Monday, August 4, 2008
How VeriSign's unpatentable patent squeaked through unsearched
Look at the following totally unpatentable software method as of August 1998, and borrowing from ()biochemical concepts, call it a genus-type patent claim (though utterly not genius):
1. A method in a data processing system with distributed databases,
each responsible for maintaining application-specific records for an
associated application, comprising:
receiving user input containing a query string, a plurality of
applications and at least one search criterion corresponding to
the plurality of applications;
transmitting a request for a search of the query string to each of
the distributed databases associated with the plurality of
applications;
receiving search results from each of the distributed databases
associated with the plurality of applications indicating, for each
of the specified applications, whether an application-specific
record exists for the application in the specified distributed
database; and
displaying the search results.
In short, a method of doing distributed database searches, a technique
well established in the 1980s. Now consider the following species
restriction:
distributed databases = DNS servers
application = domain [registration]
application-specific records =registration records of domain names
query string =domain name
and substitute the restricted species terms into the above genus claim,
resulting in:
1. A method in a data processing system with DNS servers, each
responsible for maintaining registration records of domain names
for an associated domain, comprising:
receiving user input containing a domain name, a plurality of
domains and at least one search criterion corresponding to the
plurality of domains;
transmitting a request for a search of the domain name to each
of the DNS servers associated with the plurality of domains;
receiving search results from each of the DNS servers associated
with the plurality of domains indicating, for each of the specified
domains, whether a domain name record exists for the domain name
in the specified domain; and
displaying the search results.
This type of software technique, as "genus restriction" is completely
obvious to one skilled in the art, especially in light of mountains of
non-patent prior art for distributed database queries from the late 1980s
and early 1990s, especially distributed database queries of Internet
information.
Nevertheless, here is the patent:
Patent 6,560,634
6 May 2003
Method of determining unavailability of an internet domain name
VeriSign, Inc., Filed: August 13, 1998
Abstract
Methods, systems, and articles of manufacture consistent with the
present invention provide an improved query server that overcomes
the shortcomings of existing domain name searching techniques by
performing a multitude of searches simultaneously, transparent to
the user. Specifically, the improved query server searches for
existing domain name records in various domains and then displays
the results in a formatted manner, thus eliminating the need for
a user to perform individual searches.
I think nobody bothered to search for prior art. For example, how were the following papers missed, all published ten years on more before the patent was filed:
The Clearinghouse: a decentralized agent for locating named objects
in a distributed environment
ACM Trans. Office Information Systems, July 1983, 230
Designing a global name service
1986 ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, 1
A name service for evolving, heterogeneous systems
ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles 1987, 52
A model of name resolution in distributed systems
6th Int. Conference on Distributed Computing Systems 1986, 523
This is all a contempt of science and engineering. Applicant and PTO searching is still a joke. And I have still not heard one word that convinces me that outsourcing PTO searching will improve anything. Especially in light of patents like this.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment