasonable steps to commercialize/make available/use your patent in some way, you should lose it. Patents are to encourage innovation by providing a window of exclusivity to the profits. If you're stifling innovation, you should get no profit. It's that simple.

/Defining what constitutes "reasonable" on the other hand
//Not so simple
 
2012-02-08 04:44:08 PM

Desmo: That's OK. I've developed and patented a technique for viewing the internet.

It requires a bottle of 17yr old scotch, a 2lb bag of licorice, 3 large Biore pore strips and a 2002 Ikea catalog.

www.hardwareheaven.com
i.telegraph.co.uk


I like your style.
/Hot like Eve Muirhead
//who is actualy closer to 20 something now. Can't win them all, I guess.
 
2012-02-08 04:45:30 PM
"Mentally ill person files absurd lawsuit" isn't really news.

Though I guess "Leaders of industry forced by system to waste time responding to absurd lawsuit filed by mentally ill person." might be.
 
2012-02-08 05:03:16 PM

dandude28: This is actually a good thing, it will bring more attention to how stupid and abused software patents can be.


Here's a another way in which attention could be brought to the issue:

"Two bodies found in a remote location in eastern Texas have now been positively identified as Dr. Michael Doyle, founder of patent troll corporation Eolas, and Mike McKool [rofl], the company's lead attorney."

Don't intentionally put somebody in a desperate situation, because they will take desperate measures. Especially true when billions of dollars are on the line.
 
2012-02-08 05:04:11 PM

dandude28: This is actually a good thing, it will bring more attention to how stupid and abused software patents can be.


FTFY!

/ intellectual property is the ultimate enslavement of mankind
 
2012-02-08 05:19:47 PM

Magorn: 3) There needs to be a "burden of notice" similar to the one for Copyrights. You have a reasonable duty of Due Dillegence relating to your patent and if you become aware that someone is using/selling something you have to notify them IMMEDIATELY


There is no such burden for copyrights. Are you confusing copyright and trademark law?
 
2012-02-08 05:23:06 PM

Aquapope: Cereal Fetish: What a difference 13 years makes.

2012: Claiming to invent the internet = maximum trolling
1999: Claiming to invent the internet = campaigning

Apparently, 13 years makes no difference at all:
1999: Saying Al Gore claimed he invented the internet (new window) = willful ignorance or partisan propagandizing
2012: Saying Al Gore claimed he invented the internet = willful ignorance or partisan propagandizing


Riiight... because Al Gore created the internet. Thanks for clearing up that up for us.

/Blue Koolaid is still blue.
 
2012-02-08 05:24:53 PM

Magorn: Having spent some time this summer employed inthe patent troll wars, I've come to the conclusion that tech patents, in particular, software and "business method" type patents need the following, immediate reforms

1) They need to be shorter than regular patents: No more than 5 years. 5 years is a full generation in the tech world, the patents shouldn't be for longer than that absent some truly special circumstances

2) The need to have a "use it or lose it" clause. Unless you are actively trying to market the idea or implement it on a commercial basis somehow, you patent expires as soon as someone else does.

3) There needs to be a "burden of notice" similar to the one for Copyrights. You have a reasonable duty of Due Dillegence relating to your patent and if you become aware that someone is using/selling something you have to notify them IMMEDIATELY or you either a) lose the patent altogether or b) are forced to license it to them at set, standard rates; none of this waiting until years later when billion-dollar industries now depend on your "patent" to sue


4) You actually have to DO it and it can't be just a broad idea that can be done 2000 ways. No patenting teleportation, no patenting delivering pizza, no patenting selling beenie babies online, no patenting having the stapler on the left side of your desk...
 
2012-02-08 05:29:05 PM
Funny - A man claims to invent the internet (Gore)

Fark - Talks about Global Warming (also known as "the new money making scheme")...gets praised for his hard work and that all they doubters are evil.

/classic
 
2012-02-08 06:04:54 PM
Someone should tell this man about Vannevar Bush....
 
2012-02-08 06:19:46 PM

Gestankfaust: Funny - A man claims to invent the internet (Gore)

/classic


Farking old and tiring - Claiming that Al Gore said he invented the internet.

Can't we let this die yet??
 
2012-02-08 06:22:18 PM
Speaking of maximum trolling, I'm gonna be a bit annoyed if there's something nefarious behind me not being able to get my weekly Zero Punctuation fix.

/Any other Canadians able to get to http://www.escapistmagazine.com currently? Just getting a Rogers "This page can't be found! Would you like to go somewhere else?" error.
 
