[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
www/philosophy trivial-patent.html
|
From: |
Joakim Olsson |
|
Subject: |
www/philosophy trivial-patent.html |
|
Date: |
Tue, 27 Mar 2007 13:00:29 +0000 |
CVSROOT: /web/www
Module name: www
Changes by: Joakim Olsson <jocke> 07/03/27 13:00:29
Modified files:
philosophy : trivial-patent.html
Log message:
Fixed invalid HTML.
CVSWeb URLs:
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/trivial-patent.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.4&r2=1.5
Patches:
Index: trivial-patent.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/trivial-patent.html,v
retrieving revision 1.4
retrieving revision 1.5
diff -u -b -r1.4 -r1.5
--- trivial-patent.html 18 Dec 2006 19:10:57 -0000 1.4
+++ trivial-patent.html 27 Mar 2007 13:00:24 -0000 1.5
@@ -1,348 +1,267 @@
-<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
+ <!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
-<title>The Anatomy of a Trivial Patent - the GNU project - Free Software
Foundation - Free as in Freedom - GNU/Linux</title>
+ <title>The Anatomy of a Trivial Patent - the GNU project - Free
+ Software Foundation - Free as in Freedom - GNU/Linux</title>
-<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
+ <!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
-<!--
- Please ensure that you properly nest your tags.
- If in doubt, use the w3c validator: this is strict xhtml.
- Keep tables simple, and make sure they degrade properly.
- Review the w3c accessibility guidelines when in doubt
--->
-
-<!-- END FSFlinks -->
-
-<!-- BEGIN content -->
-<h2>The Anatomy of a Trivial Patent</h2>
-
-<p>by <a href="http://www.stallman.org/";><strong>Richard
Stallman</strong></a></p>
+ <h2>The Anatomy of a Trivial Patent</h2>
-<p>
- <a href="/graphics/philosophicalgnu.html"><img
src="/graphics/philosophical-gnu-sm.jpg"
- alt=" [image of a Philosophical Gnu] "
- width="160" height="200" /></a>
-</p>
-
-<p>
-Programmers are well aware that many of the software patents cover
-laughably obvious ideas. Yet the patent system's defenders often
-argue that these ideas are nontrivial, obvious only by hindsight. And
-it is surprisingly difficult to defeat them in debate. Why is that?
-</p>
-
-<p>
-One reason is that any idea can be made look complex when analyzed to
-death. But another reason is that these trivial ideas often look
-quite complex as described in the patents themselves. The patent
-system's defenders can point to the complex description and say, "How
-can anything this complex be obvious?"
-</p>
-
-<p>
-I will use an example to show you how. Here's claim number one from
-US patent number 5,963,916, applied for in October 1996:
-</p>
-
-<p>
-1. A method for enabling a remote user to preview a portion of a
-pre-recorded music product from a network web site containing
-pre-selected portions of different pre-recorded music products, using
-a computer, a computer display and a telecommunications link between
-the remote user's computer and the network web site, the method
-comprising the steps of:
-</p>
-
-<ul>
- <li>
- using the remote user's computer to establish a
- telecommunications link to the network web site wherein the
- network web site comprises (i) a central host server coupled to a
- communications network for retrieving and transmitting the
- pre-selected portion of the pre-recorded music product upon
- request by a remote user and (ii) a central storage device for
- storing pre-selected portions of a plurality of different
- pre-recorded music products;
- </li>
- <li>
- transmitting user identification data from the remote user's
- computer to the central host server thereby allowing the central
- host server to identify and track the user's progress through the
- network web site;
- </li>
- <li>
- choosing at least one pre-selected portion of the pre-recorded
- music products from the central host server;
- </li>
- <li>
- receiving the chosen pre-selected portion of the pre-recorded
- products; and
- </li>
- <li>
- interactively previewing the received chosen pre-selected
- portion of the pre-recorded music product.
- </li>
-</ul>
-
-<p>
-That sure looks like a complex system, right? Surely it took a real
-clever guy to think of this? No, but it took cleverness to make it
-seem so complex. Let's analyze where the complexity comes from:
-</p>
-
-<p><i>
-1. A method for enabling a remote user to preview a portion of a
-pre-recorded music product from a network web site containing
-pre-selected portions
-</i></p>
-
-<p>
-That states the biggest part of their idea. They have selections from
-certain pieces of music on a server, so a user can listen to them.
