6 ms·
FWIW, we considered this technique back at Pebble to make notifications more actionable and even filed a patent for that (sorry!) https://patents.justia.com/pat
by HeikoBehrens 2y ago
FWIW, we considered this technique back at Pebble to make notifications more actionable and even filed a patent for that (sorry!) https://patents.justia.com/patent/9411785 https://patents.justia.com/patent/9411785
Back then on iOS via ANCS, the watches wouldn't receive much more than the textual payload you'd see on the phone. We envisioned to be working with partners such as WhatsApp et al. to encode deep links/message ids into the message so one could respond directly from the watch.
- coldpie 2y agoSo whoever now owns that patent (Google? maybe some patent troll picked it up?) could, in theory, sue the author of this article for patent infringement, right? Even though they invented it independently and never once used or looked at your patent. Do you think you made the world a better place or a worse place by filing that patent?
- delian66 2y agoDo you think your comment made the world, and HN specifically a better place?
- Imustaskforhelp 2y agoI think so , yes , it made me be re aware of the patent troll scam in the USA. In fact it is your comment which to me seems a little hateful , yes the above comment also felt a little hateful Hate doesn't counter Hate , I guess.
- RIMR 2y agoYes, calling out unethical practices makes the world a better place by discouraging unethical practices.
- krupan 2y agoBerating people for filing patents in self defense is not how we fix this problem. The government put these rules in place. Businesses have to at least accumulate patents to use defensively (you found a patent of yours that you think I'm violating? Well let me do a quick search through the patents I have...what's that? Nevermind, I'm not actually infringing your patent? Good, that's what I thought.)
- JadeNB 2y ago> Do you think you made the world a better place or a worse place by filing that patent? Come on, what does this contribute to this conversation? The poster clearly is aware of the drawbacks of such patents, and didn't clearly play any role in filing the patent (they said "we … filed it," not "I filed it"). This kind of response just encourages people not to mention such things; it can't possibly change their past behavior, and, since Pebble the company per se doesn't exist any more, is also unlikely to change future behavior.
- coldpie 2y ago> The poster clearly is aware of the drawbacks of such patents, and didn't clearly play any role in filing the patent (they said "we … filed it," not "I filed it"). A person with the same name as that commenter is listed as an inventor on the patent. > it can't possibly change their past behavior Obviously, but it can change future behavior. Maybe realizing that they made the world a worse place by filing that patent will prevent them, or a reader of this discussion, from doing it again in future.
- RealityVoid 2y ago_Can_ they sue them for patent infringement? They just described a technique (that you can see in the patent filing anyway) and not selling a product based on it. I think there's nothing to sue here. I'm curious is my understanding of this is correct.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- singleshot_ 2y ago“Except as otherwise provided… whoever without authority… uses… any patented invention… infringes[.]” 35 usc 271
- krupan 2y agoOne of the benefits of the patent system (that now seems to be far outweighed by negatives) is that patents are public information. Your invention is documented for all to see. I don't think that someone writing about public information is a punishable office, but IANAL
- Hizonner 2y agoWell, given that the technique itself makes the world a worse place, anything that impedes its use is probably positive... And, no, they couldn't do anything meaningful to the author of the article. They could get them ordered not to do it any more, and they could recover their economic damages... which are obviously zero.
- IncreasePosts 2y agoNo. The author could not be sued for this successfully. All they did was write a blog post about an interesting technique. They could literally read the patent application and write a blog post about that, assuming the methods are the same. What percentage of your actions are based around making the world a better place, instead of personal fulfillment or gain?
- coldpie 2y ago> All they did was write a blog post about an interesting technique. They could literally read the patent application and write a blog post about that, assuming the methods are the same. Okay, change "sue" to "prevent from creating a marketable product without paying a royalty to the patent owner in return for having provided nothing of value." The point remains. > What percentage of your actions are based around making the world a better place, instead of personal fulfillment or gain? Many harms are unavoidable, but I make a point to at least not go out of my way to make it a worse place, for example by filing software patents. The company I work for provides financial bonuses for filing software patents, and I will never participate in that program. (I've even tried to convince the lawyers to license our patents similar to Red Hat's open patent promise, because they claim they are intended only to be used defensively... but no luck so far.)
