PatenTrakker IDEA Cop - Third Party Opposition

Macrovision redefines the word "SPARSE"

OK, we know Alfred J. Amoroso, who insiders tell us, would rather be called 'Fred' than 'Al' (and can you blame him?) along with those other DRM-afiles (a.k.a., control freaks) at Macrovision Corporation, have come up with a gem of a patent application, 20050216433, entitled, "Identification of input files using reference files associated with nodes of a sparse binary tree," which we know is a mouthful, but that is not the point, note the use of the word sparse. Apparently a series of ONE HUNDRED AND FOURTEEN CLAIMS is Freddie's idea of sparse!

Even though Fred's Curriculum Vitae reads like the travelogue of Ferdinand Magellan, we can't believe that that alone was the genesis of the long winded patent claims list. Then again, we could be wrong.

But the subject was 'trees' so let's not beat around the bush on this one. Perhaps they could have at least partially trimmed the burden on the poor USPTO examiner by axing Claim 1, which reads as follows ...

"1. A method for matching an input audio file with a plurality of reference audio files, comprising: identifying potential matches of an input audio file among a plurality of reference audio files based upon at least one common characteristic; and searching for a match of the input audio file among the potential matches. "

Ummm... is that cutting edge or what??? How else does one ordinarily match stuff? Perhaps Fred will just threaten to cut-off the DRM rights of the examiner's cable box CD's or iPod if the patent does not issue? We hope not ... for all concerned. If there is one thing this world does not need is an entertainment-denied patent examiner!

So that we too are not accused of being long winded, we will cut this review short, but we trust that the readers of this blog will take up the challenge as the IdeaCop(tm) has done and review the attached file of potentially material prior art references for the case.

Better yet, contact the Macrovision Patent Dept Attorney and STOP THE PATENT MADNESS!!

Loren Hillberg, General Counsel
Macrovision Corporation
C/O Patent Department
2830 De La Cruz Boulevard
Santa Clara, CA 95050
Phone: (408) 562-8400
Fax: (408) 567-1800
Loren.Hillberg@macrovision.com

Scott McNealy's Warm Personal Vibrator!

Our first thought was that it was just Scott McNealy's longing for those good old COMDEX days spent by the Sun Microsystems' crew at the now closed Westward Ho! Motel on the Las Vegas Strip and where some of the readers of the IdeaCop(tm) no doubt will recall was one of the few places on the Strip, that for a mere 25 cents one could use the vibrating bed machine in each room after a stressful day on the exhibit floor (which self-pleasure appliances were, just like the SPARC Station, retrospectively, useless 'cutting edge' technology), but we are wondering ... is all of this what still causes Scott to spend money like a drunken sailor in continuing to prosecute this dead dog patent application no. 20020180693 entitled, Computer input device having heating and/or vibrating elements ?

After all, the application was filed just at the peak of Silicon Bust in June 0f 2001. But that, in and of itself, can't explain, to us, at least, why on earth Scott is continuing to flog a dead horse, notwithstanding the apparent draw of a warm vibrator, which Scott could use as an input device and keep close to his personal computer. Well, we suppose there has to be some come-on to sell Sun machines these days.

Oh, just like the maid cleaning up a dingy room at the Westward Ho, potentially material prior art for the subject patent application has to be exposed and shown the light of day and ... to the extent that it can help with that task, the IdeaCop will meet that challenge head-on, so to speak.

LET US MAKKE ONE THING CLEAR at the outset ... the IdeaCop(tm) is not known for, nor knows much about the design, operation or disposal of personal vibrators, warm or otherwise, so it may be that this is indeed a valuable, new, useful and unobvious invention, but in the event that one or more of our readers feels differently, they are encouraged to explore the potentially material references contained in the attached file and/or post their own references, to STOP THIS PATENT INSANITY!
Or better yet, contact SUN's Attorney

ERIC B. MEYERTONS
Meyertons, Hood, Kivlin, Kowert & Goetzel, P.C.
The Chase Building
700 Lavaca
Suite 800
Austin TX 78701-3102
Phone: (512) 853-8800
FAX: (512) 853-8801
emeyertons@intprop.com

ATTACK OF THE REDMOND WORMS!

