FARK.com: (7229970) Mark Zuckerberg granted patent on what amounts to dynamic web content

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.

		Mark Zuckerberg granted patent on what amounts to dynamic web content (news.cnet.com)		153
		More: Asinine, Mark Zuckerberg, patent applications, USPTO, messages

• • •

13733 clicks; posted to Main » on 24 Jul 2012 at 1:48 PM | Favorite | share:

Share this link:

URL:

http://fark.com/go/7229970

Bookmark:

Article Comments close

153 Comments (+0 »)

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

xanadian		2012-07-24 12:00:46 PM

So, he patented security and privacy settings?

Fark.com, you's in BIG TROUBLE NOW

/and pretty much every other Web 2.0 site out there

Marcus Aurelius		2012-07-24 12:50:32 PM

The frigging patent office is completely worthless these days. Absolutely nothing is "obvious" to those people. And they have no conception of any "prior art".

Worthless.

imtheonlylp		2012-07-24 01:52:54 PM

6 yrs ago almost to the date. crazy.

red5ish		2012-07-24 01:53:29 PM

And they go to court to try to defend it in 3...2...1...

pkellmey		2012-07-24 01:53:57 PM

xanadian: So, he patented security and privacy settings?

Fark.com, you's in BIG TROUBLE NOW

/and pretty much every other Web 2.0 site out there

Can I sue him when it fails?

stuhayes2010		2012-07-24 01:56:17 PM

I left my patent law degree in my other pants. Why do I care about this?

Theaetetus		2012-07-24 01:56:55 PM

Marcus Aurelius: Absolutely nothing is "obvious" to those people.

From the article: "Originally rejected by USPTO (United States Patent and Trademark Office) examiners due to "obvious" claims in the patent (1, 8 and 16)..."
From the deeper linked article: "The USPTO issued it only after curbing claims 1, 8 and 16, which USPTO patent examiners originally rejected because of obviousness."

Worthless.

Agreed. Would you like to try again to make a worthwhile comment?

RoyBatty		2012-07-24 01:58:16 PM

Not a lawyer, but from the article it seems to cover FARK's user pages, where I can see all my content on it, but only certain content is public.

A system and method for dynamically generating a privacy summary is provided. The present invention provides a system and method for dynamically generating a privacy summary. A profile for a user is generated. One or more privacy setting selections are received from the user associated with the profile. The profile associated with the user is updated to incorporate the one or more privacy setting selections. A privacy summary is then generated for the profile based on the one or more privacy setting selections.

RoyBatty		2012-07-24 01:59:21 PM

Theaetetus: Agreed. Would you like to try again to make a worthwhile comment?

Could you, for once, try not being a jackass from your first, overly smug comment?

Teiritzamna		2012-07-24 02:01:17 PM

Oh Hooray! Yet another discussion based on the title/abstract of a patent (which mean nothing) rather than the claims (which are the important bit)! I look forward to the educated and rational debate!

/based on Tier's law, wherein we are only allowed to debate the first three words of a patent title - it appears Z patented "Dynamically generating a"! Oh noes! He patented the ability to write the letter A!!!! That PTO is a revolving door, i tells ya!

baronvonzipper		2012-07-24 02:01:44 PM

Two days and a wakeup to retire - after then, it's just pencil and paper. Screw all of these patent trolls and their anti competition crap.

LarryDan43		2012-07-24 02:02:51 PM

You didn't built that, but your government granted patent will let you claim it.

Theaetetus		2012-07-24 02:03:02 PM

baronvonzipper: Screw all of these patent trolls

Facebook has a product.

Sudlow		2012-07-24 02:04:06 PM

FTFA: "....requesting numerous interviews and a reinvestigation in to the application in February this year. Eventually, the effort paid off, and the patent has now been granted."

Translation: They figured out who to bribe and worked out the amounts.

rmoody		2012-07-24 02:04:19 PM

Teiritzamna: Oh Hooray! Yet another discussion based on the title/abstract of a patent (which mean nothing) rather than the claims (which are the important bit)! I look forward to the educated and rational debate!

/based on Tier's law, wherein we are only allowed to debate the first three words of a patent title - it appears Z patented "Dynamically generating a"! Oh noes! He patented the ability to write the letter A!!!! That PTO is a revolving door, i tells ya!