-</p>
-
-<p><i>
-of different pre-recorded music products,
-</i></p>
-
-<p>
-This emphasizes their server stores selections from more than one
-piece of music.
-</p>
-
-<p>
-It is a basic principle of computer science is that if a computer can
-do a thing once, it can do that thing many times, on different data
-each time. Many patents pretend that applying this principle to a
-specific case makes an "invention".
-</p>
-
-<p><i>
-using
-a computer, a computer display and a telecommunications link between
-the remote user's computer and the network web site,
-</i></p>
-
-<p>
-This says they are using a server on a network.
-</p>
-
-<p><i>
-the method
-comprising the steps of:
-* a) using the remote user's computer to establish a
-telecommunications link to the network web site
-</i></p>
-
-<p>
-This says that the user connects to the server over the network.
-(That's the way one uses a server.)
-</p>
-
-<p><i>
-wherein the
-network web site comprises (i) a central host server coupled to a
-communications network
-</i></p>
-
-<p>
-This informs us that the server is on the net. (That is typical of
-servers.)
-</p>
-
-<p><i>
-for retrieving and transmitting the
-pre-selected portion of the pre-recorded music product upon
-request by a remote user
-</i></p>
-
-<p>
-This repeats the general idea stated in the first two lines.
-</p>
-
-<p><i>
-and (ii) a central storage device for
-storing pre-selected portions of a plurality of different
-pre-recorded music products;
-</i></p>
-
-<p>
-They have decided to put a hard disk (or equivalent) in their computer
-and store the music samples on that. Ever since around 1980, this has
-been the normal way to store anything on a computer for rapid access.
-</p>
-
-<p>
-Note how they emphasize once again the fact that they can store
-more than one selection on this disk. Of course, every file system
-will let you store more than one file.
-</p>
-
-<p><i>
-* b) transmitting user identification data from the remote user's
-computer to the centralpply a very low standard when judging
-whether a patent is "unobvious". This patent might pass muster,
-according to them.
-</i></p>
-
-<p>
-This says that they keep track of who you are and what you access--a
-common (though nasty) thing for web servers to do. I believe it was
-common already in 1996.
-</p>
-
-<p><i>
- * c) choosing at least one pre-selected portion of the pre-recorded
- music products from the central host server;
-</i></p>
-
-<p>
-In other words, the user clicks to say which link to follow. That is
-typical for web servers; if they had found another way to do it, that
-might have been an invention.
-</p>
-
-<p><i>
- * d) receiving the chosen pre-selected portion of the pre-recorded
- products; and
-</i></p>
-
-<p>
-When you follow a link, your browser reads the contents.
-This is typical behavior for a web browser.
-</p>
-
-<p><i>
- * e) interactively previewing the received chosen pre-selected
- portion of the pre-recorded music product.
-</i></p>
-
-<p>
-This says that your browser plays the music for you. (That is what
-many browsers do, when you follow a link to an audio file.)
-</p>
-
-<p>
-Now you can see how they padded this claim to make it into a complex
-idea: they included important aspects of what computers, networks, web
-servers, and web browsers do. This complexity, together with two
-lines which describe their own idea, add up to the so-called
-"invention" for which they received the patent.
-</p>
-
-<p>
-This example is typical of software patents. Even the occasional
-patent whose idea is nontrivial has the same sort of added
-complication.
-</p>
-
-<p>
-Now look at a subsequent claim:
-
-<p><i>
- 3. The method of [149]claim 1 wherein the central memory device
- comprises a plurality of compact disc-read only memory (CD-ROMs).
-</i></p>
-
-<p>
-What they are saying here is, "Even if you don't think that claim 1 is
-really an invention, using CD-ROMs to store the data makes it an
-invention for sure. An average system designer would never have
-thought of that."
-</p>
-
-<p>
-Now look at the next claim:
-</p>
-
-<p><i>
- 4. The method of [150]claim 1 wherein the central memory device
- comprises a RAID array drive.
-</i></p>
-
-<p>
-A RAID array is a group of disks set up to work like one big disk,
-with the special feature that even if one of the disks in the array
-has a failure and stops working, all the data is still available on
-the other disks in the group. Such arrays have been commercially
-available since long before 1996, and are a standard way of storing
-data for high availability. But these brilliant inventors have
-patented the use of a RAID array for this particular purpose.