2012-02-08 06:26:03 PM
1: Patents stifle innovation. If software patents had existed in the early days of computing, we wouldn't be where we are today.

2: For a lot less money than they'll end up paying lawyers to argue about this, Google and Yahoo and the others can hire a hit man to make it all go away. And that would leave the world a better place.
 
2012-02-08 06:29:48 PM

FTGodWin: dandude28: This is actually a good thing, it will bring more attention to how stupid and abused software patents can be.

FTFY!

/ intellectual property is the ultimate enslavement of mankind


Well, right below actually physically being enslaved of course.


The problem of course, is the sooner people see how stupid and abused software patents, the sooner lobbyists will be pitching their "industry experts" to help with some sort of congressional panel to help "fix" the problem. The problem of course, is their clients are the ones who want to do the suing, not getting sued.

/Pretty sure the only definition of "fix" that Congress knows is the one that involves their bookies.
//expect "reasonable safeguards" added to the patent system that only seem to safeguard giant companies from claims - whether patent trolls or people they genuinely ripped off.
 
2012-02-08 06:34:25 PM

russlar: Just remember, IBM has patented patent trolling. Seriously.


userserve-ak.last.fm
Impressed.
 
2012-02-08 06:38:15 PM

Cereal Fetish: What a difference 13 years makes.

2012: Claiming to invent the internet = maximum trolling
1999: Claiming to invent the internet = campaigning


And yet,
1999: Claiming Al Gore said something he never said = politics as usual
 
2012-02-08 06:44:44 PM

stuffy: I invented air. So ether pay me or stop breathing.


I think your claim may have some merit, but I won't hold my breath.
 
2012-02-08 06:44:57 PM

Misch: Magorn: 3) There needs to be a "burden of notice" similar to the one for Copyrights. You have a reasonable duty of Due Dillegence relating to your patent and if you become aware that someone is using/selling something you have to notify them IMMEDIATELY

There is no such burden for copyrights. Are you confusing copyright and trademark law?


meant to say trademark...fingers and brain disconnect sometimes
 
2012-02-08 06:47:58 PM

UKCoolCat: Gestankfaust: Funny - A man claims to invent the internet (Gore)

/classic

Farking old and tiring - Claiming that Al Gore said he invented the internet.

Can't we let this die yet??


Umm...he did though....srsly (deny it all you want...it's recorded)

But this is what I meant. Al Gore IS A MORON!!
Why are we still listening to him?
 
2012-02-08 07:33:02 PM

Gestankfaust: UKCoolCat: Gestankfaust: Funny - A man claims to invent the internet (Gore)

/classic

Farking old and tiring - Claiming that Al Gore said he invented the internet.

Can't we let this die yet??

Umm...he did though....srsly (deny it all you want...it's recorded)

But this is what I meant. Al Gore IS A MORON!!
Why are we still listening to him?


I've looked it up: Link (new window). Have you?

p.s. Nobody is listening to him. The only people who ever bring up his name are climate change deniers.
 
2012-02-08 08:03:10 PM
The city of Tyler, Texas, is better known as the nation's "rose capital" than as a hotspot of the technology industry.

No, it's been WELL KNOWN for being a PATENT TROLL hotspot for years. Hell, the federal courts in east texas have been so notorious for patent trolling that This American Life has done a story on it.

The solution for patent trolling is "loser pays". Patent trolls count on having a lot of vague patents they keep suing away at, knowing the rich companies they go against have no recourse.
 
2012-02-08 09:06:39 PM

exactly three days: mantidor: sure haven't: [2.bp.blogspot.com image 640x426]

/oblig
//hot

holy crap, until now I hadn't noticed the maximum trolling meme had a map of the UK on it.

I see it now too.


I'm not certain, but I think the origin of that image was from a forum where scottish soccer fans were being trolled hardcore about something. Maybe geopgraphic location of a team or something I have no idea. But I think that's where it came from.
 
2012-02-08 09:34:46 PM

7wolf: I don't even find stuff like this surprising anymore...


you get a few hundred/thousand to pay a lawyer to file the charges.... Google, Yahoo et al will throw 10, 25 grand at him to settle out of court, because taking it to court costs a hell of a lot more than that.

/dirtball, I hope someone rapes his wife and forces her to carry a black babby to term
//oh sorry that's my wish for Ricky Sh*tstain Santorum
///I hope somebody mugs this guy right after he walks out of the bank from cashing his check
 
2012-02-08 09:45:44 PM

Lt. Cheese Weasel: the "interactive web" before anyone else, while they were employed by the University of California back in 1993. Doyle argues that a program he created at UC's San Francisco

1993? Sure sure....and the earth is only 6000 years old too.


