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

When Bad Patents Hurt Good People: Patent Threat Shuts Down Flight Planning Site

eff.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 39 posts

Re: When Bad Patents Hurt Good People: Patent Threat Shuts Down Flight Planning Site

#21

Post by alain94040 »

redthrowaway wrote: post #14
kajecounterhack wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whoa Linked Lists got patented?!?! That's crazy. Do you happen to have a link about it, I'm really curious about this. That's friggin crazy...

Yeah, it's pretty damned discouraging. http://www.google.com/patents?id=Szh4AAAAEBAJ&printsec=a...

Sorry, but that patent does not cover linked lists.

It covers the merging to two lists using linked lists so that there are multiple ways to loop though a list of items.

Fairly obvious? I would say so. But not the sensational claim that "linked lists are patented".

By making such bogus claims, you actually hurt the cause of people who want real patent reform.

This opinion coming from someone who had to go through the legal system to file and defend bogus patent infringement cases.

Re: When Bad Patents Hurt Good People: Patent Threat Shuts Down Flight Planning Site

#22

Post by soitgoes »

CapitalistCartr wrote: post #3

Three weeks ago they were going to fight it: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2018272

And since then, he seems to be getting quite a bit of support in his fight: http://blog.runwayfinder.com/2011/01/07/the-lawyers-are-talk...

Re: When Bad Patents Hurt Good People: Patent Threat Shuts Down Flight Planning Site

#23

Post by fuzzythinker »

nphase wrote: post #18
patrickaljord wrote: post #15

On a related note, the guys from Hipmunk[0] also patented something ridiculous which is basically a simple jquery plugin. [0]: http://www.hipmunk.com/

Getting a patent for something isn't necessarily a bad thing in and of itself. Doing harm with those patents is. Many companies get patents to protect themselves from situations just like this one.

until they get brought by a slightly eviler co.

Re: When Bad Patents Hurt Good People: Patent Threat Shuts Down Flight Planning Site

#24

Post by cookiecaper »

fuzzythinker wrote: post #23
nphase wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Getting a patent for something isn't necessarily a bad thing in and of itself. Doing harm with those patents is. Many companies get patents to protect themselves from situations just like this one.

until they get brought by a slightly eviler co.

It doesn't always have to work that way. If patents are secured, they can effectively be released into public domain, at least as far as I understand. Take a look at Xiph and Ogg; my understanding is that they publicly relinquished any rights to pursue infringement claims on their Vorbis-related (?) patents. IANAL.

Someone may also take a more creative route and attempt to make the point that software patents are terrible and evil by doing something absurd and high-profile by wielding them. For instance, if people can't get an iPhone anymore because of an injunction related to a patent suit, people will get mad and someone will probably at least try to fix the law, but probably end up making it worse. Generally, it seems people don't care about principle as much as they care about having their fleeting wants fulfilled. If you take away American Idol or iPhone, you will get angry citizens.

Re: When Bad Patents Hurt Good People: Patent Threat Shuts Down Flight Planning Site

#25

Post by Natsu »

alain94040 wrote: post #21
redthrowaway wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, it's pretty damned discouraging. http://www.google.com/patents?id=Szh4AAAAEBAJ&printsec=a...

Sorry, but that patent does not cover linked lists. It covers the merging to two lists using linked lists so that there are multiple ways to loop though a list of items. Fairly obvious? I would say so. But not the sensational claim that "linked lists are patented". By making such bogus claims, you actually hurt the cause of people who want real patent reform. This opinion coming from someone who had to go through the…

Would it make you feel better if he'd said that it covers doubly linked lists?

Because those appear to satisfy every element of claim #1 that I can find. IANAL, but I'm pretty sure that's the same as being patented.

Specifically, we have a "plurality" of objects in a doubly-linked list because it's a list and we have a primary and auxiliary pointer that lets the computer go through all the items without resorting them. In a doubly-linked list, the primary pointer points forwards, the auxiliary pointer points backwards and it lets a computer program go through the list without sorting.

Notably, there's no limitation I can see on claim #1 that forbids the auxiliary pointers from all going backwards and the field of invention might as well just say "computers." Maybe there's something limiting it in the prosecution history, but I'm not going to hold my breath.

EDIT: Also note that nothing in that claim's text requires merging two lists. If I'm misreading anything, feel free to cite the exact portion that says otherwise.

At first, I honestly thought this was from a decade or more ago. But then I noticed this: Filing date: Sep 26, 2002 Issue date: Apr 11, 2006

Yeah, because nobody was using more than one pointer on a linked list before then. I feel like I should grep some old FOSS code and see how many published examples of this "invention" I can find.

I don't know enough LISP to be sure, but I wonder if the cons cell itself can't almost be prior art.

