Letting Famous People Interact Online? Patented! Twitter Sued
from the oh-come-on dept
Mike Wokasch accidentally alerted us to the news that Twitter is being sued for patent infringement over what may be one of the most ridiculous patents we've seen in a long time. The patent, 6,408,309, is for a "method and system for creating an interactive virtual community of famous people." And yes, the USPTO actually approved this.Reading through the claims, however, not only suggest that this patent never should have gotten anywhere near being approved, but also raises serious questions about how Twitter infringes. What's patented sounds more like a community in which people compete to be recognized as leaders in specific fields. Twitter is just a communications platform -- it has very little of what's actually described in the claims of the patent. But for the regular patent system defenders in the crowd, can someone explain how this could possibly be seen as patentable? An interactive virtual community of famous people? Seriously?
Wokasch also points out that the "inventor" (and I use that term loosely) is a patent attorney himself. Amusingly, the copyright notice on his website says "Copyright 1999 - 2001" suggesting it's not updated very often.
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: celebrities, interactions, patents
Companies: twitter
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Patented
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Patented
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Famous: widely known. Do facebook friends count?
Famous: honored for achievement. Including scholarly(such as high school awards)?
Since when is twitter just for "famous" twits?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Richard, please pay up or be sued.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Further proof USPTO is just a registry
They just need to add in little caveat that requires the patent must be provable (repeatable and/or implementable) and in use (or schedule to be in use) only by the proposed patent holder.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
wrong target
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Even still, didn't IRC have famous people chat LONG before this?
What about SMS/MMS?
What about collaborative appearance on television and radio?
What about summits and conferences?
Not only is this proof that the USPTO is nothing more than a registry service, but so is the friggin' American Bar Association!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sounds a bit like Quora ;-)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Virginia law
Anyone who has ever lived in VA --and has also actually LEFT VA-- knows how screwed up they're commonwealth laws are. No, I'm not on a soapbox, I'm just saying that maybe it's a contributing factor.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Here is the exact text of Claim 1:
Any infringer would need to be doing these exact steps. In particular, an infringer would need to be creating profiles on behalf of potential users. Twitter seems to be way off because, afaik, twitter does not create profiles on behalf of potential users. However, other professional networking sites such as AVVO.com, justia.com, vitals.com and the countless other sites that grab data from professional licensing registries and automatically create professional profiles for users would seem to be potentially infringing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Making money from patent reviews
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I make no assertion regarding whether this patent should have been granted, I'm merely elaborating on the first claim. In particular, Claim 1 recites the following:
Any infringer would need to be doing these exact steps. In particular, an infringer would need to be creating profiles on behalf of potential users. Twitter seems to be way off because, afaik, twitter does not create profiles on behalf of potential users. However, other professional networking sites such as AVVO.com, justia.com, vitals.com and the countless other sites that grab data from professional licensing registries and automatically create professional profiles for users would seem to be potentially infringing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's a good thing this was patented
/sarcasm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A Patented Case that deserves it ?
I've been reading quite a lot of contra-propaganda regarding patents. Would it maybe be useful to do a case on a particular useful patent that was not obvious and was not in hindsight obvious either ?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: A Patented Case that deserves it ?
I was even told, by IP maximists on this blog, that the overwhelming majority of patents were good and that these, on this blog, were the exception. Of course this blog doesn't come close to documenting all the bad patents, or even the bad patents that are presented on other blogs. So I challenged the IP maximists. If the majority of patents are good, they should easily be able to come up with more good (preferably relatively recent) patents than we should bad ones. Most of the attempted good patents they came up with were very easily shown to be bad and we can easily come up with a plethora of bad ones ourselves. I've presented this challenge several times on techdirt on different threads during different periods of time. IP maximists invariably fail to come up with examples of good patents. There are only like a few, if that, and in fact this is the only one I've seen up to date (though that particular case is still an abuse of the system)
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100318/1240568623.shtml
Face it, patents are worse than useless. They cause far more harm than good, at least with our current system.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: A Patented Case that deserves it ?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: A Patented Case that deserves it ?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Could Aliens claim Prior Art?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Stupid ideas...
Watch out you morons! I'm coming to get yout wallet!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Patents
That way EVERYONE will have to pay me and the licensing fee for the act of filing a patent will be a modest $1,000,000.
Too much? We can negotiate! Just give me 50% of your licensing fees and we will be all set...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dear sir's
for your knowledge I have claimed patent on free speech and will sue you all for still talking to eachother without my permission.
Best regards
[ link to this | view in chronology ]