4 ms·

Judge Orders Facebook to Release Source Code

16 points by rams 17y ago

mahmud 17y ago
I am reading the patent and it pretty much describes any large scale distributed multi-user application. Their patent is mostly "workflow" and "project" oriented, and I would think they would have had better chance trolling Google and MS for Docs and Office, not facebook. Even IBM for Lotus Domino. Their platform "specs" are so widespread and so far ranging, it has every HPC acronym thrown at it. They even specify bits of the BIOS and EPROMs. Who are these morons and why do they think FB is nothing but intuitive development dictated by growth and everyday contact with a huge user base? Anybody who is anybody would have come up with distributed caching of RDBMs queries, didn't someone implement Memcached at LiveJournal? and the rest of it is self-dictating. Can you imagine being the FB engineers tasked with developing a platform for applications? the last thing you want to read are patents; they're mostly medieval sketches, and arm-chair monday-morning quarterback-engineering that you don't want your mental model cluttered with this crap. Instead, you poach competent people from your competitors (i.e. people who don't have the time to lay patent mines for posterity and instead have shit to do today) A platform for managing information? get fucked!
- yason 17y ago
  Well said. Patents are so controversial and stifling. It's sickening to observe such hypocritical behaviour but, for example, my employer doesn't allow their employees reading patent texts (at least during work hours, IIRC) in fear of provable infringement -- yet they apply for patents themselves whenever they can, apparently just for defensive purposes! How much more actual, productive work could we do if we didn't have to keep the best of our people writing documents for patent applications, occupying their minds with such frivolous patent games while still working our arses off to make a difference in the real world?
- hooande 17y ago
  For what it's worth, almost all technology patents read like this. I check out patents on http://www.freepatentsonline.com http://www.freepatentsonline.com sometimes just because it's interesting to see people try to describe incredibly complex processes using the most general terms possible. Most of them seem to describe very common technologies on the web. I don't know how any of them get enforced. I guarantee there is some kind of patent out now for "an interface (possibly a website) that allows users to post messages (possibly comments or urls) to a group and use a signal (possibly voting) to indicate preference (possibly up or down)."
ryanwaggoner 17y ago
Fuck the patent system in this country. It's doing more harm than good these days, I'm afraid.
- jacquesm 17y ago
  Constructive use of the word 'fuck' on HN. Kudos :) The patent system is about as broken as it gets, I'm on the swing with regards to what to do about it, abolish it completely or overhaul it. I also think there ought to be a strict rule that if you hold a patent you have to market a product within a year of receiving your patent that uses your patented stuff in an essential way.
  - ubernostrum 17y ago
    For maximum style points, the post should have taken advantage of the fact (related to me by my college linguistics prof) that "fucking" is one of only a few generally-accepted (by linguists) infixes in the English language.
TweedHeads 17y ago
In the tech woeld, patents should last just one year. Enough time to build and market your product and have the advantage of being first. After that is open season for everybody to improve upon that patent, everybody wins.
- zandorg 17y ago
  The guy (Doug Englebart) who invented and patented the mouse saw it expire a few years before the GUI explosion. Does this make sense? Cringely says it takes 20 years for technology to come to the fore. Patents are 17 (?) years or so. Is this fair?
  - a-priori 17y ago
    No, but I also don't think it's a coincidence.
  - TweedHeads 17y ago
    Yes, it is fair. The world has changed a lot and nowadays if you have a patent worthwile funds will flood your bank account to bring it to reality in no time. The rest is bureaucracy or just plain bad intention.
    - zandorg 17y ago
      I agree. The reason Doug had to wait for a GUI was that microcomputers weren't fast enough to implement them. Although I imagine the Amiga and Mac brought him some money (patent was 1970, assume 17 years to bring 1987), I agree with you that hardware speed and capability is enough to get going in maybe 2 years.

16 points by rams 17y ago

I am reading the patent and it pretty much describes any large scale distributed multi-user application. Their patent is mostly "workflow" and "project" oriented, and I would think they would have had better chance trolling Google and MS for Docs and Office, not facebook. Even IBM for Lotus Domino. Their platform "specs" are so widespread and so far ranging, it has every HPC acronym thrown at it. They even specify bits of the BIOS and EPROMs. Who are these morons and why do they think FB is nothing but intuitive development dictated by growth and everyday contact with a huge user base? Anybody who is anybody would have come up with distributed caching of RDBMs queries, didn't someone implement Memcached at LiveJournal? and the rest of it is self-dictating. Can you imagine being the FB engineers tasked with developing a platform for applications? the last thing you want to read are patents; they're mostly medieval sketches, and arm-chair monday-morning quarterback-engineering that you don't want your mental model cluttered with this crap. Instead, you poach competent people from your competitors (i.e. people who don't have the time to lay patent mines for posterity and instead have shit to do today) A platform for managing information? get fucked!

yason 17y ago
Well said. Patents are so controversial and stifling. It's sickening to observe such hypocritical behaviour but, for example, my employer doesn't allow their employees reading patent texts (at least during work hours, IIRC) in fear of provable infringement -- yet they apply for patents themselves whenever they can, apparently just for defensive purposes! How much more actual, productive work could we do if we didn't have to keep the best of our people writing documents for patent applications, occupying their minds with such frivolous patent games while still working our arses off to make a difference in the real world?
hooande 17y ago
For what it's worth, almost all technology patents read like this. I check out patents on http://www.freepatentsonline.com http://www.freepatentsonline.com sometimes just because it's interesting to see people try to describe incredibly complex processes using the most general terms possible. Most of them seem to describe very common technologies on the web. I don't know how any of them get enforced. I guarantee there is some kind of patent out now for "an interface (possibly a website) that allows users to post messages (possibly comments or urls) to a group and use a signal (possibly voting) to indicate preference (possibly up or down)."

ryanwaggoner 17y ago

Fuck the patent system in this country. It's doing more harm than good these days, I'm afraid.

jacquesm 17y ago
Constructive use of the word 'fuck' on HN. Kudos :) The patent system is about as broken as it gets, I'm on the swing with regards to what to do about it, abolish it completely or overhaul it. I also think there ought to be a strict rule that if you hold a patent you have to market a product within a year of receiving your patent that uses your patented stuff in an essential way.
- ubernostrum 17y ago
  For maximum style points, the post should have taken advantage of the fact (related to me by my college linguistics prof) that "fucking" is one of only a few generally-accepted (by linguists) infixes in the English language.

TweedHeads 17y ago

In the tech woeld, patents should last just one year. Enough time to build and market your product and have the advantage of being first. After that is open season for everybody to improve upon that patent, everybody wins.

zandorg 17y ago
The guy (Doug Englebart) who invented and patented the mouse saw it expire a few years before the GUI explosion. Does this make sense? Cringely says it takes 20 years for technology to come to the fore. Patents are 17 (?) years or so. Is this fair?
- a-priori 17y ago
  No, but I also don't think it's a coincidence.
- TweedHeads 17y ago
  Yes, it is fair. The world has changed a lot and nowadays if you have a patent worthwile funds will flood your bank account to bring it to reality in no time. The rest is bureaucracy or just plain bad intention.
  - zandorg 17y ago
    I agree. The reason Doug had to wait for a GUI was that microcomputers weren't fast enough to implement them. Although I imagine the Amiga and Mac brought him some money (patent was 1970, assume 17 years to bring 1987), I agree with you that hardware speed and capability is enough to get going in maybe 2 years.