diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/trivial-patent.html')
-rw-r--r-- | talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/trivial-patent.html | 293 |
1 files changed, 293 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/trivial-patent.html b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/trivial-patent.html new file mode 100644 index 0000000..5fab4b6 --- /dev/null +++ b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/trivial-patent.html @@ -0,0 +1,293 @@ +<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" --> +<!-- Parent-Version: 1.79 --> + +<title>The Anatomy of a Trivial Patent - GNU project - Free Software Foundation</title> + +<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/trivial-patent.translist" --> +<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" --> + +<h2>The Anatomy of a Trivial Patent</h2> + +<p>by <a href="http://www.stallman.org/"><strong>Richard Stallman</strong></a></p> + +<p>Programmers are well aware that many of the existing software patents +cover laughably obvious ideas. Yet the patent system's defenders often +argue that these ideas are nontrivial, obvious only in hindsight. And +it is surprisingly difficult to defeat them in debate. Why is that?</p> + +<p>One reason is that any idea can be made to look complex when +analyzed to death. Another reason is that these trivial ideas often look +quite complex as described in the patents themselves. The patent +system's defenders can point to the complex description and say, +“How can anything this complex be obvious?”</p> + +<p>I will use an example to show you how. Here's claim number one +from US patent number 5,963,916, applied for in October 1996:</p> + +<blockquote> +<p>1. A method for enabling a remote user to preview a portion of a +pre-recorded music product from a network web site containing +pre-selected portions of different pre-recorded music products, using +a computer, a computer display and a telecommunications link between +the remote user's computer and the network web site, the method +comprising the steps of:</p> + +<ul> +<li>a) using the remote user's computer to establish a telecommunications +link to the network web site wherein the network web site comprises +(i) a central host server coupled to a communications network for +retrieving and transmitting the pre-selected portion of the +pre-recorded music product upon request by a remote user and (ii) a +central storage device for storing pre-selected portions of a +plurality of different pre-recorded music products;</li> +</ul> + +<ul> +<li>b) transmitting user identification data from the remote user's +computer to the central host server thereby allowing the central host +server to identify and track the user's progress through the network +web site;</li> +</ul> + +<ul> +<li>c) choosing at least one pre-selected portion of the pre-recorded +music products from the central host server;</li> +</ul> + +<ul> +<li>d) receiving the chosen pre-selected portion of the pre-recorded +products; and</li> +</ul> + +<ul> +<li>e) interactively previewing the received chosen pre-selected portion +of the pre-recorded music product.</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + +<p>That sure looks like a complex system, right? Surely it took a real +clever guy to think of this? No, but it took cleverness to make it seem +so complex. Let's analyze where the complexity comes from:</p> + +<blockquote> +<p>1. A method for enabling a remote user to preview a portion of a +pre-recorded music product from a network web site containing +pre-selected portions</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>That states the principal part of their idea. They put selections +from certain pieces of music on a server so a user can listen to +them.</p> + +<blockquote> +<p>of different pre-recorded music products,</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>This emphasizes their server stores selections from more than one +piece of music.</p> + +<p>It is a basic principle of computer science that if a computer can do +a thing once, it can do that thing many times, on different data each +time. Many patents pretend that applying this principle to a specific +case makes an “invention”.</p> + +<blockquote> +<p>using a computer, a computer display and a telecommunications +link between the remote user's computer and the network web +site,</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>This says they are using a server on a network.</p> + +<blockquote> +<p>the method comprising the steps of:</p> +<p>a) using the remote user's computer to establish a telecommunications link to the network web site</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>This says that the user connects to the server over the network. +(That's the way one uses a server.)</p> + +<blockquote> +<p>wherein the network web site comprises (i) a central host server +coupled to a communications network</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>This informs us that the server is on the net. (That is typical of +servers.)</p> + +<blockquote> +<p>for retrieving and transmitting the pre-selected portion of the +pre-recorded music product upon request by a remote user</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>This repeats the general idea stated in the first two lines.</p> + +<blockquote> +<p>and (ii) a central storage device for storing pre-selected +portions of a plurality of different pre-recorded music +products;</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>They have decided to put a hard disk (or equivalent) in their +computer and store the music samples on that. Ever since around 1980, +this has been the normal way to store anything on a computer for rapid +access.</p> + +<p>Note how they emphasize once again the fact that they can store +more than one selection on this disk. Of course, every file system +will let you store more than one file.</p> + +<blockquote> +<p>b) transmitting user identification data from the remote +user's computer to the central host server thereby allowing the +central host server to identify and track the user's progress through +the network web site;</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>This says that they keep track of who you are and what you +access—a common (though nasty) thing for web servers to do. I +believe it was common already in 1996.