Paul Allen Files Patent Suit Against Apple, Google, Yahoo, Others 219
mewshi_nya writes "A firm run by Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen filed suit alleging 11 technology companies are violating patents developed at a Silicon Valley lab that Allen financed more than a decade ago. Named in the lawsuit: Apple, Google, AOL, eBay, Facebook, Netflix, Office Depot, OfficeMax, Staples, Yahoo and Google's YouTube subsidiary. The suit doesn't name Microsoft, Amazon.com or other tech companies in Seattle where Allen is based, and it doesn't estimate a damage amount. The suit lists violations of four patents (PDF) for technology that appear to be key components of the operations of the companies — and that of e-commerce and Internet search companies in general."
Really? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Why now? (Score:5, Funny)
He can't win (Score:5, Funny)
I have patented suing for patent damages. And I won't license it to him.
Read for yourself:
http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PG01&p=1&u=/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=%2220080270152%22.PGNR.&OS=DN/20080270152&RS=DN/20080270152 [uspto.gov]
Re:And here I thought (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Lots of companies, obvious patents (Score:4, Funny)
Having alerted you users all to these items of interest, I will now proceed to pay Paul Allen.
Gasp! And you used my browser to do it, you patent-cheating fiend!
Re:He can't manage The Trail Blazers... (Score:3, Funny)
What gives him the idea he can take on a dozen major tech companies out of the Valley?
That would be patent 5714015... [freepatentsonline.com]
Re:Why now? (Score:5, Funny)
If I was trying to get money out of AOL, I'd be in a big hurry too!
Me, too!
Re:Why now? (Score:4, Funny)
Mr. Allen, a pioneer of computer software, didn't develop any of the technology himself but owns the patents.
So, he didn't buy them ... and didn't develop them ... so does that make him a bankrolling patent troll?
Re:Really? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Why now? (Score:3, Funny)
actually none of your examples gold up.
there is a difference between doing something physically and doing something electronically.
Re:Why now? (Score:1, Funny)
Don't tell me you're still of the opinion that patent law and common sense have anything to do with each other.
Re:Why now? (Score:3, Funny)
Well.. now I'm stumped... it was FILED in Seattle... I expected E.Texas... Oh well...
Re:Patents In question (Score:3, Funny)
Patent '652 and '314 are patents for "Attention Manager for Occupying the Peripheral Attention of a Person in the Vicinity of a Display Device" or Advertisments.
Patent '682 is for "Alerting Users to Items of Current Interest." or Targeted Advertisements.
Sorry, but you're wrong - it's not about ads. With those three patents, he basically patented Clippy.
35 USC 292 (Score:5, Funny)
I have patented suing for patent damages. And I won't license it to him.
Read for yourself:
http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PG01&p=1&u=/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=%2220080270152%22.PGNR.&OS=DN/20080270152&RS=DN/20080270152 [uspto.gov]
You claim you've "patented" this, but it clearly is merely the publication of a patent application, and in fact, has not been granted. Accordingly, by claiming you have "patented" it, you are in violation of 35 USC 292 which makes "false marking" illegal, and levies a charge of up to $500 for every such offense.
I leave a settlement offer to you. A donation to Slashdot would certainly be appropriate. Cheers.
Disclaimer: I am a patent agent. I am not your patent agent. Nothing in this post should be considered legal advice, nor should be relied on. This is merely for the purposes of [my] amusement.
Re:Why now? (Score:3, Funny)
Why should there be? Is a clock any different just because it uses pixels?