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

Mistral Patent for “Code implemented tool calls”

patentsgazette.uspto.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 211 posts

Re: Mistral Patent for “Code implemented tool calls”

#121

Post by fluidcruft »

linuxhansl wrote: post #99

Having my name on a bunch of software patents - and, yes, I tried to get my name off them, but was not allowed - I can fairly confidently say: There is not A single worthy software patent out there. You know, one that is "not obvious to someone skilled in the art" and that actually protects a monetary investment. Software patent are a scourge of the software industry. Patents are designed to protect costly research;…

Copyrights for protecting software seems likely to die on the altar of LLMs. It seems likely patents will become more important.

Re: Mistral Patent for “Code implemented tool calls”

#122

Post by jjice »

Roark66 wrote: post #34

It is quite funny an EU company patenting a software feature that is basically unpatentable in EU in the US. Clearly this is an attempt to prevent similar patents from being weaponised against them in the US. No one cares about such stuff in Europe.

> Clearly this is an attempt to prevent similar patents from being weaponised against them in the US.

Why do we assume that Mistral is a "good guy" protecting themselves? I'm not sure they necessarily are. Could just be trying to grab any ground they can.

I mean, maybe they are the "good guy", but I don't think we know either way.

Re: Mistral Patent for “Code implemented tool calls”

#123

Post by CodesInChaos »

j-bos wrote: post #112
CodesInChaos wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately there are many patents that simply combine an old thing with a new thing in the obvious way. Since the new thing is new, the combination is "novel".

Law says must be NON obvious

The patent office applies a much lower "non-obviousness" threshold than how a technical person would interpret that word.

Re: Mistral Patent for “Code implemented tool calls”

#124

Post by mediaman »

freejazz wrote: post #111
jrflo wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is why all patents exist. It's ridiculously time consuming and expensive to get a utility patent for anything. I invented something at my old company 5 years ago and the patent process is still ongoing, should hopefully get awarded this year. It costs tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees and you need to actively litigate infringements if you want to keep it. 99% of patents exist just for legal bullying and…

> you need to actively litigate infringements if you want to keep it. No you don't. That being said, what is the point of a patent if not to enforce the right of exclusivity it grants as to the invention?

That poster mixed it up with trademarks, for which enforcement is required to maintain its validity.

Re: Mistral Patent for “Code implemented tool calls”

#125

Post by linuxhansl »

TheMagicHorsey wrote: post #120
linuxhansl wrote: post #99

Having my name on a bunch of software patents - and, yes, I tried to get my name off them, but was not allowed - I can fairly confidently say: There is not A single worthy software patent out there. You know, one that is "not obvious to someone skilled in the art" and that actually protects a monetary investment. Software patent are a scourge of the software industry. Patents are designed to protect costly research;…

Anyone who has ever taken part in a software patent litigation ... or in the creation of a software patent, knows intimately that its a bunch of bullshit. The boogieman that software patent advocates raise is that IP theft and free riding will destroy America if we don't have patents. But literally nobody is creating software to get a patent on it, and software patents don't stop anyone from replicating software. Ins…

It feels more like an arms-race to me. Where I work we patent stuff for defensive purposes only, so we have something when we get sued (and we have been). Maybe that's just another boogieman, but it seems unless everybody stops nobody can.

Re: Mistral Patent for “Code implemented tool calls”

#127

Post by jrflo »

freejazz wrote: post #111
jrflo wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is why all patents exist. It's ridiculously time consuming and expensive to get a utility patent for anything. I invented something at my old company 5 years ago and the patent process is still ongoing, should hopefully get awarded this year. It costs tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees and you need to actively litigate infringements if you want to keep it. 99% of patents exist just for legal bullying and…

> you need to actively litigate infringements if you want to keep it. No you don't. That being said, what is the point of a patent if not to enforce the right of exclusivity it grants as to the invention?

Yeah you're right, I was thinking of trademarks. I just think the system is very cumbersome and antiquated, these days it mostly serves to benefit patent lawyers rather than inventors and small businesses, aside from highly regulated fields where things move slower.

Re: Mistral Patent for “Code implemented tool calls”

#128

Post by st_goliath »

ffsm8 wrote: post #108
_fizz_buzz_ wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fraunhofer absolutely does licensing. That is one of their main sources of income. Also,your retelling of the story is off: https://www.4ipcouncil.com/features/mp3-digital-audio-coding

I think you didn't understand what I was trying to say. Fraunhofer didn't do licencing before joining up with Thomson. That's why - back in the 90s - there were no litigation anywhere even though everyone ignored their patents. Then Frauenhofer joined up with Thomson and that's where your understanding joins up with reality: now the Frauenhofer does licencing and sues anyone that's not paying them. My whole comment w…

> I think you didn't understand what I was trying to say.

They don't do this sort of thing... oh wait, they do.

But we are still wrong to judge their character by their own actions, because... evil French people made them do it?

Re: Mistral Patent for “Code implemented tool calls”

#129

Post by summarity »

linuxhansl wrote: post #99

Having my name on a bunch of software patents - and, yes, I tried to get my name off them, but was not allowed - I can fairly confidently say: There is not A single worthy software patent out there. You know, one that is "not obvious to someone skilled in the art" and that actually protects a monetary investment. Software patent are a scourge of the software industry. Patents are designed to protect costly research;…

I agree in general, but can think of at least one counterpoint: https://terathon.com/blog/decade-slug.html

Actually novel implementation is protected, paid the author's bills, and was dedicated to the public domain recently - no massive corp involved.

Post reply on HN