-</p>
-
-<p>
-Trivial as it is, this patent would not necessarily be found legally
-invalid if there is a lawsuit about it. Not only the US Patent Office
-but the courts as well tend to apply a very low standard when judging
-whether a patent is "unobvious". This patent might pass muster,
-according to them.
-</p>
-
-<p>
-What's more, the courts are reluctant to overrule the Patent Office,
-so there is a better chance of getting a patent overturned if you can
-show a court prior art that the Patent Office did not consider. If
-the courts are willing to entertain a higher standard in judging
-unobviousness, it helps to save the prior art for them. Thus, the
-proposals to "make the system work better" by providing the Patent
-Office with a better database of prior art could instead make things
-worse.
-</p>
-
-<p>
-It is very hard to make a patent system behave reasonably; it is a
-complex bureaucracy and tends to follow its structural imperatives
-regardless of what it is "supposed" to do. The only practical way to
-get rid of the many obvious patents on software features and
-business practices is to get rid of all patents in those fields.
-Fortunately, that would be no loss: the unobvious patents in the
-software field do no good either.
-</p>
-
-<p>
-The patent system is supposed, intended, to promote progress, and
-those who benefit from software patents ask us to believe without
-question that they do have that effect. But programmers' experience
-is otherwise. New theoretical analysis shows that this is no paradox.
-(See <a
href="http://www.researchoninnovation.org/patent.pdf";>http://www.researchoninnovation.org/patent.pdf</a>.)
-</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
-<!-- BEGIN copyleft -->
-<div id="footer">
-
-<p><a name="ContactInfo"></a>
- Please inquire about GNU by Email:
- <a href="mailto:address@hidden";>address@hidden</a>,
- Voice: +1-617-542-5942, or Fax: +1-617-542-2652.
-</p>
+ <div id="rms-image"></div>
+
+ <p>by <a href="http://www.stallman.org/";><strong>Richard
+ Stallman</strong></a></p>
+
+ <p>Programmers are well aware that many of the software
+ patents cover laughably obvious ideas. Yet the patent
+ system's defenders often argue that these ideas are
+ nontrivial, obvious only by hindsight. And it is
+ surprisingly difficult to defeat them in debate. Why is
+ that?</p>
+
+ <p>One reason is that any idea can be made look complex
+ when analyzed to death. But another reason is that these
+ trivial ideas often look quite complex as described in the
+ patents themselves. The patent system's defenders can point
+ to the complex description and say, "How can anything this
+ complex be obvious?"</p>
+
+ <p>I will use an example to show you how. Here's claim
+ number one from US patent number 5,963,916, applied for in
+ October 1996:</p>
+
+ <p>1. A method for enabling a remote user to preview a
+ portion of a pre-recorded music product from a network web
+ site containing pre-selected portions of different
+ pre-recorded music products, using a computer, a computer
+ display and a telecommunications link between the remote
+ user's computer and the network web site, the method
+ comprising the steps of:</p>
+
+ <ul>
+ <li>using the remote user's computer to establish a
+ telecommunications link to the network web site wherein
+ the network web site comprises (i) a central host server
+ coupled to a communications network for retrieving and
+ transmitting the pre-selected portion of the pre-recorded
+ music product upon request by a remote user and (ii) a
+ central storage device for storing pre-selected portions
+ of a plurality of different pre-recorded music
+ products;</li>
+
+ <li>transmitting user identification data from the remote
+ user's computer to the central host server thereby
+ allowing the central host server to identify and track
+ the user's progress through the network web site;</li>
+
+ <li>choosing at least one pre-selected portion of the
+ pre-recorded music products from the central host
+ server;</li>
+
+ <li>receiving the chosen pre-selected portion of the
+ pre-recorded products; and</li>
+
+ <li>interactively previewing the received chosen
+ pre-selected portion of the pre-recorded music
+ product.</li>
+ </ul>
+
+ <p>That sure looks like a complex system, right? Surely it
+ took a real clever guy to think of this? No, but it took
+ cleverness to make it seem so complex. Let's analyze where
+ the complexity comes from:</p>
+
+ <p><i>1. A method for enabling a remote user to preview a
+ portion of a pre-recorded music product from a network web
