4 ms·

Another similar service (that I like better) is what3words. Unfortunately that's patented/proprietary, so no one will ever use it. Basically it splits the worl

Another similar service (that I like better) is what3words. Unfortunately that's patented/proprietary, so no one will ever use it. Basically it splits the world into small squares, each defined by 3 common English words. Very easy to remember. https://patents.google.com/patent/CA2909524A1 https://patents.google.com/patent/CA2909524A1

myself248 8y ago
> patented/proprietary, so no one will ever use it. Actually, that means there's a bunch of money behind it, bribing carmakers to include it in their nav systems, etc. It's still shit, but it'll be ubiquitous shit.
- lifthrasiir 8y ago
  And there is at least one known instance of such system: many car navigation systems in Japan have support for Denso Mapcode [1]. Its algorithm is almost trivial but has a private mapping which effectively makes its entirty proprietary. [1] https://www.denso-communications.jp/mapcode/ https://www.denso-communications.jp/mapcode/
- mtmail 8y ago
  And Daimler was also bribed into becoming an investor in what3words? Maybe Daimler looked at the various options and chose the one best for marketing (best to convince end users, press, investors what it is). Easier to add celebrities and puns in ads similar to Apple Siri ads https://vimeo.com/250456705 https://vimeo.com/250456705
goodstuff9 8y ago
> No one will ever use it Tell that to aramex, dominos, Mercedes and united nations
aw3c2 8y ago
Prior art: https://patents.stackexchange.com/questions/13629/i-had-invented-and-published-before-this-patent-application-how-do-i-get-it-in https://patents.stackexchange.com/questions/13629/i-had-inve...
- ReverseCold 8y ago
  According to that link he wasn't able to get it invalidated. (not a lawyer, baseless speculation follows) There is proof that that guy did it first though, so if you get permission from him and then get sued by W3W then maybe you can claim prior art that way(?)
bhrgunatha 8y ago
Futility Closet podcast Ep 218 had a section on plus codes this/last week, including what3words and parodies like what 2 numbers - Lat, Lon! They have the full list of links. https://www.futilitycloset.com/2018/09/24/podcast-episode-218-lost-in-the-amazon/ https://www.futilitycloset.com/2018/09/24/podcast-episode-21...
brad0 8y ago
Here’s something that shits me up the wall. Here’s the patent: - convert a 2D value into a single value - divide that value up into 3 values - there’s a 1-1 database of values that map a value to a word Pretty much everyone on this site could come up with that concept given 15 minutes to think about the problem. How is this patentable?
danso 8y ago
Slightly off-topic, but is there anything in the design of W3W that mitigates the chances that a square would have an offensive/embarrassing combination of words? Besides a blacklist of problematic words? I imagine the probability that this would happen only increases for English words that are problematic in other languages.
tzs 8y ago
Both of the independent claims in that are quite specific about the conversions between locations and lists of numbers and between lists of numbers and lists of words being unique. If not done more than a cursory reading of those claims, but I wonder if you could work around it by simply making some of the mappings non-unique? I did not look at the dependent claims because generally if you infringe a dependent claim you necessarily also infringe the dependent claim upon which it depends. As the Federal Circuit noted [1]: "It is axiomatic that dependent claims cannot be found infringed unless the claims from which they depend have been found to have been infringed." However, a year later [2], that same court quoted that in another case, and then said: "While this proposition is no doubt generally correct, it does not apply in the circumstances of this case" The circumstances of that had something to do with the doctrine of equivalents being used to find infringement of the dependent claims, but the scope of the equivalents was wide enough to bring in prior art that would encompass the independent claim (but not the dependent claim), and so that prior art stopped infringement of the independent claim but not of the dependent claim--or something like that. I've not looked serious at patent law in a long time so this is getting into territory I'm now very fuzzy on. My initial impression is that this would probably not apply if the alleged infringement of the what3words patent was a product that was pretty much the same as what3words except for not satisfying the uniqueness properties from that patent. [1] Wahpeton Canvas Co., Inc. v. Frontier, Inc., 870 F.2d 1546, 1553 & n. 9, 10 USPQ2d 1201, 1208 & n. 9 (Fed. Cir. 1989) [2] Wilson Sporting Goods Co., Plaintiff-appellee, v. David Geoffrey & Associates D/b/a Slazenger, and Dunlopslazenger Corporation Aka Dunlop Sportscorporation, Defendants-appellants, 904 F.2d 677 (Fed. Cir. 1990)
jschulenklopper 8y ago
What3Words has some strange choices / consequences: * If you accidentally change the word order for a location, you could send a mailman to a wrong and faraway location: - http://map.what3words.com/help.driver.lost is in Chicago - http://map.what3words.com/driver.lost.help is near Grand Rapids * If you accidentally mess up the plurals or spelling, you send people all over the place: - cosmetic.takeover.fries is in Amsterdam - cosmetic.takeover.fires is above the Pole Circle in Russia - cosmetic.takeovers.fries is west of Shanghai * Lastly, locations are 'named' quite randomly, with no apparent logic or explanation behind it. So, adjacent locations have a completely different name. How can we (or a mailman) deduct/reason about the 'address' of a neighbor, or the what3words for the other side of a property?
- masukomi 8y ago
  > How can we (or a mailman) deduct/reason about the 'address' of a neighbor, or the what3words for the other side of a property? why do we need to? Why can't it simply be this string = this place. that string = that place ? Why does there have to be metadata indicating relative positions of things? US address on the same street have relative metadata, but ones on different streets do not. They may be around the corner from each other or they may be across town. You don't know, and yet we get along just fine. I'd also point to "Massachusetts Ave." in Boston and its suburbs which has the same damn numbers like 4 times and thus 660 Mass ave. gives you NO clue where the thing is relative to 658 which may be next door and miles away and it may be east or west, or both. Somehow we've been able to get along just fine without relative metadata on different streets or even the same one. Why should it be a requirement here?
  - jschulenklopper 8y ago
    Perhaps not a hard requirement, but a handy feature. It would be nice to know that "<number> <street>" is at least in the area of "<a number close to that number> <same street>" (if the city doesn't completely mess up giving out addresses). With what3words, "///ladders.chimp.drama" is exactly next to "///thick.candle.enacts" and "///nails.spit.blaring", but you can't tell. Also, you don't know whether there are other addressable points in between. It would have been nice if there was more method in this madness.

