IBM "Invents" 40-Minute Meetings 161
theodp writes "On Thursday, the USPTO disclosed that self-described patent reform leader IBM wants a patent covering its System and Method for Enhancing Productivity. So what exactly have the four IBM inventors — including two Distinguished Engineers — come up with? In a nutshell, the invention consists of not permitting business meetings to be scheduled for a full hour during certain parts of the day. From the application: 'The observation is that if an hour were shorter, by a small amount, we would be more focused, and accomplish the same amount of work, but in less real time, thereby increasing productivity.'" I just knew someone would one up my 43-minute-meeting patent. That's why I've already begun intense R&D on my latest invention: the 37-minute meeting! Register early for an early-bird discount. Register even earlier for more of one.
Zero minute meeting (Score:3, Insightful)
Bad summary (Score:5, Insightful)
Any Slashdot article that quotes from the abstract, background, or other parts of the disclosure of a patent application instead of the claims, which are the part of a patent application that actually counts, should automatically get tagged "badsummary".
Oh, wait, that'd be all of them.
Bad assumptions (Score:5, Insightful)
The only way to fight this epidemy
You have two problematic assumptions:
Frankly, your idea won't work, as nobody would care -- and I'd call it unimaginative to say there's no other way :-)
Re:Mine Mine (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:prior art (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Mine Mine (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Mine Mine (Score:2, Insightful)
That's fine. I'm already working on my patent for meetings lasting 39 minutes and 59 seconds, and also meetings lasting 40 minutes and 1 second.
Plus meetings of durations 00:00 42:00 43:00 44:00 45:00 4*:00 5*:00 **:02 **:03 **:04 **:05 **:06 **:07 **:08 **:09 **:1* **:2* **:3* **:4* **:5* **:6* **:7* **:8* **:9* 0*:** 1*:** 2*:** 3*:**
By the time i'm finished, the fine folks at IBM are going to have to use an atomic clock to time their meetings, in order to ensure compliance and non-infringement of my patents....
Re:The Obvious... (Score:3, Insightful)
For those that use q3a to test lan latency...... (Score:3, Insightful)
2:00 Meeting
3:00 Meeting
4:00 Meeting
5:00 BEATING
Re:Mine Mine (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't despair, I think patents expire. We will look back at this time 200 years from now and wonder "what were we thinking!"
Patents expire, but a lot of harm can be done until they do and IBM is no stranger to playing the patent extortion [forbes.com] game.
The chief blue suit orchestrated the presentation of the seven patents IBM claimed were infringed, the most prominent of which was IBM's notorious "fat lines" patent: To turn a thin line on a computer screen into a broad line, you go up and down an equal distance from the ends of the thin line and then connect the four points. You probably learned this technique for turning a line into a rectangle in seventh-grade geometry, and, doubtless, you believe it was devised by Euclid or some such 3,000-year-old thinker. Not according to the examiners of the USPTO, who awarded IBM a patent on the process.
After IBM's presentation, our turn came. As the Big Blue crew looked on (without a flicker of emotion), my colleagues--all of whom had both engineering and law degrees--took to the whiteboard with markers, methodically illustrating, dissecting, and demolishing IBM's claims. We used phrases like: "You must be kidding," and "You ought to be ashamed." But the IBM team showed no emotion, save outright indifference. Confidently, we proclaimed our conclusion: Only one of the seven IBM patents would be deemed valid by a court, and no rational court would find that Sun's technology infringed even that one.
An awkward silence ensued. The blue suits did not even confer among themselves. They just sat there, stonelike. Finally, the chief suit responded. "OK," he said, "maybe you don't infringe these seven patents. But we have 10,000 U.S. patents. Do you really want us to go back to Armonk [IBM headquarters in New York] and find seven patents you do infringe? Or do you want to make this easy and just pay us $20 million?"
After a modest bit of negotiation, Sun cut IBM a check, and the blue suits went to the next company on their hit list.
IBM even tried to patent the patent protection racket [slashdot.org].
And whenever something about IBM and patents comes up someone giddy over how IBM fought SCO in court says something stupid like it's just a defensive patent. IBM has a long history of being offensive with patents [newsweek.com].
IBM set the standard for patent licensing in the early '90s. While Big Blue was in a steep decline, veteran employee and lawyer Marshall Phelps got the company to raise the fees it charged others for piggybacking on its ubiquitous technology. Phelps recalls that incoming CEO Lou Gerstner was skeptical of the program; at RJR Nabisco, he had been involved in a patent dispute with Procter & Gamble over soft chocolate-chip cookies. Phelps changed Gerstner's mind by cracking open an IBM PC and showing him all the components that came from other companies. In other words: hardware companies were interdependent, and as the biggest fish in the sea, IBM should exploit that fact. A few years, later IBM was raking in $2 billion a year of almost pure profit from licensing revenue.
I've worked for IBM for almost 25 years. (Score:4, Insightful)