Oh boy, another patent troll defending jackass! Tell us more about how holding a monopoly on a process benefits society in any way shape or form.

dj_spanmaster		2012-07-24 02:04:27 PM

I have an idea - I'm going to patent the way circles spin! I'm going to make BILLIONS

Derigiberble		2012-07-24 02:07:42 PM

Marcus Aurelius: The frigging patent office is completely worthless these days. Absolutely nothing is "obvious" to those people. And they have no conception of any "prior art".

Worthless.

Or you know, they rejected it as obvious but the way the system is laid out by the laws the person applying for a patent can just continue arguing and pestering the examiner with interviews until they get what they want.

The courts also have routinely imposed rather absurd requirements on saying something is obvious. It is very hard to simply say "this is obvious" because the applicant will simply say "nu-uh, prove it!".

Theaetetus		2012-07-24 02:08:41 PM

rmoody: another patent troll defending jackass

Again, Facebook has a product. They're not a troll, by definition.

Tell us more about how holding a monopoly on a process benefits society in any way shape or form.

Oh, it doesn't. Granting a time-limited monopoly on a process in exchange for public disclosure of that process benefits society. Or rather, the public disclosure benefits society, and the monopoly is the payment.
It's like asking how paying money for things benefits you in any way shape or form. Well, paying money doesn't benefit you, because you have less money... but then you get things. And things benefit you.

ph0rk		2012-07-24 02:09:06 PM

RoyBatty: Theaetetus: Agreed. Would you like to try again to make a worthwhile comment?

Could you, for once, try not being a jackass from your first, overly smug comment?

What, Theaetetus not be abrasive and confrontational from the get-go?

More on-topic, I find it amusing that most people have had to go 3rd party to get a privacy summary of their facebook profile during the period that the patent was in limbo: Link

ZAZ		2012-07-24 02:09:28 PM

Claim 1 from the USPTO site:

A method comprising: accessing a profile for a user stored in an electronic database; presenting a first user interface to the user; receiving a plurality of privacy setting selections provided by the user using the first user interface, wherein the privacy settings selections identify, for each of a plurality of different categories of information associated with the user, one or more other users who can access that category of information; updating the profile associated with the user to incorporate the plurality of privacy setting selections; generating, by a processor, a narrative explanation of which other users can access which categories of information based on the privacy settings selections, wherein generating the narrative explanation comprises, for one or more of the privacy settings selections, selecting a narrative explanation template based on the privacy settings selection, wherein the narrative explanation template comprises text that identifies a group of other users who can access a category of information about the user profile based on the privacy settings selection; and providing the narrative explanation to the user associated with the profile in a second user interface after receiving the privacy setting selections provided using the first user interface.

The invention is taking an access control list (40+ year old technology) and turning it into a "narrative explanation" for people who don't understand computers.

Theaetetus		2012-07-24 02:10:09 PM

Derigiberble: Marcus Aurelius: The frigging patent office is completely worthless these days. Absolutely nothing is "obvious" to those people. And they have no conception of any "prior art".

Worthless.

Or you know, they rejected it as obvious but the way the system is laid out by the laws the person applying for a patent can just continue arguing and pestering the examiner with interviews until they get what they want.

Yeah, that's called due process. It's a requirement in the constitution.

For example:
The courts also have routinely imposed rather absurd requirements on saying something is obvious. It is very hard to simply say "this is obvious" because the applicant will simply say "nu-uh, prove it!".

The courts have also routinely imposed "rather absurd" requirements on saying someone is guilty. It is very hard to simply say "you're a murderer" because the defendant will simply say "nu-uh, prove it!"
Same thing.

EdNortonsTwin		2012-07-24 02:10:24 PM

Sounds like he just got a patent on a moderately difficult algebra problem.

Theaetetus		2012-07-24 02:10:44 PM

... albeit a lower standard of proof on the PTO than "beyond a reasonable doubt", which is a good thing.