- rolph 2y agoconsider how far you reach to make the world better. 1) thats really good im gonna, strive to keep it. 2) " " tell all and those who want will build one. 3) " " make lots and give them to everyone.
- ooterness 2y agoAs a wise man once said: "Don't hate the player, hate the game."
- shermantanktop 2y agoWhere’d the game come from? Hint: the players.
- krupan 2y agoFirst of all, it's not just a game, it's an outright battle to the death (of your company). Sure, you can choose not to wield patents, even in self defense, but good luck with that.
- coldpie 2y agoYou can also choose to legally declare that your patents may only be used for defensive purposes. But no one ever does this, because they do not actually intend to use them only for defensive purposes. This is a bogus defense of software patents.
- krupan 2y agoSee my other comments to you. Sometimes the threat of a good offensive weapon is the best defense. It's kinda like a nuclear arms race
- shermantanktop 2y agoNope. That’s not how piles of patents are wielded defensively by the big companies. They don’t protect their IP with defensive patents, they defend their company using the threat of using unrelated patents offensively against the attacker.
- coldpie 2y agoYes, I know. That's what this part of my post means: > may only be used for defensive purposes It's done with a clause in the public license like "if you sue us, then we revoke this license to you and may in turn sue you." You retain the MAD defensive benefit of the patents, while also not hampering innovation with your patent's existence. If the patents truly exist only for defense, then there is no reason not to do this.
- krupan 2y agoPlease see my comment about about the sad necessity for patents https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43026595 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43026595
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- frereit 2y agoWould this patent cover just the encoding alone? The first sentence says: > A method, apparatus, and system relating to embedding hidden content within a Unicode message and using the hidden content to perform a particular computer action. So, in my extremely unqualified opinion, just the encoding technique alone is not covered by the patent, only when combined with some action performed based on the encoding?
- palata 2y agoRespectfully: how the hell would that be a valid patent? Feels like patenting the idea of writing text in white on white on a Word document such that you don't lose it but it doesn't get printed. It's just insane to ever call that "an invention".
- detourdog 2y agoI think the magic is in the context of Unicode. Which also makes it almost twice as ridiculous from my point of view. Because it seems to be doing exactly what unicode is meant to do.
- rwmj 2y agoCompanies acquire indefensible patents all the time. They are used in bulk to threaten smaller competitors ("we've got 500 patents in this field, better not bring your product to market"). This is one reason why patents can be terrible for competition.
- shermantanktop 2y agoThey are also used in bulk to defend against larger competitors using this type of threat. In a war where the ammunition is garbage, you either lose or you start hoarding garbage.
- neilv 2y agoAbout 25 years ago, this was explained to me as "sword patents and shield patents". Sure, some can use patents as swords, to suppress legitimate competition, or to extract undue rents. But you can also use patents as shields, to protect in various ways against those swords. If I ran a BigTech (like the original warm-fuzzy Google reputation), I'd be registering any plausible patents, and have lawyers figure out how to freely license-out the ones that weren't key secret sauce, under terms that figuratively poisoned anyone doing illegitimate sword patents.
- palata 2y ago> If I ran a BigTech History tells us that those who run a BigTech become crazy narcissists serving their own interests :).
- detourdog 2y agoJust curious this seems like simple digital Steganography or maybe even even the same as Shannon's boolean gate work. Do you think the patent is defendable in court? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steganography https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steganography
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- Etheryte 2y agoHopefully a wholly undefendable patent, you're essentially trying to patent the Unicode spec. The rest of it is perform an action in response to a text message which clearly isn't novel.