Now IBM Wants To Patent Responding To Chaos
from the no-one-but-IBM-can-do-that... dept
theodp writes "Thanks to IBM, the next time a crisis of 9/11 or Katrina magnitude strikes, you may have to worry about patent infringement. Just-published USPTO documents reveal that Big Blue has a patent application for Optimizing the Selection, Verification, and Deployment of Expert Resources in a Time of Chaos, which covers responding to 'episodes of profound chaos during hurricanes, earthquakes, tidal waves, solar flares, flooding, terrorism, war, and pandemics to name a few.' If anyone from Homeland Security is reading, it's apparently this easy." Yes, this is actually a patent application for a computerized process (not, as theodp suggests, just for responding), but it still seems rather bizarre that you would patent such a thing. Does one firm really deserve to have a monopoly on a computerized system for responding to a chaotic event?Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Now IBM Wants To Patent Responding To Chaos
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
yes
Yes.
this article is kind of weak. IBM isn't trying to own chaos itself, or the ability to respond. they are trying to own just one way in which you can respond to that chaos. How is this a bad thing? Its not like anyone else is stepping up to the plate anyway.
As long as this "save the world" computer doesn't use windows, im fine with it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I have to say, though, that some of what I picked up from that sounded somewhat... ambitious, not to say optimistic.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This is what I think is going on:
1) There are many algorithms for crisis management
2) IBM thought of one and is trying to patent it (in a computerised context)
It seems reasonable, because what [the system] does is "find skills and resources for responding to an event" (if I read it correctly). That's only one small aspect of crisis management. I'm sure the rest of the world can find something useful to contribute to the development of computerisation of crisis management even with this patent in place.
Of course, implementation is everything; it remains to be seen if IBM's going to use this patent to make a monopolised killing from natural disaster management.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The same in this case. Anyone who's looking to protect people from such chaotic events -- and wouldn't you know it, they seem to be pretty prevalent these days -- would have to go through IBM. If the patent isn't granted, then we'll get a number of companies competing to make their "disaster recovery system" better and cheaper than the rest, which can only be a GOOD thing.
It's one thing to argue for software patents when you're talking about an MP3 player or an operating system. What we're talking about now is something that could cost lives.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Many algorithms
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Oh my, what will we do?
^..^
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
IBM isn't usually very sue-happy
Imagine if a patent troll had patented this, then after the next disaster if FEMA had used anything even remotely similar, they would jump out of the woodwork and shout "You Owe Me One Hundred Billion Dollars!" and the US Government may end up having to pay some idiot a large sum of money (or at least pay a lot of lawyers to try and stop from having to pay).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: IBM isn't usually very sue-happy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: IBM isn't usually very sue-happy
(if by "patent troll" you mean the ability to squize royalty payments right and left from all kinds of companies based on IBM's mostly junk but HUGE patent portfolio of some 40,000 patents)
http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/53836.html
Next time do you homework, little punk
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: IBM isn't usually very sue-happy
Now go back to your pretend patents.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: IBM isn't usually very sue-happy
how bout "interlocutory appeal" punk ?
Hah ? just shut up already
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: IBM isn't usually very sue-happy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: IBM isn't usually very sue-happy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: IBM isn't usually very sue-happy
IBM patents are *mostly* junk
MShit patents are even more *mostly* junk
Independent inventors usually can't afford filing like 5000 junk patents a year so the percentage of junk patents for independent inventors is significantly lower
Got it now ?
or ask Greg Aharonyan about IBM's patents, he did some research on them and published his findings
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: IBM isn't usually very sue-happy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: IBM isn't usually very sue-happy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: IBM isn't usually very sue-happy
AS far as I remember ALL of their patent claims were recently upheld on reexamination after being challenged by the entire banking industry
Also, they filed their patent claims long before paperless check processing became a standard way of doing business
and btw they had an operating business of 100 or something people before banks stole their technology
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Stupid Stuff
I can see it now, "Sorry sir, your license agreement has expired. Goodbye." Go and die in chaos.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
IBM is a patent troll
1 - No other company in the world rackets as much useless patents as IBM.
2 - IBM ACTIVELY uses those patents against competitors and frequently forces companies to license their software and hire their services in exchange of not suing those companies.
3 - IBM talks about the evils of patents and at the same time actively lobbies for software patents in the European Union.
Conclusion: IBM is full of sh*t.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: IBM is a patent troll
Disagree with some of these people, and you automatically get labeled as a corporate stooge or shill, despite the fact that it isn't true. Apparently, this guy has no issue with spreading his own "FUD and lies" to support his own position while accusing others of doing the same.
Why do they find it so hard to believe that some people don't buy their arguments because they don't make any sense?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
In 2006 IBM sued Amazon using "we-own-the-Internet" 1990s patents on "electronic catalogs." (see angrydude's link above).
This is not a patent on a particular algorithm; if it was, they would have to disclose it in the patent, and it's not in there. They can keep that algorithm a trade secret and hold this patent as a means to sue a competitor using _any_ method of responding to chaos.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Correction to above
Obviously, I don't know what they intend to use it for. But, the possibility is there.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]