myself248 8y ago

> patented/proprietary, so no one will ever use it. Actually, that means there's a bunch of money behind it, bribing carmakers to include it in their nav systems, etc. It's still shit, but it'll be ubiquitous shit.

lifthrasiir 8y ago
And there is at least one known instance of such system: many car navigation systems in Japan have support for Denso Mapcode [1]. Its algorithm is almost trivial but has a private mapping which effectively makes its entirty proprietary. [1] https://www.denso-communications.jp/mapcode/ https://www.denso-communications.jp/mapcode/
mtmail 8y ago
And Daimler was also bribed into becoming an investor in what3words? Maybe Daimler looked at the various options and chose the one best for marketing (best to convince end users, press, investors what it is). Easier to add celebrities and puns in ads similar to Apple Siri ads https://vimeo.com/250456705 https://vimeo.com/250456705

goodstuff9 8y ago

> No one will ever use it Tell that to aramex, dominos, Mercedes and united nations

aw3c2 8y ago

Prior art: https://patents.stackexchange.com/questions/13629/i-had-invented-and-published-before-this-patent-application-how-do-i-get-it-in https://patents.stackexchange.com/questions/13629/i-had-inve...

ReverseCold 8y ago
According to that link he wasn't able to get it invalidated. (not a lawyer, baseless speculation follows) There is proof that that guy did it first though, so if you get permission from him and then get sued by W3W then maybe you can claim prior art that way(?)

bhrgunatha 8y ago

Futility Closet podcast Ep 218 had a section on plus codes this/last week, including what3words and parodies like what 2 numbers - Lat, Lon! They have the full list of links. https://www.futilitycloset.com/2018/09/24/podcast-episode-218-lost-in-the-amazon/ https://www.futilitycloset.com/2018/09/24/podcast-episode-21...

