
EBay Files Patent Application for Bitcoin Currency Exchanger - lelf
http://www.ecommercebytes.com/C/abblog/blog.pl?/pl/2014/3/1394372710.html
======
thinkcomp
The best way to evaluate a patent application is to look at its claims first.
Here's the application in its published form:

[https://www.google.com/patents/US20130173416](https://www.google.com/patents/US20130173416)

The claims are on the right on Google Patents and at the end of the official
PDF. Independent claims are the most important; dependent claims are only
valid if the claims that they depend upon are also valid. Here, claim 1, which
is independent, involves a lot of language having to do with digital goods and
inventory. Already that's confusing because digital goods don't tend to have
inventory; they're digital. Claim 2, which is dependent upon claim 1, gets
into digital currencies. The other focus of the patent application relates to
combinations of digital goods. I'd expect the examiner to push back on claim 1
to clarify what they're actually talking about and limit it accordingly.

Is there a lot of prior art out there dated before December 29, 2011 (the
application's priority date) that could block this applciation from ever going
anywhere? Yeah, there is. Will I file some with the USPTO in a few minutes?
Yeah, I will.

Meanwhile, keep in mind, patents are inherently confusing because by the time
one gets granted it has three numbers already, and that's just in the U.S.:
there's the application number, which here is 13/340,494, the publication
number (before publication, no one can see the application so it can't yet be
considered prior art in others), which here is US20130173416 A1, and the grant
or issue number, which right now would be somewhere in the 8 million range
were it to be granted. A lot of people and institutions mix these numbers up,
including even Westlaw, which calls publications "applications". A publication
is a snapshot of an application at a particular point in time.

Anyway, don't freak out. There's worse [actually granted] patents out there.
Also, none of this is legal advice and I'm not a lawyer.

Update: I just filed the following potential prior art:

1\.
[http://www.google.com/patents/US20020161692](http://www.google.com/patents/US20020161692)

2\. [http://techcrunch.com/2011/12/14/gumroad-lets-you-sell-
anyth...](http://techcrunch.com/2011/12/14/gumroad-lets-you-sell-anything-you-
make/)

3\.
[http://www.wired.com/magazine/2011/11/mf_bitcoin/](http://www.wired.com/magazine/2011/11/mf_bitcoin/)

~~~
bennyg
Nice research and explanation man! Filing prior art is awesome too.

------
snitko
If this patent gets accepted, I think US may never see any Bitcoin exchange
except EBay. This is completely stupid. There's nothing fundamentally special
about a Bitcoin exchange. Trading engine and all the other parts are, of
course, difficult, but hardly a new type of software.

------
sgpl
Can someone please explain how this is possible/allowed?

Also wouldn't this patent (if granted) be refutable due to prior art, etc?

From the article:

 _> BitMit was the first successful Bitcoin marketplace (well, second if we
count Silk Road) and actually launched its service the same month and year of
the eBay patent filing._

~~~
nolok
I think/believe you're looking at invalidating it the wrong way.

Patent should be non obvious (I don't remember the exact wording). The prior
art for this is not "another bitcoin exchange", its another currency exchange
period; adding a new currency to your currency exchange is an obvious step,
and should be treated as such.

If the judge act as an idiot and pretend this is new, _then_ you can complain
prior art for bitcoin exchange specifically. This way, you don't have to do it
again and again and again with the gazillion crypto-currencies out there.

~~~
Natsu
If common sense applied to patents, we wouldn't be in this mess. No doubt
they've added some ridiculous limitations that add trivial "advancements" to
what the patent office can find documentation of, but it will cost millions of
dollars and a trip to Marshall, TX if you want to fight it out with them.

~~~
akiselev
But that's the problem, "common sense" IS applied to the problem. Thing is,
"common sense" is just a bullshit phrase we like to apply out of laziness and
lack of empathy for how hard it is to establish and maintain a solid
foundation of knowledge in any field, let alone tech where "common sense" can
change year to year. (although I'm sure it has a legal definition with lots of
precedent in the two centuries before the internet)

The patent office is over worked and most patent examiners have no idea what
"common sense" is in most tech fields, each of which requires a familiarity
that few of us here on HN can claim, let alone a bureaucrat with terrible
guidance from legislators. All it takes is a single small gap, like what a
crypto currency is, or a misunderstanding of how currency exchanges operate,
or even outright semantic manipulation by legal counsel, and the poor patent
examiner has no choice but to approve the patent. This is why we have appeals
and the legislature, the former to fix the failings of "common sense" and the
latter to be bought to manipulate it.

~~~
Natsu
Yes, they've found a bright line that's in a bad place and stick to it because
it makes the patent bar a lot of money. I don't think it's the best place to
be and I have thought quite a bit about a 'triviality' test where if you can
tell someone skilled in the art _what_ to make without telling them _how_ and
they could still make it, your "invention" is too trivial to be worth
protecting.

But I'm certainly open to the notion that we're moving too fast for patents to
be worthwhile in some fields...

------
spikels
Fuck EBay and the stupid patent system. You should have to actually invent
something before you can patent it. This is written so broadly as to encompass
almost anything involving exchanging non-physical items of value using
networks and computers. Yet this has been going on for decades in financial
markets.

------
adamnemecek
OT but it's been a while since I saw webdesing that looked as 90's as this
site.

~~~
code_duck
It looks about 2002-2005 to me.

------
devx
Prior art still works, right?

------
rgbrgb
Idea: 1-click Bitcoin Currency Exchanger.

~~~
Rhian
Not a 1-click currency exchange, but the calculator tool I've just co-
developed is a neat way to keep track of all your cryptocurrency investments.
The fact that competition between the exchanges is wide open is obviously a
great thing, so [http://www.countmycrypto.com](http://www.countmycrypto.com)
makes it easy to aggregate your total balance (and keep it in local storage)
even if your different coins are split over multiple exchanges and offline
wallets

~~~
QuantumDoja
Bookmarked! + Nice work!

~~~
Rhian
Thanks dude :)

