Stupid Patent of the Month: Solocron Education Trolls With Password Patent
from the patenting-passwords dept
Another month, another terrible patent being asserted in the Eastern District of Texas. Solocron Education LLC, a company whose entire "education" business is filing lawsuits, owns U.S. Patent No. 6,263,439, titled "Verification system for non-traditional learning operations." What kind of "verification system" does Solocron claim to have invented? Passwords.
The patent describes a mundane process for providing education materials through video cassettes, DVDs, or online. Students are sent course materials, take tests, and, if they pass the tests, are allowed to continue on to the next part of the course. At various times, students confirm their identity by entering their biographical details and passwords.
Solocron did not invent distance education, encryption, or passwords. The patent doesn't describe any new technology, it just applies existing technology in a routine way to education materials. That should not be enough to get a patent. Unfortunately, the Patent Office does not do enough to prevent obvious patents from issuing, which is how we get patents on white-background photography or on filming a Yoga class.
The extraordinary breadth of Solocron's patent is clearest in its first claim. The claim, with added comments, is below:
1. A process which comprises the steps of:
encoding at least one personal identifier onto a user interface media [i.e. set up an interface requiring a particular user ID];
displaying a prompt on said user interface media for the at least one personal identifier which requires a match of the at least one personal identifier encoded on the user interface media [i.e. ask the user to enter their user ID];
encoding at least one password onto a data storage media [i.e. encrypt or otherwise password-lock a file];
encoding the at least one password from the data storage media onto the user interface media [i.e. set up the user interface so it can check if the password is correct]; and
displaying a prompt on the user interface media for entering the at least one password which requires a match of the at least one password from the data storage media with the at least one password encoded on the user interface media [i.e. require users to enter their passwords into the interface].
Although the claim runs 119 words, it just describes an ordinary system for accessing content via inputting a user ID and password. These kinds of systems for user identification predate the patent by many, many years. The claim is not even limited to education materials but, by its terms, applies to any kind of "data storage media." The Patent Office should not allow itself to be hoodwinked by overly verbose language that, when read closely, describes an obvious process.
Solocron is asserting its stupid patent aggressively. It has sued dozens of companies, including many new suits filed this year. As with so many patents we have featured in this series, it is suing in the Eastern District of Texas, taking advantage of the court's patent-owner-friendly rules. We need fundamental patent reform, including venue reform, to stop patents like this from being granted and from being abused in the courts.
Reposted from the EFF's Stupid Patent of the Month series.
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: passwords, patents, stupid patent of the month
Companies: solocron education
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why is this a patent?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Abolish IP
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
No need. They're already taking it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wow.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How this Ends
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: How this Ends
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
wot?
WTF is a "...user interface media"? User interfaces do not contain media. Media has nothing to do with user interfaces. This crap should end now.
Any decent patent clerk (hello, 2000's calling Einstein...?) would call bullshit on this parade of horribles.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Maybe get the judges of West Texas all expense paid trips to turkey - return flights fully refundable.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Just a bit of precision...
More specifically, the claim requires "one personal identifier," such as mother's maiden name, elementary school, pet's name, etc. The link via "predate the patent" only seems to talk about passwords, and not "personal identifiers" in the context of the disclosure and the claim.
I am not saying the patent is valid, or should be valid, but the criticism regarding lack of novelty should be based on what the claim actually alleges is novel rather than what someone thinks the claim says.
As a side note, the priority date of this patent is August 27, 1996, so any reference needs to be before that priority date.
As another side note, it is amusing that a lawsuit is being filed now, given that the patent expires in about 13 months.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]