

Chicago Tribune being sued for $10 M by patent troll over how it links to stuff - brandnewlow
http://windycitizen.com/whRE

======
kljensen
The patent is hilarious <http://priorsmart.com/6049835>

"A system for quickly and easily accessing preselected desired addresses or
URLs on the Internet is disclosed in which a published list of Internet or
World Wide Web sites together with their unique jump codes is utilized in
connection with a corresponding specialized Web site which is accessed by a
user using either a personal computer or a TV Internet Terminal and remote
control, after which access a jump code corresponding to the preselected
desired URL is entered by the user and software contained in the specialized
Web site immediately and automatically accesses the desired Web site."

Bitly?

~~~
ams6110
Is there some kind of mandate that patent abstracts be written as run-on
sentences?

------
jeffmould
Seems like a stretch to me. I read the patent and in particular the claims
they are saying the Chicago Tribune infringed on. I then looked at the
Tribune's website and don't see where they would be infringing based on the
claims and description in the patent. Looking at the Jump Code website, it
gives an example of newspaper classified ads, but in looking at the Tribune
website I don't any "codes" in their classifieds. In fact most of their
classifieds are run by third-party systems (CareerBuilder, Pets.com, etc...).
I wonder if the print version of the Tribune includes some reference to these
numbers in their classifieds or even articles in the paper relating the print
article to the online version.

I don't think this is a unique idea though and I would think it would be easy
to find some form of prior art in the case. The system basically sounds like
using a "keyword", or in this case a JumpCode, to link to a website. But the
patent was filed in 2000. Companies like AOL and even CompuServe have used
keywords for years on their site to link to webpages. I know newspapers have
used keywords in print classifieds to link to online resources for a while
(not sure if it would be before 2000 though) as well.

I don't believe these people are trolling necessarily, but I do think they
have some aggressive legal advice here and may be looking to get some
attention or prevent their business from failing.

~~~
grhino
I think the patent violation only applies to advertisements that appear in the
print edition. At least, I hope so.

~~~
jeffmould
I would hope so too, but in reading the link it sounds like they are only
referring to the website. Really sounds like a long shot to me.

------
kljensen
Might not be "troll" - here's their "JumpCode" system:
<http://www.jumpcodesystem.com/>

~~~
jonknee
Wow, the pricing is unbelievable. $250-500/month per "Jump Code". I'd love to
know if they have a single paying customer at that rate.

~~~
robryan
There is always the chance that they aren't trying to attract customers but
give themselves the best opportunity to win patent cases by actively pursuing
their patent?

------
jcromartie
I almost want to set up a competitor to this (having not read the patent) and
sell it for $5 per code. Could one simply ignore such a silly lawsuit? Or
would it really ruin me if they sued?

Honestly, a bit.ly clone like this would take an afternoon to do _well_.

------
kgermino
It's the people like this that are retarding the progress of software. I
understand the need for protections but for something so basic and widely used
I don't see how suing someone who uses a similar system helps anyone but the
lawyers.

