5 ms·

@all - Quick points to clarify - my partner and I have 'filed' for patent but not received it yet. The concept is not unique in itself - the auto switch from vi

@all - Quick points to clarify - my partner and I have 'filed' for patent but not received it yet. The concept is not unique in itself - the auto switch from visible to invisible is. As a fully funded VC company, any patent is value creating - the intention is obviously to use the patent tag to then seriously license the solution to folks like Viacom etc.

disguisedcoder 16y ago
if (HOST != MYSERVER) { show_ad(); } This is silly. I congratulate you for writing an interesting blog post and I can understand that one would like to obtain a monopoly if he's found a working business model, yet I consider such a practice to be highly unethical. You are right in thinking that you deserve to reap the benefits after you've found a solution to that problem. You truly do. But you're wrong in drawing the conclusion that you've somehow acquired the right to shut out your competition. Software patents are a sham(e).
- todayiamme 16y ago
  I won't argue with your viewpoint of the patent system, but at some level I can understand why the OP did this. India is not a good place to do business especially if you're a software company which is centered around being a hotbed for innovation. The legal system is so slow that nuclear fusion would have been invented by the time your case is resolved. Down here it is common for people to copy your code by reverse engineering or some other method and use it blatantly in their products, because they know that you can't go after them. What a patent does is that it gives that aura of security. I think that the indian govt. is trying to setup a fast track court to deal with patent disputes in order to be globally competitive. So, people are less likely to mess with you if you have that bit over there. In his point of view it is a defense tactic necessary for the survival of his company. It is doubtful that his company would survive beyond a point if it doesn't protect itself like this. I know this is wrong in so many ways, but try to explain this to the trolls.
  - disguisedcoder 16y ago
    I can understand the desire to get a monopoly too, as I've pointed out. But I also fail to see how the situation is any different in the rest of the world. Don't let minor differences fool you. This is simply a case of a lack of innovation and therefore they have no edge over their competition. This ridicules the whole concept of software patents. Where they should protect innovation they simply protect the lack thereof. If it was the other way around, if they had such a great product that the competition had too much work to do, they wouldn't need a patent in the first place. This is how the rest of the world deals with the problem. Now we know that having the best product is not a guarantee for success. And that's where that unethical edge-taking via patents comes into play.
    - todayiamme 16y ago
      I know that. The problem is that you're assuming that everyone is playing a level headed game with you. I was born and raised in India. Even though I grew up elsewhere inside my head, I've seen stuff that is so far out that I really couldn't believe my eyes. I've seen my father pile money into a black bag for his boss in order to bribe a certain famous politician. Why? Well, they wanted to win the bid for supplying security gear to a certain infrastructural branch. I snorted in disbelief and I was promptly rushed out of the room. I've seen people copy and paste code for a living in a company. I've seen family businesses that are hardly above being a gray mafia. I've seen people burn their books every year to evade tax, and I've seen tax officials get richer and richer all the time. Do you want me to continue? It is true that such stuff happens every where, but over here it is taken as the birth right of a company to do so. As long as they have money in their pockets no one can touch them. This is where scare tactics come in. Whether or not his company is innovative is a question that comes into play only when other people are competing in the same way. Trust me he has done something extremely bold down here, but the trolls have more money and less expenses. They don't need to hire people to develop stuff. They just copy whatever he makes and bribe the officials so that they can get away. If a patent deters them even one bit and allows him to thrive then I think it is logical for him to do so. Right or wrong comes into the equation when certain basic parameters are met. Personally, I can't live like this and the minute I get an opportunity I will pack my bags and leave. I want to spend my time creating beautiful things not fighting trolls in the name of running a "business". So, in a way I applaud him for standing his ground and fighting to make it down here. At the same time I condemn him, but can I really blame him?
- Khambadkone 16y ago
  It's a bit more complicated than a simple formula, but certainly more productive than serving "cease and desist" orders when it comes to protecting IP. We're a start-up, and we aim to innovate and build value. If we do patents, the objective is not to monopolize but more like an old Arab saying, "Trust in God, but tie up your camel".
reitzensteinm 16y ago
When was it filed exactly? I first did this in 2007. And I have to say, I considered it obvious at the time (the difference is I show an ad for my site, rather than generic ads). Do you have a link to the filing?
- mathgladiator 16y ago
  obvious to hackers = novel to suits :(
  - xinsight 16y ago
    Yes, but obvious to hackers = high possibility of prior art
    - mathgladiator 16y ago
      true, but to the extent of the prior art is visible and notable.