brad0 8y ago

Here’s something that shits me up the wall. Here’s the patent: - convert a 2D value into a single value - divide that value up into 3 values - there’s a 1-1 database of values that map a value to a word Pretty much everyone on this site could come up with that concept given 15 minutes to think about the problem. How is this patentable?

danso 8y ago

Slightly off-topic, but is there anything in the design of W3W that mitigates the chances that a square would have an offensive/embarrassing combination of words? Besides a blacklist of problematic words? I imagine the probability that this would happen only increases for English words that are problematic in other languages.

tzs 8y ago

Both of the independent claims in that are quite specific about the conversions between locations and lists of numbers and between lists of numbers and lists of words being unique. If not done more than a cursory reading of those claims, but I wonder if you could work around it by simply making some of the mappings non-unique? I did not look at the dependent claims because generally if you infringe a dependent claim you necessarily also infringe the dependent claim upon which it depends. As the Federal Circuit noted [1]: "It is axiomatic that dependent claims cannot be found infringed unless the claims from which they depend have been found to have been infringed." However, a year later [2], that same court quoted that in another case, and then said: "While this proposition is no doubt generally correct, it does not apply in the circumstances of this case" The circumstances of that had something to do with the doctrine of equivalents being used to find infringement of the dependent claims, but the scope of the equivalents was wide enough to bring in prior art that would encompass the independent claim (but not the dependent claim), and so that prior art stopped infringement of the independent claim but not of the dependent claim--or something like that. I've not looked serious at patent law in a long time so this is getting into territory I'm now very fuzzy on. My initial impression is that this would probably not apply if the alleged infringement of the what3words patent was a product that was pretty much the same as what3words except for not satisfying the uniqueness properties from that patent. [1] Wahpeton Canvas Co., Inc. v. Frontier, Inc., 870 F.2d 1546, 1553 & n. 9, 10 USPQ2d 1201, 1208 & n. 9 (Fed. Cir. 1989) [2] Wilson Sporting Goods Co., Plaintiff-appellee, v. David Geoffrey & Associates D/b/a Slazenger, and Dunlopslazenger Corporation Aka Dunlop Sportscorporation, Defendants-appellants, 904 F.2d 677 (Fed. Cir. 1990)

jschulenklopper 8y ago

What3Words has some strange choices / consequences: * If you accidentally change the word order for a location, you could send a mailman to a wrong and faraway location: - http://map.what3words.com/help.driver.lost is in Chicago - http://map.what3words.com/driver.lost.help is near Grand Rapids * If you accidentally mess up the plurals or spelling, you send people all over the place: - cosmetic.takeover.fries is in Amsterdam - cosmetic.takeover.fires is above the Pole Circle in Russia - cosmetic.takeovers.fries is west of Shanghai * Lastly, locations are 'named' quite randomly, with no apparent logic or explanation behind it. So, adjacent locations have a completely different name. How can we (or a mailman) deduct/reason about the 'address' of a neighbor, or the what3words for the other side of a property?

masukomi 8y ago
> How can we (or a mailman) deduct/reason about the 'address' of a neighbor, or the what3words for the other side of a property? why do we need to? Why can't it simply be this string = this place. that string = that place ? Why does there have to be metadata indicating relative positions of things? US address on the same street have relative metadata, but ones on different streets do not. They may be around the corner from each other or they may be across town. You don't know, and yet we get along just fine. I'd also point to "Massachusetts Ave." in Boston and its suburbs which has the same damn numbers like 4 times and thus 660 Mass ave. gives you NO clue where the thing is relative to 658 which may be next door and miles away and it may be east or west, or both. Somehow we've been able to get along just fine without relative metadata on different streets or even the same one. Why should it be a requirement here?
- jschulenklopper 8y ago
  Perhaps not a hard requirement, but a handy feature. It would be nice to know that "<number> <street>" is at least in the area of "<a number close to that number> <same street>" (if the city doesn't completely mess up giving out addresses). With what3words, "///ladders.chimp.drama" is exactly next to "///thick.candle.enacts" and "///nails.spit.blaring", but you can't tell. Also, you don't know whether there are other addressable points in between. It would have been nice if there was more method in this madness.