+ site containing pre-selected portions</i></p>
+
+ <p>That states the biggest part of their idea. They have
+ selections from certain pieces of music on a server, so a
+ user can listen to them.</p>
+
+ <p><i>of different pre-recorded music products,</i></p>
+
+ <p>This emphasizes their server stores selections from more
+ than one piece of music.</p>
+
+ <p>It is a basic principle of computer science is that if a
+ computer can do a thing once, it can do that thing many
+ times, on different data each time. Many patents pretend
+ that applying this principle to a specific case makes an
+ "invention".</p>
+
+ <p><i>using a computer, a computer display and a
+ telecommunications link between the remote user's computer
+ and the network web site,</i></p>
+
+ <p>This says they are using a server on a network.</p>
+
+ <p><i>the method comprising the steps of: * a) using the
+ remote user's computer to establish a telecommunications
+ link to the network web site</i></p>
+
+ <p>This says that the user connects to the server over the
+ network. (That's the way one uses a server.)</p>
+
+ <p><i>wherein the network web site comprises (i) a central
+ host server coupled to a communications network</i></p>
+
+ <p>This informs us that the server is on the net. (That is
+ typical of servers.)</p>
+
+ <p><i>for retrieving and transmitting the pre-selected
+ portion of the pre-recorded music product upon request by a
+ remote user</i></p>
+
+ <p>This repeats the general idea stated in the first two
+ lines.</p>
+
+ <p><i>and (ii) a central storage device for storing
+ pre-selected portions of a plurality of different
+ pre-recorded music products;</i></p>
+
+ <p>They have decided to put a hard disk (or equivalent) in
+ their computer and store the music samples on that. Ever
+ since around 1980, this has been the normal way to store
+ anything on a computer for rapid access.</p>
+
+ <p>Note how they emphasize once again the fact that they
+ can store more than one selection on this disk. Of course,
+ every file system will let you store more than one
+ file.</p>
+
+ <p><i>* b) transmitting user identification data from the
+ remote user's computer to the centralpply a very low
+ standard when judging whether a patent is "unobvious". This
+ patent might pass muster, according to them.</i></p>
+
+ <p>This says that they keep track of who you are and what
+ you access--a common (though nasty) thing for web servers
+ to do. I believe it was common already in 1996.</p>
+
+ <p><i>* c) choosing at least one pre-selected portion of
+ the pre-recorded music products from the central host
+ server;</i></p>
+
+ <p>In other words, the user clicks to say which link to
+ follow. That is typical for web servers; if they had found
+ another way to do it, that might have been an
+ invention.</p>
+
+ <p><i>* d) receiving the chosen pre-selected portion of the
+ pre-recorded products; and</i></p>
+
+ <p>When you follow a link, your browser reads the contents.
+ This is typical behavior for a web browser.</p>
+
+ <p><i>* e) interactively previewing the received chosen
+ pre-selected portion of the pre-recorded music
+ product.</i></p>
+
+ <p>This says that your browser plays the music for you.
+ (That is what many browsers do, when you follow a link to
+ an audio file.)</p>
+
+ <p>Now you can see how they padded this claim to make it
+ into a complex idea: they included important aspects of
+ what computers, networks, web servers, and web browsers do.
+ This complexity, together with two lines which describe
+ their own idea, add up to the so-called "invention" for
+ which they received the patent.</p>
+
+ <p>This example is typical of software patents. Even the
+ occasional patent whose idea is nontrivial has the same
+ sort of added complication.</p>
+
+ <p>Now look at a subsequent claim:</p>
+
+ <p><i>3. The method of [149]claim 1 wherein the central
+ memory device comprises a plurality of compact disc-read
+ only memory (CD-ROMs).</i></p>
+
+ <p>What they are saying here is, "Even if you don't think
+ that claim 1 is really an invention, using CD-ROMs to store
+ the data makes it an invention for sure. An average system
+ designer would never have thought of that."</p>
+
+ <p>Now look at the next claim:</p>
+
+ <p><i>4. The method of [150]claim 1 wherein the central
+ memory device comprises a RAID array drive.</i></p>
+
+ <p>A RAID array is a group of disks set up to work like one
+ big disk, with the special feature that even if one of the
+ disks in the array has a failure and stops working, all the
+ data is still available on the other disks in the group.
