

JP Morgan files for anonymous online payment system - debugunit
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-25326289

======
nh
I would think BBC would do some fact checking. I posted this comment in
another blogger's article. [1]

"The author's entire premise is off. The recent filing is a continuation of an
application filed on Feb 3, 2000 (see patent 6,609,113). So, Chase wasnt
taking a 'swipe' at Bitcoin because the original application was filed 13
years ago."

[1]
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6878442](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6878442)

~~~
jasonwatkinspdx
Patent applications filed before the end of 2000 were not published. You can
in effect file a continuation as many times as you like, and rewrite the
patent substantially as you do. This leads to a tactic called submarine-ing,
where you keep filing continuations on a patent that is repeatedly rejected
for being overly broad. Then once a concrete target appears on the horizon,
you narrow the patent to cover it before prior art, etc is well established.

It's no longer possible to do this with patent applications filed after the
end of 2000 due to reform. The period the patent is in force no longer shifts
forward with the continuations. But previous applications were grandfathered
in.

------
aklein
Bitcoin is continually referred to as "anonymous" in the press, but it is just
the opposite [1]. Maybe confusion over what cryptographically secure
identification is? Some simple network analysis on the public ledger can
reveal a whole lot of "identifying" info ...

[1] [http://bitcoin.org/en/faq#is-bitcoin-
anonymous](http://bitcoin.org/en/faq#is-bitcoin-anonymous)

~~~
wmf
To a layman, anything less than "know your customer" is "anonymous".

~~~
nitrogen
This is a dangerous oversimplification that can lead to gross
misunderstandings.

------
pmorici
Here is a article I read earlier today talking about how they are basically
trying to patent BitCoin's features

[http://letstalkbitcoin.com/jpmorgan-chase-building-
bitcoin-k...](http://letstalkbitcoin.com/jpmorgan-chase-building-bitcoin-
killer/)

------
mrobot
Owning anonymity is an attack on privacy. It means if i want to set up a
system where people pay for things without being tracked i have to pay the
guys who are tracking all purchases.

Theoretical full ownership of all anonymous payment processes means consumers
cannot own their own behaviors without paying a tax on doing so.

If i can hold on to my anonymity i can actually own and even sell my own
behaviors. As one example, I could prove to someone that a bitcoin wallet was
my own.

------
wbl
Can people read? The patent claims are very distinct from Bitcoin: claim 1
requires 2 institutions with customers at each. Bitcoin has no such
institutions.

~~~
newsmaster
Call me paranoid but sounds like they're trying to stop institutions adopting
bitcoins as payment to each other otherwise they'll sue? What's the definition
of institution anyway? If it's got customers then isn't it the same as a
company/business?

------
steven2012
I guess they are trying to take control of all Bitcoin/digital currency
payments by patenting a payment system, and making it as broad as possible.

~~~
spinlock
Would their patent be enforceable? Their claims include anonymity. How do you
know who to sue if the payments are anonymous?

~~~
jacques_chester
You sue any company with a "Bitcoin accepted here" logo.

------
RexRollman
You just know the anonymous part will never fly; our survellence overlords
won't allow it.

~~~
castis
Which, to me, makes this extremely suspect.

------
ris
Hands up who trusts JP Morgan

------
shmerl
Patents? No thanks, especially not from some greedy bank.

------
reovirus
Very interesting, thanks for sharing