Re: When Bad Patents Hurt Good People: Patent Threat Shuts Down Flight Planning Site

#26

Post by wazoox »

nphase wrote: post #18
patrickaljord wrote: post #15

On a related note, the guys from Hipmunk[0] also patented something ridiculous which is basically a simple jquery plugin. [0]: http://www.hipmunk.com/

Getting a patent for something isn't necessarily a bad thing in and of itself. Doing harm with those patents is. Many companies get patents to protect themselves from situations just like this one.

When companies must have patents to defend themselves against patent trolls, the only possible winners are lawyers.

Software patents are completely wrong. As a side note, pg said that if software patents are wrong, then all patents are wrong. BTW I'm confident that most of current IP environment (both patents and copyright) hurts people and the economy.

Re: When Bad Patents Hurt Good People: Patent Threat Shuts Down Flight Planning Site

#27

Post by prodigal_erik »

wazoox wrote: post #26
nphase wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Getting a patent for something isn't necessarily a bad thing in and of itself. Doing harm with those patents is. Many companies get patents to protect themselves from situations just like this one.

When companies must have patents to defend themselves against patent trolls, the only possible winners are lawyers. Software patents are completely wrong. As a side note, pg said that if software patents are wrong, then all patents are wrong. BTW I'm confident that most of current IP environment (both patents and copyright) hurts people and the economy.

I don't think patents are wrong in all fields. They seem to work when you're required to claim a specific, high-effort solution that the industry wouldn't have found without you. They fail when you're allowed to claim an entire problem by being the first to write down the features all solutions have in common. With software, USPTO is enabling a land rush into a new discipline that doesn't yet have enough written prior art to make any useful work safe, and their bar for "novel and non-obvious" is absurdly low.

Re: When Bad Patents Hurt Good People: Patent Threat Shuts Down Flight Planning Site

#28

Post by kljensen »

wazoox wrote: post #26
nphase wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Getting a patent for something isn't necessarily a bad thing in and of itself. Doing harm with those patents is. Many companies get patents to protect themselves from situations just like this one.

When companies must have patents to defend themselves against patent trolls, the only possible winners are lawyers. Software patents are completely wrong. As a side note, pg said that if software patents are wrong, then all patents are wrong. BTW I'm confident that most of current IP environment (both patents and copyright) hurts people and the economy.

Patents do not defend against "trolls" because "trolls" don't make products.

Re: When Bad Patents Hurt Good People: Patent Threat Shuts Down Flight Planning Site

#29

Post by dhimes »

redthrowaway wrote: post #12
nickpinkston wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd argue that: 1.) There are bad feedback loops between speed / quality / price of patent examination and the amount of ridiculous patents issued. 2.) Increasing the budget to improve screening and throughput will lead to an increase in patents submitted - will this increase at a higher / lower rate than their budget? I.e. will new patent submissions bloat the office even more than now? 3.) We could try to increase…

I think you really need to re-examine 1 & 2. Increasing the speed and quality of patent review may lead to more patent applications, but would reduce the number of baseless patents granted. As for price, the USPTO was never supposed to be self-sufficient. Doing it properly means the taxpayer picks up the tab. That's just something you have to accept in exchange for living in a highly developed economy. IBM's patents,…

Probably due to the fact that IANAL, I never understood why you need an actual patent to defend yourself. Why doesn't just having prior art suffice? Seems like if it's publicly reachable you should be safe.

Re: When Bad Patents Hurt Good People: Patent Threat Shuts Down Flight Planning Site

#30

Post by yason »

prodigal_erik wrote: post #27
wazoox wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When companies must have patents to defend themselves against patent trolls, the only possible winners are lawyers. Software patents are completely wrong. As a side note, pg said that if software patents are wrong, then all patents are wrong. BTW I'm confident that most of current IP environment (both patents and copyright) hurts people and the economy.

I don't think patents are wrong in all fields. They seem to work when you're required to claim a specific, high-effort solution that the industry wouldn't have found without you. They fail when you're allowed to claim an entire problem by being the first to write down the features all solutions have in common. With software, USPTO is enabling a land rush into a new discipline that doesn't yet have enough written prio…

Patents can help innovation but only in the rare cases where it's actually worth to license the patent in order to still make serious money _now_. But even specific patented solutions often seem to be a hindrance in overall development.

As an example, when reading the history of steam engines, I recall several occasions where development simply halted until some patent expired. Nobody got any wealthier either but when the thing fell into public domain, innovation rushed forward. And this was in the 1800's, and pretty much a prime example of what the patent system was cooked up for: a mechanical, specified engineering invention...

Yet it failed, already then.

Post reply on HN