BarkingUnicorn		2012-07-24 02:11:10 PM

I thought Zuck wanted to do away with privacy, not own it.

imtheonlylp		2012-07-24 02:11:27 PM

What are some other patents you farkers would come up with?

this one was a good start:
dj_spanmaster: I have an idea - I'm going to patent the way circles spin! I'm going to make BILLIONS

Me? I'd patent a more portable "cool suit" for people who live in hot humid climates. Equivalent to that of a race car driver's suit, just more portable for everyday wear.

JackieRabbit		2012-07-24 02:11:55 PM

Actually, having a patent pending is in many ways better than having the patent. A pending patent cannot be challenged. It's also easier to get a court to order someone to cease and desist if it believes a pending patent is being encroached on.

Theaetetus		2012-07-24 02:12:27 PM

ph0rk: What, Theaetetus not be abrasive and confrontational from the get-go?

If you remember or bother to scroll up, I was replying to this post:
Marcus Aurelius: The frigging patent office is completely worthless these days. Absolutely nothing is "obvious" to those people. And they have no conception of any "prior art".

Worthless.

Would you say that that's not "abrasive and confrontational"? Is it wrong to reply in kind to someone?

Theaetetus		2012-07-24 02:15:02 PM

JackieRabbit: Actually, having a patent pending is in many ways better than having the patent.

This is correct, but for the wrong reasons:
A pending patent cannot be challenged.

It can be watched and challenged as soon as a notice of allowance is issued.

It's also easier to get a court to order someone to cease and desist if it believes a pending patent is being encroached on.

Absolutely not. A pending patent application gives the applicant no rights whatsoever other than a right to the filing date of the application. A court can not only not issue an injunction, they can't even hear a case relating to the application.

Theaetetus		2012-07-24 02:16:52 PM

Hit return too soon.
The reason the pending application is potentially better, Jackie, is that the claims aren't fixed in a pending application, so a potential infringer doesn't know how to design around them.

swaxhog		2012-07-24 02:19:02 PM

Quick, someone take this idea and add "on a handheld device". Then another patent with "over wireless".

torr5962		2012-07-24 02:19:13 PM

What ever happened to that 100 million he gave the Newark school district in 2010?

thelordofcheese		2012-07-24 02:19:46 PM

Zuckerberg invented Active Directory and Sharepoint?

RoyBatty		2012-07-24 02:21:42 PM

Theaetetus: ph0rk: What, Theaetetus not be abrasive and confrontational from the get-go?

If you remember or bother to scroll up, I was replying to this post:
Marcus Aurelius: The frigging patent office is completely worthless these days. Absolutely nothing is "obvious" to those people. And they have no conception of any "prior art".

Worthless.

Would you say that that's not "abrasive and confrontational"? Is it wrong to reply in kind to someone?

Marcus Aurelius's statement was his opinion about the patent office, it was not a personal attack on you.

Your response, right off the bat, was a personal attack on Marcus Aurelius.

Yes, you're a patent attorney, yes, you occasionally have interesting things to say, and yes, your style is always one of total jackass.

Enough said from me.

Teiritzamna		2012-07-24 02:22:33 PM

rmoody: Teiritzamna: Oh Hooray! Yet another discussion based on the title/abstract of a patent (which mean nothing) rather than the claims (which are the important bit)! I look forward to the educated and rational debate!

/based on Tier's law, wherein we are only allowed to debate the first three words of a patent title - it appears Z patented "Dynamically generating a"! Oh noes! He patented the ability to write the letter A!!!! That PTO is a revolving door, i tells ya!

Oh boy, another patent troll defending jackass! Tell us more about how holding a monopoly on a process benefits society in any way shape or form.

Oh darling, so much wrongness in one short sentence.

1) not a patent troll if they are making the product.
2) lack of understanding the basis for government protection of IP, which was considered important enough a benefit to society that its an enumerated power of congress
3) the belief that i am defending Z, when in fact i am lamenting the fact that 90% of articles and threads about patent are people foaming at the mouth about statements in the abstract, or worse the title, rather than the claims. This is about as annoying to someone who actually understands patent law as the tendency of calling all pistols "glocks" is annoying to anyone who knows something about guns.

However, you were correct in the fact that i am in fact a jackass. So 'grats!

ZAZ: Claim 1 from the USPTO site:

See! This guy is actually discussing the operative part! Spiffy!

