Facebook Wants To Own Idea Of Crowdsourced Translations

from the some-prior-art? dept

Thu, Aug 27th 2009 8:42am — Mike Masnick

Apparently Facebook is trying to patent the idea of crowdsourced translations of its service. The actual patent application was filed in December of 2008, but the real priority date (I believe) is December of 2007 (when I think the company filed a provisional patent).

This one caught my attention for a few reasons -- with a major one being that way back in March of 2006, some friends of mine were working on a startup called Gabbly, which did online chat, and they had amazing success with crowdsourcing translations. Now, the Facebook patent is a little more advanced, because beyond just asking people to translate, it includes a voting mechanism. But, still, the evolution of crowdsourced translations shows the total silliness of even trying to throw patents in the middle. Almost immediately after Gabbly started doing crowdsourced translations, another online chat provider, Meebo, did the same. Gabbly used a forum. Meebo tried a wiki. Others picked up on the idea and did slightly different variations, and everyone kept innovating, and no one felt the need to own the concept of crowdsourced translations or to prohibit others from doing it.

But now, suddenly, there needs to be a patent on the concept?

I'm confused how anyone could think this meets the criteria of "promoting the progress." After all, plenty of others had figured out how to do crowdsourced translations earlier, and each one improved on the process a bit as they went. It's pretty obvious that including little voting mechanisms is an obvious next step (they were already popular on sites like Digg). So what benefit does the patent provider here other than to slow down innovation? It's difficult to believe that this "innovation" would not have occurred but for the patent system -- or even that it would have taken longer to happen but for the patent system.

Hopefully, the USPTO quickly dumps this, but just the fact that Facebook and its lawyers felt this was worth patenting shows you something about the ridiculous state of the patent system today.

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

Filed Under: crowdsourcing, patents, prior art, translations
Companies: facebook

19 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Richard, 27 Aug 2009 @ 8:56am

Then Crowdsource the patent litigation
Seems to me that for once the public have a say in this - if enough people don't like the patent then they have the power to stop the mechanism from working by sabotaging it.

The phrase "my hovercraft is full of eels" springs to mind.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 27 Aug 2009 @ 9:00am

Re: Then Crowdsource the patent litigation
How can we possibly stop it? Boycott the use of the idea? That just hinders innovation. Convince the patent office not to patent it? They're unelected (they're appointed), remember, what do they care what the masses want?

Yet another example of how progress works just fine until patents get in the way.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 27 Aug 2009 @ 9:03am

People need to understand something. Federal agencies like the USPTO, FDA, FCC, etc... are all appointed, they're not elected directly by the people. As such elected officials get to use them as scapegoats. Elected officials act like they're doing everything right but when big corporations want unethical laws passed they ask elected officials to hire scapegoats to do all the dirty work and people blame the scapegoats instead of the elected officials.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
slogger, 27 Aug 2009 @ 9:03am

https://translations.launchpad.net/
And I'm there were community sourced translations in the open source world before launchpad even existed...

Go screw yourself facebook.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
nose hair clipper, 27 Aug 2009 @ 9:12am

can we stop it?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Chronno S. Trigger (profile), 27 Aug 2009 @ 9:28am

Re: Re: Then Crowdsource the patent litigation
He's talking about screwing with Facebook. Giving false translations and stuff.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 27 Aug 2009 @ 9:36am

Oh Noes! The good guys are turning into the bad guys! Oh Noes!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Marcus Carab (profile), 27 Aug 2009 @ 10:18am

How is this even a patentable thing? Applying vote-based crowdsourcing methods to translation... really? What, will there now be a rush to patent "crowdsourcing" every different thing that can be crowdsourced?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ake, 27 Aug 2009 @ 10:46am

Patenting an idea
I thought it was impossible to patent an idea... only a system?
I mean, is it possible to patent the idea of "crowdsourced translations"? Is it not just the overall system? In this case, someone might change the inside mechanics of the voting system and distribute it (and eventually put a patent on it ;) )
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Dark Helmet (profile), 27 Aug 2009 @ 10:55am

Buddy?
Aren't we about due for a good Angry Dude rant, filled with words like "punky" or "lemming", short sound-byte sentences, and semi-thought through logic which is then displaced by vulgarity?

You out there buddy? I miss your awesomeness...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 27 Aug 2009 @ 11:07am

Re: Buddy?
I think we're overdue.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 27 Aug 2009 @ 11:27am

Re: Buddy?
He's off with RD sharing the meds. The ranting loons are on both ends of the spectrum here.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Dark Helmet (profile), 27 Aug 2009 @ 11:33am

Re: Re: Buddy?
"The ranting loons are on both ends of the spectrum here."

Hell yeah they are. Though I suspect I would be considered a "conspiracy loon". Which I'm okay with.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Andrew Calcutt, 27 Aug 2009 @ 11:34am

No way is that new
CrowdSourcing language packs is definitely not something new. Even in my own program (http://www.vistumbler.net), I had my first user submitted language pack on Dec 10th 2007 according to my forum (http://forum.techidiots.net/forum/viewforum.php?f=27&sid=e4b162d9750fbe846655c3f65b7b8aa4). I know I wasn't the first and I won't be the last to do my language packs this way.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
B Rose, 27 Aug 2009 @ 11:53am

Sorry Facebook, whereistand.com had crowdsourced translation in the public domain in 2005.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
eclecticdave (profile), 27 Aug 2009 @ 1:11pm

Re: Patenting an idea
> I thought it was impossible to patent an idea

Well, that's the way it *should* work, yes.

They way these things are actually done is, you submit a patent application describing your specific implementation - then you add a long list of Claims which amount to claiming that every other possible implementation is also covered by your patent.

Then your typical Patent Examiner rubber-stamps it and waves it through with barely a glance because he has a Quota to fill... (OK, I don't actually *know* that last bit is true, but that's the way it seems sometimes :-)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
USPTO, 27 Aug 2009 @ 7:12pm

Re: Re: Patenting an idea
Pretty close, we actually get paid by the patents that we review. So like the iPhone app store we just Christmas tree the reviews.... Also, since were all patent lawyers, we know that the more patents we grant (especially the really obvious ones loaded down with prior art) the more business were bound to sink our fangs into once this gig ends. Not to mention, certain law firms hire us in droves in exchange for a wink wink review of anyhing they send across our desk. Hell, I approved a patent application for shoes that was sketched out on a bar napkin last week.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
staff1, 28 Aug 2009 @ 2:18pm

stop the shilling!!!
"I'm confused..."

Finally, you admit it!!!!! Write about things you know something about, like....well, I don't know. Surely you must know something??

Patent reform is a fraud on America...
Please see http://truereform.piausa.org/ for a different/opposing view on patent reform.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Andrew, 10 Dec 2010 @ 9:39pm

http://wlancontroller.com can be used for scanner and access point
[ link to this | view in thread ]