The subject of this posting may sound like the title of a cheesy Sci-Fi novel, but rest assured that one of the newest published patent applications from four of billg's Redmond Cabal's developers from across the pond, reads even worse!

As Rod Serling might have blogged about billg's boyz ... Imagine if you will, a company trapped in a world and a time not its own ...

Of course the IdeaCop(tm) is talking about the latest and greatest ...
United States Patent Application 20060021054
Containment of Worms

Wanting to get down and dirty with this one, we need only refer you to Claim 1

"1. One or more computer readable media containing computer readable instructions that, when implemented, perform a method comprising:

a) receiving an instruction to write or store received information in a first portion of a memory of a computing system;

b) associating a first dirty indicator with the first portion of the memory, the first dirty indicator indicating `dirty` if the received information is received from an untrusted source or from a fourth portion of the memory with a fourth dirty indicator indicating `dirty`;

c) receiving an instruction to load the received information into a program counter or to execute the received information; and

d) providing an indication of a program vulnerability if the first dirty indicator indicates `dirty`. "

Ignoring for the moment, the obvious questions about what happened to the second and third dirty indicators (is that how billg counts, e.g., one for you, four for me?) , after reading this claim, we would have thought a more appropriate title for the application would have been "Four Strikes and You're Out!" ... but that is just us and perhaps the authors figured that the sports metaphor did not jibe with the science fiction genre of worms.

And of course, in keeping with Mr. Serling's possible postings in connection with the seemingly eternal vulnerability of the Microsoft operating systems to attach, he might add ...

A giant who stood only inches tall; A company of peace who lived and fought in a time of war; A company forever bound by nostalgic love to its roots in a small town, but powerfully drawn to the bright lights and golden opportunities of the big city; A company courageously committed to its duties as a citizen of humanity, yet a victim itself of bigotry and hatred ... A company that may have lived too long, though its life was cut tragically short. Imagine all this, and you might begin to understand the soul of the company we call ... Microsoft.

Not wanting to bore the readers any more than we have already, IN ORDER TO STOP THIS PATENT INSANITY!, we will cut to the chase and post our selection of potentially material prior art references to this application for your further review, enjoyment and enhancement in the attached file. The readers are encouraged to post their comments and further references .. or better yet, to contact the MSFT Patent Attorney of record on this case
MICHAEL ALLEN
MICROSOFT CORPORATION;ATTN: PATENT GROUP DOCKETING DEPARTMENT
ONE MICROSOFT WAY
REDMOND WA 98052-6399
425-722-2455

USPatAppl_20060021054.DOC

SUN MICRO Offers a Pause that Refreshes - NOT

Scott McNeilly must be getting desperate.
Sun Microsystems, Inc. has filed

United States Patent Application 20060020831
Method and appratus (sic) for power throttling in a multi-thread processor.

Claim 1 reads as follows:

1. A method for controlling power consumption in a processor, the method comprising: fetching instructions to be executed in a processor pipeline; issuing the instructions to be executed in the processor pipeline; executing the instructions in the processor pipeline; and inputting M stalls into the pipeline every N instruction cycles, based on a power management inputwherein M and N are integer values and wherein M is less than N.

As far as the IdeaCop(tm) can determine the only inventive aspect of this 'idea' may be the novel use of the word 'stall.'

We would have and, in fact have, called it a pause when we used such techniques a thousand times in programming code, but what do we know?

Then again, perhaps they are just making amens for the misspelling of apparatus in the title?

We are relieved, however, that SUN recognized that M must be less than N, else the thing would likely not work at all but we suppose that the claim would not have been complete without that limitation.

WAIT! If we could just get it to work with M>N, perhaps we really would have something interesting!

