5 ms·

IP lawyer here. You should ignore everything but the claims, and see what the claims say. So stare at https://patents.google.com/patent/US9952841B2/en https://

IP lawyer here. You should ignore everything but the claims, and see what the claims say. So stare at https://patents.google.com/patent/US9952841B2/en https://patents.google.com/patent/US9952841B2/en and look only at the claims. To me, that set of claims is ... worrying

zamalek 8y ago
IANAL, but those claims seem to describe .Net (multiple languages targeting a common IR?), so there's prior art.
- cestith 8y ago
  p-code?
  - zamalek 8y ago
    The key "innovation" that Apple seems to be claiming is that multiple languages are intended to be compiled down to a single p-code (in this case, LLVM). .Net does this in two ways: * Projects in different languages (originally, C#, VB and curiously Eiffel) compile to the same p-code/IR and are dynamically linked into an application. * A single project contains multiple languages (C#, ASPX, Razor) compile to the same p-code/IR and are statically linked into an application. .Net may not be the first that did this intentionally, but it does cover all the scenarios.
2_listerine_pls 8y ago
Could you recomend me a book or course on how to file an utility patent? I took a mooc explaining the overall process but it lacks details.
- pnw_hazor 8y ago
  Filing your own patent pro se is one of the best ways to both waste your money and lose your rights. edit: word order
- DannyBee 8y ago
  You really really really don't want to do this if you can avoid it. It's not because there is magic here, it's because the set of rules, regulations, and interpretations to follow is voluminous. The document you want is called the MPEP. https://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/index.html https://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/index.html This covers the rules/regulations/interpretations/etc that they will expect you to know/follow, and examiners to know/follow. In that sense, it literally does cover everything you'd need to know to do this right, and how the examiner/etc will look at your patent application, etc. It's even understandable by normal human beings and goes to great lengths to explain its reasoning and the case law that supports their views. However, it's also thousands of pages. Now, it's definitely possible and in my experience, examiners are fairly nice to pro-se applicants and try to be helpful. But this would really be a thing you'd want to have to spend a significant amount of time doing. For the vast majority of people, it's much more effective to hire someone who will charge a fixed fee. (for a single person filing a patent for the firs time, you'd qualify as a micro-entity, so most of your fees would be the lawyer/agent for sure) But, if you decide to do it, that's the document you want. (And just as a disclaimer: i don't make a living patenting stuff and think patents in general hurt a lot more than they help. So i'm really not the type to tell you to go spend money on a patent lawyer if i can avoid it)
aurelwu 8y ago
"Also, the new language provides two range operators, the half-closed (e.g., a . . . b) and closed (e.g., a . . . b) range operators, which are not found in the C language. " their examples for half-closed and closed are identical. I wonder how many such mistakes are in a patent filing in average and what the effect of such mistakes is.
sixstringtheory 8y ago
It's really interesting. They're describing the entire apparatus that's been built up to switch from ObjC to Swift and allow them to coexist using multistage compilation, and the recompilation of IR code to target newer devices (or for a few other enumerated reasons). As someone who's been working on the platform for several years before Swift was announced and got to watch it all unfold, it's pretty incredible to see it described so succinctly. And definitely worrying as to the future direction of the work I've done. Could you help us know any similar software development ecosystems that have been similarly patented, or anything else that might indicate how it could play out?

zamalek 8y ago

IANAL, but those claims seem to describe .Net (multiple languages targeting a common IR?), so there's prior art.

cestith 8y ago
p-code?
- zamalek 8y ago
  The key "innovation" that Apple seems to be claiming is that multiple languages are intended to be compiled down to a single p-code (in this case, LLVM). .Net does this in two ways: * Projects in different languages (originally, C#, VB and curiously Eiffel) compile to the same p-code/IR and are dynamically linked into an application. * A single project contains multiple languages (C#, ASPX, Razor) compile to the same p-code/IR and are statically linked into an application. .Net may not be the first that did this intentionally, but it does cover all the scenarios.

2_listerine_pls 8y ago

Could you recomend me a book or course on how to file an utility patent? I took a mooc explaining the overall process but it lacks details.

pnw_hazor 8y ago
Filing your own patent pro se is one of the best ways to both waste your money and lose your rights. edit: word order
DannyBee 8y ago
You really really really don't want to do this if you can avoid it. It's not because there is magic here, it's because the set of rules, regulations, and interpretations to follow is voluminous. The document you want is called the MPEP. https://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/index.html https://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/index.html This covers the rules/regulations/interpretations/etc that they will expect you to know/follow, and examiners to know/follow. In that sense, it literally does cover everything you'd need to know to do this right, and how the examiner/etc will look at your patent application, etc. It's even understandable by normal human beings and goes to great lengths to explain its reasoning and the case law that supports their views. However, it's also thousands of pages. Now, it's definitely possible and in my experience, examiners are fairly nice to pro-se applicants and try to be helpful. But this would really be a thing you'd want to have to spend a significant amount of time doing. For the vast majority of people, it's much more effective to hire someone who will charge a fixed fee. (for a single person filing a patent for the firs time, you'd qualify as a micro-entity, so most of your fees would be the lawyer/agent for sure) But, if you decide to do it, that's the document you want. (And just as a disclaimer: i don't make a living patenting stuff and think patents in general hurt a lot more than they help. So i'm really not the type to tell you to go spend money on a patent lawyer if i can avoid it)

aurelwu 8y ago

"Also, the new language provides two range operators, the half-closed (e.g., a . . . b) and closed (e.g., a . . . b) range operators, which are not found in the C language. " their examples for half-closed and closed are identical. I wonder how many such mistakes are in a patent filing in average and what the effect of such mistakes is.

sixstringtheory 8y ago

It's really interesting. They're describing the entire apparatus that's been built up to switch from ObjC to Swift and allow them to coexist using multistage compilation, and the recompilation of IR code to target newer devices (or for a few other enumerated reasons). As someone who's been working on the platform for several years before Swift was announced and got to watch it all unfold, it's pretty incredible to see it described so succinctly. And definitely worrying as to the future direction of the work I've done. Could you help us know any similar software development ecosystems that have been similarly patented, or anything else that might indicate how it could play out?