disguisedcoder 16y ago

if (HOST != MYSERVER) { show_ad(); } This is silly. I congratulate you for writing an interesting blog post and I can understand that one would like to obtain a monopoly if he's found a working business model, yet I consider such a practice to be highly unethical. You are right in thinking that you deserve to reap the benefits after you've found a solution to that problem. You truly do. But you're wrong in drawing the conclusion that you've somehow acquired the right to shut out your competition. Software patents are a sham(e).

todayiamme 16y ago
I won't argue with your viewpoint of the patent system, but at some level I can understand why the OP did this. India is not a good place to do business especially if you're a software company which is centered around being a hotbed for innovation. The legal system is so slow that nuclear fusion would have been invented by the time your case is resolved. Down here it is common for people to copy your code by reverse engineering or some other method and use it blatantly in their products, because they know that you can't go after them. What a patent does is that it gives that aura of security. I think that the indian govt. is trying to setup a fast track court to deal with patent disputes in order to be globally competitive. So, people are less likely to mess with you if you have that bit over there. In his point of view it is a defense tactic necessary for the survival of his company. It is doubtful that his company would survive beyond a point if it doesn't protect itself like this. I know this is wrong in so many ways, but try to explain this to the trolls.
- disguisedcoder 16y ago
  I can understand the desire to get a monopoly too, as I've pointed out. But I also fail to see how the situation is any different in the rest of the world. Don't let minor differences fool you. This is simply a case of a lack of innovation and therefore they have no edge over their competition. This ridicules the whole concept of software patents. Where they should protect innovation they simply protect the lack thereof. If it was the other way around, if they had such a great product that the competition had too much work to do, they wouldn't need a patent in the first place. This is how the rest of the world deals with the problem. Now we know that having the best product is not a guarantee for success. And that's where that unethical edge-taking via patents comes into play.
  - todayiamme 16y ago
    I know that. The problem is that you're assuming that everyone is playing a level headed game with you. I was born and raised in India. Even though I grew up elsewhere inside my head, I've seen stuff that is so far out that I really couldn't believe my eyes. I've seen my father pile money into a black bag for his boss in order to bribe a certain famous politician. Why? Well, they wanted to win the bid for supplying security gear to a certain infrastructural branch. I snorted in disbelief and I was promptly rushed out of the room. I've seen people copy and paste code for a living in a company. I've seen family businesses that are hardly above being a gray mafia. I've seen people burn their books every year to evade tax, and I've seen tax officials get richer and richer all the time. Do you want me to continue? It is true that such stuff happens every where, but over here it is taken as the birth right of a company to do so. As long as they have money in their pockets no one can touch them. This is where scare tactics come in. Whether or not his company is innovative is a question that comes into play only when other people are competing in the same way. Trust me he has done something extremely bold down here, but the trolls have more money and less expenses. They don't need to hire people to develop stuff. They just copy whatever he makes and bribe the officials so that they can get away. If a patent deters them even one bit and allows him to thrive then I think it is logical for him to do so. Right or wrong comes into the equation when certain basic parameters are met. Personally, I can't live like this and the minute I get an opportunity I will pack my bags and leave. I want to spend my time creating beautiful things not fighting trolls in the name of running a "business". So, in a way I applaud him for standing his ground and fighting to make it down here. At the same time I condemn him, but can I really blame him?
Khambadkone 16y ago
It's a bit more complicated than a simple formula, but certainly more productive than serving "cease and desist" orders when it comes to protecting IP. We're a start-up, and we aim to innovate and build value. If we do patents, the objective is not to monopolize but more like an old Arab saying, "Trust in God, but tie up your camel".

reitzensteinm 16y ago

When was it filed exactly? I first did this in 2007. And I have to say, I considered it obvious at the time (the difference is I show an ad for my site, rather than generic ads). Do you have a link to the filing?

mathgladiator 16y ago
obvious to hackers = novel to suits :(
- xinsight 16y ago
  Yes, but obvious to hackers = high possibility of prior art
  - mathgladiator 16y ago
    true, but to the extent of the prior art is visible and notable.