The IdeaCop(tm) is not known for, nor knows much about, pausing nor resting, so it may be that this is indeed a valuable, new, useful and unobvious invention, but in the event that one or more of our readers feels differently, they are encouraged to explore the potentially material references contained in the attached file and/or post their own references, to STOP THIS PATENT INSANITY!

Or better yet, contact SUN's Attorney (in this case, Patent Agent) on this matter
Mark Brightwell
MEYERTONS, HOOD, KIVLIN, KOWERT & GOETZEL, P.C.
The Chase Building
700 Lavaca, Suite 800
Austin, Texas 78701-3102
mbrightwell@intprop.com
USPatAppl_20060020831.DOC

OH S.A.I.C. ... By The Dawn's Early Light ...

A patriotic note if anything heralds in the spooks (just to be clear ... in this context that is slang for spies) at Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) who have been around since landing some government money back in 1969, then amassing one of the largest caches of government contracts for covert, hush hush, double-secret scientific stuff over the intervening decades. The IdeaCop(tm) wonders aloud how a company manages to do that much government work? Was Jack Abramoff's father involved? Nevermind.

We pick up on SAIC's recently published application for an underwater intrusion detection apparatus ... United States Patent Application 20060018198 for an Acoustic fence

Now one would not think that there would be a whole lotta prior art in this ... let's call it 'niche' technology ... but the IdeaCop(tm) begs to differ.

We ALSO like the broad Claim No. 1
"1. A sonar sensor system for determining if a potential underwater intruder passes within a protective boundary, the sonar system comprising: a first sonar sensor module comprising: a first sonar array that has a first sonar radiation pattern, wherein the first sonar radiation pattern is essentially omni-directional in a first underwater region; and a first data collection module that collects first sonar data of a target from the first sonar array; a second sonar sensor module comprising: a second sonar array that has a second sonar radiation pattern, wherein the second sonar radiation pattern is essentially omni-directional in a second underwater region; and a second data collection module that collects second sonar data of the target from the second sonar array; and a processor that obtains the first sonar data and that obtains the second sonar data, wherein the processor processes the first sonar data and the second sonar data in order to determine whether the target is deemed to be a threatening underwater intruder. " and hope that for God and Country's sake, not to mention the SAIC bottom line that the examiner feels likewise.

But since this patent application does not seem to offer enough information to enable the staff here to make anything work, we just suppose that we ain't ordinarily skilled in the art of building underwater fences and we will leave it at that. We are confident however that our readers are not so unduly constrained capability-wise and that they, accordingly will enjoy our list of what we consider to be potentially materially relevant prior art, which we have done in the attached file.

As always, we invite you folks to post comments and alternative references and/or contact the counsel for SAIC:

SHELDON WITCOFF
BANNER & WITCOFF, LTD.
TEN SOUTH WACKER DRIVE
SUITE 3000 CHICAGO IL 60606
switcoff@bannerwitcoff.com
USPatAppl_20060018198.DOC

Give us a BRAKE, General Electric !

The title of this one is Graduated Train Braking

a.k.a. United States Patent Application 20060012246

But the IdeaCop(tm) thinks it may as well be called DUH! BRAKING.

Claim 1 reads as follows:

1. A method of automatically controlling braking of a train comprising: applying a first degree of braking to a train during a first time period; and applying a second degree of braking to the train during a second time period following the first time period.

Ummm... does it occur to anyone else out there that this is what normally happens in trying to stop any piece of large equipment? That is, the intuitive braking function is to apply the braking action in at least two stages so as not to lock them up?

Maybe we were just schooled in the old days, before rail-road rage caught on, but can't we try to stop this patent insanity?!?

The IdeaCop(tm) has come up with some potential prior art references in the attached file for your collective review. Post your comments and alternative references. Help the USPTO do its job!

The GE Patent Attorney on this case is
John L. DeAngelis Jr.
BEUSSE BROWNLEE WOLTER MORA & MAIRE, P. A.
390 NORTH ORANGE AVENUE
SUITE 2500
ORLANDO FL 32801
jdeangelis@iplawfl.com
USPatApp_20060012246.DOC

Where's Carly Fiorina When We Need Her?