I was f*cking mudding in 1990, 1991 using a goddamn 2400 baud modem. (mudded from the guidance counselor's office in HS too, just to see if i could, cuz they had a modem; f*ckin' clowns. I had a copy of the master key to the school >:-D problem? added dirty words to the typing program on the g*ddamn Apple 2+ in 1st grade [BASIC], had to teach the teacher how to put the 5.25" floppy into the drive correctly)

.lynx ftw
//tab tab tab tab tab tab *sh*tfuk* shift-tab shift-tab
/(215)895.5896 was Drexel's dial-up number
/squeeeeeeeeeeeGI%&*(%^OI^&O* "GET OFF THE MODEM I NEED THE PHONE"
//DERP "you knocked me offline when you picked it up! hang it up, pick it up again!"
.women...
 
2012-02-08 10:23:23 PM
I'm actually surprised there aren't stories of patent trolls being found in a ditch after stupid shiat like this.
 
2012-02-08 10:57:36 PM
"former president George W Bush said "Internets" implying there are more than one Internet. Prove we're using the one in your patent."
suit dismissed
 
2012-02-08 11:02:01 PM

falcon176: "former president George W Bush said "Internets" implying there are is more than one Internet. Prove we're using the one in your patent."
suit dismissed


Also, mentioning George W Bush causes your grammar to get worse
 
2012-02-08 11:21:06 PM
You'd think major companies would push for drastic patent reform to avoid something like this actually succeeding, but I guess they have the "one day WE might be able to sue!" mindset.

What if this guy won and demanded that all infringement cease immediately?
 
2012-02-09 12:22:46 AM

tomcatadam: You'd think major companies would push for drastic patent reform to avoid something like this actually succeeding, but I guess they have the "one day WE might be able to sue!" mindset.


The way it works out, all of the big guys have a ton of patents, and they could all sue each other until the sun burns out or one of them runs out of money. If party A sues party B, then party B sues party A. It's similar to a cold war standoff. Neither can afford to throw the first nuke, due to the retaliatory strike.

That doesn't gain any of them anything, so they leave each other alone and don't worry much about it. But that lets them keep any new players from entering the market, because new players don't have millions to throw at lawyers and a pile of their own patents to use.

It's wonderful for lawyers. It's horrible for innovation. It's probably a wash for big companies. On the one hand, they can keep new players out of the market. On the other, they have to spend a lot of money on lawyers to file their own patents, make sure they avoid patent conflicts themselves, and dealing with patent trolls like the one in the article.

The big players are pretty much forced into doing it. If they don't file a patent, someone else will. If they don't have a patent portfolio, they have to worry about some company suing them out of business, with no way to launch a similar assault. As long as the laws are set up the way they are, they just don't have much choice.

The law wasn't always like this. In the early days of computing, you couldn't get a software patent. They didn't exist. The law has been changed to allow them, and it's sort of like pandora's box - now that it's been opened, it's hard to close.
 
2012-02-09 02:01:26 AM

Farking Canuck: Gestankfaust: UKCoolCat: Gestankfaust: Funny - A man claims to invent the internet (Gore)

/classic

Farking old and tiring - Claiming that Al Gore said he invented the internet.

Can't we let this die yet??

Umm...he did though....srsly (deny it all you want...it's recorded)

But this is what I meant. Al Gore IS A MORON!!
Why are we still listening to him?

I've looked it up: Link (new window). Have you?

p.s. Nobody is listening to him. The only people who ever bring up his name are climate change deniers.


Looked what up? That he's a moron who everyone either makes fun of if they are against him or honors him if they have an agenda?

Just a heads up to you...since you are unaware of the real world....people DO listen to him jackass. That is the problem. The "climate change deniers" just point out the obvious really. He is q moron...period. Yet people keep quoting and centering on him.

When "the facts" go both ways, we normal thinking people with common sense tend to go with what feels right. And it feels right to deny global warming...sorry
 
2012-02-09 08:48:10 AM

Aquapope: Cereal Fetish: What a difference 13 years makes.

2012: Claiming to invent the internet = maximum trolling
1999: Claiming to invent the internet = campaigning

Apparently, 13 years makes no difference at all...


You're totally right. I just realized that campaigning and maximum trolling are the same damn thing.
 
Displayed 50 of 103 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report