Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Software Patents Shut Down RunwayFinder

blog.runwayfinder.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 89 posts

Re: Software Patents Shut Down RunwayFinder

#61

Post by nene »

ppruitt wrote: post #29

AvWeb interviewed Ross Neher from FlightPrep. At 5:02 they discuss the RunwayFinder suit: http://www.avweb.com/podcast/podcast/AudioPodcast_FlightPrep... As a student pilot, I hope this gets sorted out soon. RunwayFinder has the best VFR-sectional-over-Google-Maps interface of the available online tools. Skyvector.com is a close second, but they don't seamlessly stitch together charts (you must manually switch betwee…

From the interview:

- How can you patent something like online flight planning? [--] Were you just first ones to think of patenting it?

- According to the Patent Office, that is correct.

The interviewer tries to squeeze information out from the man, but he just talks his way around the actual question, saying things like IANAL, It's in the Patent, the Patent is very specific, that's what the Patent Office says.

I wish the interviewer wasn't so soft with him.

Re: Software Patents Shut Down RunwayFinder

#62

Post by WildUtah »

pmiller2 wrote: post #13
Zak wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To summarize: it's a patent on the idea of overlaying a flight plan on a map using a website. The general case of this is drawing line-segments on a background, something every trivial paint program can do. This patent clearly fails the obviousness test.

It doesn't fail the obviousness test at the USPTO, because they seem not to employ people with ordinary skill in the art of anything related to software. At least, that's the most charitable explanation I can come up with.

There is a list of valid degrees that qualify a person to join the patent bar or work as an examiner. A law degree is required and also an engineering degree but software engineers are specifically excluded.

Civil, mechanical, electrical, and chemical engineers and possibly others are included and software is excluded. And this is the agency that evaluates and issues patents to strangle our field.

Re: Software Patents Shut Down RunwayFinder

#63

Post by Natsu »

pierrefar wrote: post #38
HeyLaughingBoy wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

when the patent was filed, RunwayFinder was already online Doesn't matter. Patents are awarded by first to invent not first to file .

Depends on where you are in the world. The European Patent Office explains: Virtually every patent office in the world (including the EPO and the JPO) is based on a first-to-file system. ... The USPTO, however, is the only office to be based on a first-to-invent system, meaning that a patent is granted to the person who first conceived and practiced the invention, rather than to the person who first filed the inventi…

I know that they want to change that, too, but I really hope they don't. Otherwise, the people who didn't think a thing was even worth patenting (or who couldn't afford to patent it) will have their inventions stolen from them.

I will justify the use of "stolen" here by saying it's because they're no longer legally able to use their own idea. Restricting an idea via IP laws is one of the few ways an idea can actually be stolen.

Re: Software Patents Shut Down RunwayFinder

#64

Post by kragen »

HeyLaughingBoy wrote: post #30
Vivtek wrote: post #11

Oh, good Lord, when the patent was filed, RunwayFinder was already online . Talk about prior art! This kind of abuse just boils my blood, especially when it involves this kind of penny-ante bullshit, the whole rent-seeking mentality of identifying a niche market that could really benefit from more open information and then trying to dominate it for chump change.

when the patent was filed, RunwayFinder was already online Doesn't matter. Patents are awarded by first to invent not first to file .

Even in the US with its unusual rule of first-to-invent, you can't file a patent on an invention that somebody else has also invented and disclosed to the public ("prior art").

Re: Software Patents Shut Down RunwayFinder

#65

Post by nick24862486 »

This is very sad. I would be glad if we can have site to expose those patent trolls. Browser plugin which automatically displays "Those are patent abusers, don't visit!" when you try to visit given url's would be even better. Maybe that would build some pressure to not use abusive claims.

Re: Software Patents Shut Down RunwayFinder

#66

Post by og1 »

moge wrote: post #12

knowing nothing about the company or history the line about lost revenue just made my blood boil. 22k unique visitors = 3.2 million in lost sales. 100% conversation. There is so much fail going on here and that before you include the insanity of the 'patent'.

The thing is it is actually worse than that. It is 100% conversion with the assumption that every single visitor would instead use accusing site instead of going to any of the other alternatives.