</p> + +<blockquote> +<p>c) choosing at least one pre-selected portion of the +pre-recorded music products from the central host server;</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>In other words, the user clicks to say which link to follow. That +is typical for web servers; if they had found another way to do it, +that might have been an invention.</p> + +<blockquote> +<p>d) receiving the chosen pre-selected portion of the +pre-recorded products; and</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>When you follow a link, your browser reads the contents. This is +typical behavior for a web browser.</p> + +<blockquote> +<p>e) interactively previewing the received chosen pre-selected +portion of the pre-recorded music product.</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>This says that your browser plays the music for you. (That is what +many browsers do, when you follow a link to an audio file.)</p> + +<p>Now you see how they padded this claim to make it into a complex +idea: they combined their own idea (stated in two lines of text) with +important aspects of what computers, networks, web servers, and web +browsers do. This adds up to the so-called invention +for which they received the patent.</p> + +<p>This example is typical of software patents. Even the occasional +patent whose idea is nontrivial has the same sort of added +complication.</p> + +<p>Now look at a subsequent claim:</p> + +<blockquote> +<p>3. The method of claim 1 wherein the central memory device +comprises a plurality of compact disc-read only memory +(CD-ROMs).</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>What they are saying here is, “Even if you don't think that +claim 1 is really an invention, using CD-ROMs to store the data makes +it an invention for sure. An average system designer would never have +thought of storing data on a CD.”</p> + +<p>Now look at the next claim:</p> + +<blockquote> +<p>4. The method of claim 1 wherein the central memory device +comprises a RAID array drive.</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>A RAID array is a group of disks set up to work like one big disk, +with the special feature that, even if one of the disks in the array +has a failure and stops working, all the data are still available on +the other disks in the group. Such arrays have been commercially +available since long before 1996, and are a standard way of storing +data for high availability. But these brilliant inventors have +patented the use of a RAID array for this particular purpose.</p> + +<p>Trivial as it is, this patent would not necessarily be found +legally invalid if there is a lawsuit about it. Not only the US +Patent Office but the courts as well tend to apply a very low standard +when judging whether a patent is “unobvious”. This patent +might pass muster, according to them.</p> + +<p>What's more, the courts are reluctant to overrule the Patent +Office, so there is a better chance of getting a patent overturned if +you can show a court prior art that the Patent Office did not +consider. If the courts are willing to entertain a higher standard in +judging unobviousness, it helps to save the prior art for them. Thus, +the proposals to “make the system work better” by +providing the Patent Office with a better database of prior art could +instead make things worse.</p> + +<p>It is very hard to make a patent system behave reasonably; it is a +complex bureaucracy and tends to follow its structural imperatives +regardless of what it is “supposed” to do. The only +practical way to get rid of the many obvious patents on software +features and business practices is to get rid of all patents in those +fields. Fortunately, that would be no loss: the unobvious patents in +the software field do no good either. What software patents do is put +software developers and users under threat.</p> + +<p>The patent system is supposed, intended, to promote progress, and those who +benefit from software patents ask us to believe without question that they do +have that effect. But programmers' experience shows otherwise. New theoretical +analysis shows that this is no paradox. (See <a +href="https://web.archive.org/web/20000815064858/http://www.researchoninnovation.org/patent.pdf">researchoninnovation.org/patent.pdf</a> +on web.archive.org.) There is no reason why society should expose software +developers and users to the danger of software patents.</p> + +</div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above --> + +<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" --> +<div id="footer"> +<div class="unprintable"> + +<p>Please send general FSF & GNU inquiries to +<a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org"><gnu@gnu.org></a>. +There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a> +the FSF. Broken links and other corrections or suggestions can be sent +to <a href="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org"><webmasters@gnu.org></a>.</p> + +<p><!-- TRANSLATORS: Ignore the original text in this paragraph, + replace it with the translation of these two: + + We work hard and do our best to provide accurate, good quality + translations. However, we are not exempt from imperfection. + Please send your comments and general suggestions in this regard + to <a href="mailto:web-translators@gnu.org"> + <web-translators@gnu.org></a>.</p> + + <p>For information on coordinating and submitting translations of + our web pages, see <a + href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations + README</a>. --> +Please see the <a +href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations +README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting translations +of this article.</p> +</div> + +<p>Copyright © 2006, 2016 Richard Stallman</p> + +<p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license" +href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">Creative +Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.</p> + +<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" --> + +<p class="unprintable">Updated: +<!-- timestamp start --> +$Date: 2016/11/18 06:31:39 $ +<!-- timestamp end --> +</p> +</div> +</div> +</body> +</html> |