We know Ms Fiorina got the axe in February, 2005, but we figured that if she were still around when this GB dog-bone was filed in the US on July 8, 2005, that perhaps, it would never have been filed in the US, knowing what a cost-conscious exec that she was (at least excluding the private jets, hob-knobbing parties, etc.)

We will ignore the British spelling issues in the application but ... REALLY! ... is a patent to be issued on the cutting edge idea of:

"A computer program arranged to analyse a specification for a process, the process involving two or more stages, and involving processing of stored data, the program being arranged to: analyse automatically the specification of the process to identify database accesses, and determine automatically how to reduce the amount of database accesses."

What is next? Patenting a way to zip up one's fly on the way out of the Loo, only after making certain that one's 'equipment' is safely tucked away? GIVE US A BREAK! We are pretty sure that Carly would never have stood for that.

United States Patent Application 20060020925
Analysing a multi stage process

Ordinarily we might just recommend a pint or three of good English beer to eliminate memory of this, but in the event the USPTO lets this one slip through, can't we try to stop this patent insanity?!?

The IdeaCop(tm) has come up with some potential prior art references in the attached file for your collective review.

Post your comments and alternative references. Help the USPTO do its job!

HP Patent Attorneys on this case are
JULIANA AGON
HEWLETT PACKARD COMPANY
P O BOX 272400, 3404 E. HARMONY ROAD
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ADMINISTRATION
FORT COLLINS CO 80527-2400

and

Robert Popa
Ladas and Parry
5670 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 2100
Los Angeles CA US 90036
rpopa@ladas.com

USPatApp_20060020925.DOC

Has Nathan Myhrvold Lost it?

BACKGROUND
Despite being known (and we assume willingly) as a 'quintessential Bill guy' and a 'team player' at MSFT for many years, ever since Gates' in a 1998 Antitrust case deposition labeled Myhrvold as something other than "a strategic thinker," Nate became pissed off enough to jump ship and start Intellectual Ventures.

PRESENT
In the interim, Nate and the I.V. Bellevue Boyz have done their best to try to get revenge. Alas, the IdeaCop(tm) however has its doubts about the viability of this pending Application to fill that 'bill' so to speak.

On the off hand chance that we are correct, can't we try to stop this patent insanity?!? To help you start off thinking, the IdeaCop(tm) has come up with some potential prior art references in the attached file for your collective review.

Post your comments and alternative references. Help the USPTO do its job!

United States Patent Application 20050091305
Network system extensible by users

PS
And what's up with the co-ownership of this application by Ben Franklin Patent Holding LLC and General Magic, anyway? Is Nate up to some old tricks in playing the 'patent troll' issue on both sides of the fence or what?

The Intellectual Ventures Patent Attorney on this case is
DONALD R BANOWIT
STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX PLLC
1100 NEW YORK AVENUE, N.W.
WASHINGTON DC 20005

Drop him a line or two about this
dbanowit@skgf.com
U%20S%20Pat%20Appl%2020050091305.DOC

Big Beans from IBM ... or just some gas?

Beans, Beans, Beans ...
'The Navy gets the gravy, but the Army gets the beans', or so that old song performed by Jerry Lewis went ...

But it seems to the IdeaCop(tm) that the folks from Armonk, apparently on a war footing, have taken their proximity to the West Point Miltary Academy a bit too far this time, coming up with little more than gas in this pending application. We bet the wizards from Installshield(r) had thought of this years ago.

United States Patent Application 20050125788
Wizard-based installation package with run-time debugging support

Typically we might just recommend a dose of BEANO for the problem, but in the event the patient won't take the meds, can't we try to stop this patent insanity?!?

The IdeaCop(tm) has come up with some potential prior art references in the attached file for your collective review.

Post your comments and alternative references. Help the USPTO do its job!

The IBM Patent Attorney on this case is
Jeffrey S. LaBaw
International Business Machines
Intellectual Property Law
11400 Burnet Road
Austin TX 78758

Drop him a line or two about your views on this:
jlabaw@Us.ibm.com

U%20S%20Pat%20Appl%2020050125788.DOC

Hey Computer Associates, Install THIS!