+ Such arrays have been commercially available since long
+ before 1996, and are a standard way of storing data for
+ high availability. But these brilliant inventors have
+ patented the use of a RAID array for this particular
+ purpose.</p>
+
+ <p>Trivial as it is, this patent would not necessarily be
+ found legally invalid if there is a lawsuit about it. Not
+ only the US Patent Office but the courts as well tend to
+ apply a very low standard when judging whether a patent is
+ "unobvious". This patent might pass muster, according to
+ them.</p>
+
+ <p>What's more, the courts are reluctant to overrule the
+ Patent Office, so there is a better chance of getting a
+ patent overturned if you can show a court prior art that
+ the Patent Office did not consider. If the courts are
+ willing to entertain a higher standard in judging
+ unobviousness, it helps to save the prior art for them.
+ Thus, the proposals to "make the system work better" by
+ providing the Patent Office with a better database of prior
+ art could instead make things worse.</p>
+
+ <p>It is very hard to make a patent system behave
+ reasonably; it is a complex bureaucracy and tends to follow
+ its structural imperatives regardless of what it is
+ "supposed" to do. The only practical way to get rid of the
+ many obvious patents on software features and business
+ practices is to get rid of all patents in those fields.
+ Fortunately, that would be no loss: the unobvious patents
+ in the software field do no good either.</p>
+
+ <p>The patent system is supposed, intended, to promote
+ progress, and those who benefit from software patents ask
+ us to believe without question that they do have that
+ effect. But programmers' experience is otherwise. New
+ theoretical analysis shows that this is no paradox. (See
+ <a href=
+
"http://www.researchoninnovation.org/patent.pdf";>http://www.researchoninnovation.org/patent.pdf</a>.)</p>
+ </div>
+
+ <!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
+
+ <div id="footer">
+ <p><a name="ContactInfo" id="ContactInfo"></a> Please inquire
+ about GNU by Email: <a href=
+ "mailto:address@hidden";>address@hidden</a>, Voice: +1-617-542-5942,
+ or Fax: +1-617-542-2652.</p>
-<p>Please send broken links and other web page suggestions to
+ <p>Please send broken links and other web page suggestions to
<a href="/people/webmeisters.html">The GNU Webmasters</a> at
- <a href="mailto:address@hidden";>address@hidden</a>, Thank you.
-</p>
+ <a href="mailto:address@hidden";>address@hidden</a>,
+ Thank you.</p>
-<p>Copyright © 2006 Richard Stallman<br />
- Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article
- are permitted in any medium provided this notice is preserved.
-</p>
-
-<p>Updated:
- <!-- timestamp start -->
- $Date: 2006/12/18 19:10:57 $ $Author: pescetti $
- <!-- timestamp end -->
-</p>
-</div>
-<!-- END copyleft -->
-
-<!-- BEGIN TranslationList -->
-<div id="translations">
-<h4><a href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations</a>
-of this page</h4>
-
-<!--
+ <p>Copyright © 2006 Richard Stallman<br />
+ Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article are
+ permitted in any medium provided this notice is
+ preserved.</p>
+
+ <p>Updated: <!-- timestamp start -->
+ $Date: 2007/03/27 13:00:24 $ $Author: jocke $
+ <!-- timestamp end --></p>
+ </div><!-- END copyleft -->
+ <!-- BEGIN TranslationList -->
+
+ <div id="translations">
+ <h4><a href=
+ "/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations</a>
+ of this page</h4><!--
Please keep this list alphabetical, and in the original language.
If you add a new language here please advise
address@hidden and add it to
@@ -356,15 +275,14 @@
http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/IG/ert/iso639.htm
-->
-<ul class="translations-list">
-<li><a href="/philosophy/trivial-patent.html" title="[en]
English">English</a></li>
-<li><a href="/philosophy/trivial-patent.it.html" title="[it]
Italiano">Italiano</a></li>
-</ul>
-
-</div>
-<!-- END TranslationList -->
-
-</div>
+ <ul class="translations-list">
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/trivial-patent.html" title=
+ "[en] English">English</a></li>
+
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/trivial-patent.it.html" title=
+ "[it] Italiano">Italiano</a></li>
+ </ul>
+ </div><!-- END TranslationList -->
+ </div><!-- END layout -->
</body>
</html>
-<!-- END layout -->
| [Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread] |
- www/philosophy trivial-patent.html,
Joakim Olsson <=