Re: Software Patents Shut Down RunwayFinder

#67

Post by kragen »

tif wrote: post #57
gjm11 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the betting that the terms of that "free" licence involve some sort of admission of RunwayFinder's guilt, or of the validity of FlightPrep's patent?

Doesn't the simple act of accepting a (free or otherwise) license from someone imply that that you accept their right to grant said license? Both parties I'm sure are aware of this; it's simply posturing on FlightPrep's part with the hope that RunwayFinder will be dumb enough to accept it and thereby lose in the long run.

No.

The classic case of a license in common law is permission to enter someone's property. Consider this case:

Me, opening the door to my apartment: Oh shit! There's a burglar in my living room!

Burglar: I'm not a burglar! This is my apartment! I've owned it for ten years.

Me: This isn't your apartment! It's my apartment! I bought it from Hugo López last year!

Burglar: Hold on a second. As long as you don't lay your hands on me, I'll allow you to remain in this living room to discuss this with me, but López never actually owned this apartment. He rented it from me for a while, but I evicted him five years ago for not paying rent. It was a fraudulent sale.

Me: Really? Shit. Listen, are you armed?

Burglar: No. Does this catsuit look like it has space for a gun? [Holds up hands, turns 360°]

Me: I guess not. I'm still calling the police.

Burglar: Go ahead.

Me: [pulls out cellphone and starts dialing]

Now, the burglar has granted me a license to remain on what he claims is his property. He could still be a burglar hoping to fool me long enough to get away, or he could be telling the truth and be the legal owner of the place, or in fact he could be telling the truth but López might have become the legal owner of the place through adverse possession, but in none of these cases am I accepting his claim and ceding the property to him simply by remaining in my own living room, or by not bodily throwing him out.

Re: Software Patents Shut Down RunwayFinder

#68

Post by kragen »

flipbrad wrote: post #33

I supposed it could be a big boost for FOSS if the remedy for IP infringement wasn't damages calculated on expected (lost) sales, but an account for profits; so you'd hand over the profit you made from infringing this patent (rather than - hand over what we can convince a judge we would have made if we didn't have to compete with a cheaper product)

It would probably hurt FOSS in the short term, because it would essentially legalize not-for-profit copying — unlicensed copies of any proprietary software would be legal, and so we'd have well-curated and reputable repositories of AutoCAD, Microsoft Windows, OrCAD, Cisco IOS, and so on, perhaps even with enhancements and ports to new platforms. I imagine this is already the case in China.

Re: Software Patents Shut Down RunwayFinder

#69

Post by rbanffy »

jrockway wrote: post #23
regularfry wrote: post #8

Invoking the "every visitor/download/viewer represents a lost sale" argument? Seriously? Isn't that like Godwinning a legal exchange these days?

Suing someone is expensive and risky. If the "victim" can just be bossed around with scary numbers like "33 million dollars per month", then that's excellent; they get what they want without even having to work for it. (Personally, that amount would be more than I could ever pay off in a lifetime, so I wouldn't worry about it. I would just join some teach-kids-to-read-in-Africa chairty, leave the world of material we…

> leave the world of material wealth behind forever

I would devote my life to finding a way to countersue them into non-existence as well as a way to disbar every lawyer involved in their offensive.

Re: Software Patents Shut Down RunwayFinder

#70

Post by dctoedt »

HeyLaughingBoy wrote: post #30
Vivtek wrote: post #11

Oh, good Lord, when the patent was filed, RunwayFinder was already online . Talk about prior art! This kind of abuse just boils my blood, especially when it involves this kind of penny-ante bullshit, the whole rent-seeking mentality of identifying a niche market that could really benefit from more open information and then trying to dominate it for chump change.

when the patent was filed, RunwayFinder was already online Doesn't matter. Patents are awarded by first to invent not first to file .

> Patents are awarded by first to invent not first to file.

The default value for date-of-invention is date-of-filing. An inventor who wants to establish an earlier date-of-invention has the burden of proof (and must provide corroborating evidence such as a dated- and witnessed lab notebook, because it's too easy for an inventor to "misremember").

(Yes, we're talking current U.S. law here; most other countries are indeed first-to-file.)

Additional reading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_to_file_and_first_to_inve...

Post reply on HN