12 Inch Pianist		2012-07-24 02:22:34 PM

fark Zuck

Teiritzamna		2012-07-24 02:24:11 PM

Teiritzamna: Oh darling, so much wrongness in ~~one short sentence~~ two short sentences.

FTFM

Central		2012-07-24 02:24:19 PM

I hear the USPTO works on RAID 0 with no backup plan. That would be nice.

Theaetetus		2012-07-24 02:24:22 PM

RoyBatty: Your response, right off the bat, was a personal attack on Marcus Aurelius.

I pointed out that his post was factually incorrect based on quotes from the article, and I suggested his post was therefore worthless and he should make a new one. At no point was there a "personal attack on Marcus Aurelius" from me.

Abrasive? Sure.
Confrontational? In similar style as his own.
An ad hominem? Not at all.

Oznog		2012-07-24 02:26:22 PM

Marcus Aurelius: The frigging patent office is completely worthless these days. Absolutely nothing is "obvious" to those people. And they have no conception of any "prior art".

Worthless.

They used the "Obvious" tag?

Sweet.

Spanky3woods		2012-07-24 02:26:42 PM

Theaetetus: baronvonzipper: Screw all of these patent trolls

Facebook has a product.

Yes. The product is YOU. They don't make money when you post pictures of your dog or write messages to friends telling them where you ate lunch.

They make money off of you. Your information. Your habits. Your likes and dislikes. This they sell to the highest bidder.

Nothing more complicated than that.

The_Six_Fingered_Man		2012-07-24 02:27:01 PM

If I don't find Theatetus to be condescending and jackass-esque, then I am curious as to what that says about me.

In any case, I'm ok with it.

Keep on keepin on, Patent Law Guy.

geek_mars		2012-07-24 02:27:16 PM

So, does this mean Faceberg can retroactively sue (pretty much) the rest of the internet?

fluffy2097		2012-07-24 02:28:24 PM

I patented altering electrical voltages years ago.

I'm filthy rich now.

Theaetetus		2012-07-24 02:29:06 PM

The_Six_Fingered_Man: jackass-esque

It's short for Esquire, so lawyers should be properly identified as jackass-esq.

blackhonda		2012-07-24 02:31:10 PM

baronvonzipper: Two days and a wakeup to retire - after then, it's just pencil and paper. Screw all of these patent trolls and their anti competition crap.

32 days and a wakeup to boredom and the beginnings of a search for part time work. Been there done that.

Teiritzamna		2012-07-24 02:31:42 PM

Theaetetus: It's short for Esquire, so lawyers should be properly identified as jackass-esq.

well i did spend a lot of time/effort earning my Jackass Doctor, or J.D., so yeah

jonny_q		2012-07-24 02:33:34 PM

Teiritzamna: Oh Hooray! Yet another discussion based on the title/abstract of a patent (which mean nothing) rather than the claims (which are the important bit)! I look forward to the educated and rational debate!

If the specific patented claims were the important bit, and this really was a very specific, limited, minor patent, and this was really the norm, there would be a lot fewer patent cases right now between pretty much everyone and pretty much everyone else.

It doesn't matter that the later pages are the important part ... they'll still try to sue everyone of existence.

/actually, Facebook may be more like Google and doing this defensively, but, well, see Apple vs. pretty much everyone, or the history of Amazon's One-click

WinnipegDragon		2012-07-24 02:35:06 PM

I'm going to need more pictures of the blogger to fully digest this story.

jonny_q		2012-07-24 02:35:54 PM

The_Six_Fingered_Man: If I don't find Theatetus to be condescending and jackass-esque, then I am curious as to what that says about me.

In any case, I'm ok with it.

Keep on keepin on, Patent Law Guy.

He has his facts straight, but his opinions start from such a flawed premise that I find it hard to believe he actually believes anything he says.
/which is why I have him on ignore.

Teiritzamna		2012-07-24 02:37:57 PM

jonny_q: He has his facts straight, but his opinions start from such a flawed premise that I find it hard to believe he actually believes anything he says.

Actual honest question, what premise might that be?

Displayed 50 of 153 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Redisplay/refresh comments

This thread is closed to new comments.