- BountyQuest/Amazon's 1-click goofup
- Netflix sued for infringing "optimizing interest potential" patent
- Phyllis Schlafly opposes patent reform bill
This year's Halloween patent: U.S. patent 748,284 - "Method of preserving the dead" - "... whereby a corpse may be hermetically sealed within a block of transparent glass" by pouring hot, molten glass all over it. Use it next time you get a lack of utility rejection from the PTO.
BOUNTYQUEST/AMAZON'S 1-CLICK EMBARRASSMENT
A recent Slashdot revealed a bit or irony about one of the more recent public prior art scams, BountyQuest.
Slashdot writes: "One last dose of irony - in explaining the prior art he used to reject the 1-click claims, a USPTO Examiner cited the very same TV remote control patent that was deemed to be unsuitable in a 1-Click prior art contest run by the O'Reilly and Bezos-bankrolled (and now bankrupt) BountyQuest (just last year, Amazon testifed to Congress that the contest failed to find prior art for Bezos' patent)."
Yes, a reason why a) BountyQuest was a joke, and b) these public prior art scams are ripe for abuse. There is only one solution - fire the jokers in charge of prior art handling at the PTO, and bring in some people who know how to supply examiners with the time, tools and resources to do the searching themselves - which they can do.
NETFLIX SUED FOR infringing "OPTIMIZING INTEREST POTENTIAL" patent
Over the years, I have spent a fair amount of time trying to bust the Netflix patents. Decent filing date - decent claims - always a trick to bust. A bit of irony then in seeing Netflix sued by a company called Refined Recommendation Corporation. The patent is 6,606,102. You can pretty much wipe your ass with this patent, for its late filing date and lack of any non-patent prior art. Will you jerks growup and do some searching before asserting such crap?
One additional crap note: you will see the word "valence" below, a ruse to distract the examiner. How's "valence" defined? ".... user interest and disinterest (valence)" in something. So why not just use "interest" like every other software recommendation system?
And finally, is it really surprising that RRC is a subsidiary of Acacia, which seems to be in a contest with Niro to see who can find the most crappy unsearched patent to assert?
PHYLLIS SCHLAFLY OPPOSES PATENT REFORM
Hey, even rightwing extremists get it right once in a blue moon (or red moon when they look at it). "The Patent Act is a Cheat on Americans", by Phyllis Schlafly, www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=23109 "A combination of foreigners who make a business of stealing out intellectual property, and the multinationals who want to avoid paying royalties to small inventors, have ganged up to get Congress to do their bidding".
Damn, she stole my next script idea. "Chinese Government: Hey Microsoft, Intel, IBM. You want us to give you more protection. Then work to undermine the U.S. patent system." Of course, that could explain the "Basic Chinese for Dummies" on Dudas' desk.