Is it just us? Or does this smack of same old same old to anyone else?
The inventor is from Australia, but we are pretty sure that even down under the technology is more advanced than portrayed here.

We quote:

"The system and method in one aspect collects information about all products and components being installed from a centralized user interface, before the actual installation is performed ... The collected information is then stored centrally. Thereafter, subsequent installations, whether on the same or different machine locations, access this information for the subsequent installation procedure."

United States Patent Application 20050262503
Distributed installation configuration system and method

Are they serious? Or is this just a NY lawyer trying to make some news?
Dunno, but can't we try to stop this patent insanity?!?

The IdeaCop(tm) has come up with some potential prior art references in the attached file for your collective review.

Post your comments and alternative references. Help the USPTO do its job!

The Computer Associates Patent Attorney on this case is
Richard F. Jaworski, Esq.
Cooper & Dunham LLP
1185 Avenue of the Americas
New York NY 10036

Drop him a line or two about your views on this:
rjaworski@cooperdunham.com
U%20S%20Pat%20Appl%2020050262503.DOC

Is YAHOO! Joking? ... Sharing is Good

When the IdeaCop(tm) first spied this one from the folks at YAHOO, INC., we thought it must be a joke.

Are ALL of the people in San Jose that lame, or just the Yahoo's?

We just wondered who else could try to lay claim to a method of Sharing, comprising passing a result from one application to another application. Hmmmm...

United States Patent Application 20050267870
Data sharing
see full text at http://appft1.uspto.gov/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.html

We will quote from the Application:
"A technique for sharing data is disclosed. The technique comprises performing a search in a first application to obtain a first search result, transferring search data associated with the search to a second application, and providing, in the second application, a second search result based on the search data."

Oh, wait, they are more specific in the dependent Claims:
"2. A method for sharing data in a messaging environment as recited in claim 1, wherein the first application is a first instant messaging application.
3. A method for sharing data in a messaging environment as recited in claim 1, wherein the second application is a second instant messaging application."

Now we see how this is REALLY CUTTING EDGE!

We have not figured out if YAHOO is really serious or if this really just is a joke, but JUST IN CASE THAT the USPTO thinks they are serious, the IdeaCop(tm) has come up with some potential prior art references in the attached file for your collective review.

Post your comments and alternative references. Help the USPTO do its job!

The YAHOO Patent Attorney on this case is

EDWARD BECKER
HICKMAN PALERMO TRUONG & BECKER, LLP
2055 GATEWAY PLACE
SUITE 550
SAN JOSE CA 95110

ebecker@.hptb-law.com
href="http://www.patentrakker.com/idea/USPatApp20050267870.DOC">USPatApp20050267870.DOC

The RIAA May Use Iridium Isotope Tracing on CD's

Try, Try, again.

Having nearly completely destroyed the market for Music CD's, the Brian Trust at the RIAA is trying now to patent a very scientific method of identifying 'authentic' CD's. Should be a useful technique for the distributors' auditors to inventory the unsold CD's at the warehouse so they can be written off.

We quote:

"Using mass spectrometry, specific types and/or quantities of isotopes of each tracing substance, on a structural level, are used to indicate a specific marking and product identity characteristics, such as a specific lot number, batch number, manufacturer identity, shipping date and the like. The security marking is preferably invisible to the naked eye. The security marking technique is also useful for tracking, authenticating and quality control purposes"

United States Patent Application 20050190677
Security marking system and method for minimizing pirating of data on data media including compact discs and digital versatile discs
see full text at http://appft1.uspto.gov/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.html

We have not figured out if fighting the RIAA is worth the trouble, as they seem to be doing a great job of destroying their own business, but if one was interested in contesting the patent application, the IdeaCop(tm) has come up with some potential prior art references in the attached file for your collective review.

Post your comments and alternative references. Help the USPTO do its job!

The RIAA Attorney on this case is

Irah H Donner
WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE AND DORR LLP
399 PARK AVENUE
NEW YORK NY 10022

Drop him a line or two about your views on this:
irah.donner@wilmerhale.com
U%20S%20Pat%20Appl%200050190677.DOC

MPAA Now wants to PROBE your Personal Info

Let us see if we understand this correctly ... up until now the MPAA was content with just harassing people for viewing movies (Great Business Model, eh?), but now the geniuses there want to PROBE your personal info to restrict even more of your rights.

United States Patent Application 20050192902
Digital rights management using multiple independent parameters

As they put it ... "use of independent parameters (e.g., "who," "what" and "how many") to determine a threat index" What is this all about? Maybe they just want a job at the NSA?

Dunno, but can't we try to stop this patent insanity?!?

The IdeaCop(tm) has come up with some potential prior art references in the attached file for your collective review.

Post your comments and alternative references. Help the USPTO do its job!

The MPAA Attorney on this case is
Brian M. Berliner
O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP
400 South Hope Street
Los Angeles CA 90071-2899

Drop him a line or two about your views on this:
bberliner@omm.com

U%20S%20Pat%20Appl%2020050192902.DOC

eBay wants to Crash Your Wedding!

Getting closer to Spring, when eBay's thoughts turn to ... Money! ... and how to make more of it off the prospective Brides and Bridegrooms.

Well, perhaps Meg Whitman is just getting old(er) and greedy. As if it was not enough that she wants you to pay her to sell your unwanted post-nuptial gifts on eBay.com, instead of Craigslist, but now she wants you to pay her to list your gift registry at the online mall in the first place!

United States Patent Application 20050108109
Method to provide a gift registry in an online mall
see full text at http://appft1.uspto.gov/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.html

Is this double dipping enough to make you want to elope?!

Dunno, but can't we try to stop this patent insanity?!?

The IdeaCop(tm) has come up with some potential prior art references in the attached file for your collective review.

Post your comments and alternative references. Help the USPTO do its job!

The eBay Patent Attorney on this case is
Benjamin C Armitage
Schwegman, Lundberg, Woessner
& Kluth
1600 TCF Tower
121 S. 8th Street
Minneapolis MN 55402

Drop him a line or two about your views on this:
barmitage@slwk.com

U%20S%20Pat%20Appl%2020050108109.DOC

Microsoft to Devs .. Pay MSFT to track YOUR code mods!

My Oh My!

billg and his lawyer buddies up in Redmond have come up with a slick idea. Patent the method of keeping track of changes to YOUR code modifications. Is this enough to make one want to revolt?

United States Patent Application 20060015863
Systems and methods for tracking file modifications in software development
see full text at http://appft1.uspto.gov/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.html

Dunno, but can't we try to stop this patent insanity?!?

The IdeaCop(tm) has come up with some potential prior art references in the attached file for your collective review.

Post your comments and alternative references. Help the USPTO do its job!

The Microsoft Patent Attorney on this case is

CHRISTOPHER M ARENA
WOODCOCK WASHBURN LLP
ONE LIBERTY PLACE - 46TH FLOOR
PHILADELPHIA PA 19103

Drop him a line or two about your views on this:
carena@woodcock.com
MSFT%20U%20S%20Pat%20Appli%200060015863.DOC

Why is Google Trying to Patent Spell Checking ?!?

Yes folks, it has finally happened, from those friendly DO NO EVIL folks in Mountain View.

United States Patent Application 20050289463
see full text at http://appft1.uspto.gov/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.html

Can we do anything about it?

Dunno, but attached below are some of the IdeaCop(tm)'s suggested prior art references for your review. We need to stop this patent insanity.

Post your comments and alternative references. Help the USPTO do its job!

Google's Patent Attorney is

Jung-hua Kuo
Attorney At Law
P O Box 3275
Los Altos CA 94024

Drop him a line or two about your views on this.
jkuo@kuolaw.com

BS%203a50%20United%20States%20Patent%20Application%200050289463.DOC