
Kim Dotcom to Google, Twitter, Facebook: I Own Security Patent, Work With Me - chemcoder
http://torrentfreak.com/kim-dotcom-to-google-twitter-facebook-i-own-security-patent-work-with-me-130523/
======
huhtenberg
That's some quality trolling.

It can't be anything else, he's not an idiot.

I may not like his business ventures or his personality, but I just cannot
_not_ respect him for having a backbone and a pair of balls to keep pushing
this thing forward. They did him wrong and he doesn't let go. This is really
impressive.

~~~
nolok
Had trouble getting your last paragraph right, double negative makes it harder
to read. Agreed with what you said though, he knows there is no trial possible
over it.

------
n00b101
The patent system is so horribly broken.

Let me get this straight ... something as simple as 2-factor authentication
can be patented in the US and enforced world-wide? Let's say I'm running a
start-up or a small business and I need secure, remote access ... my go-to
solution would be to use 2-factor authentication ... but I have to worry about
getting sued or finding funds for paying extortion money just to apply an idea
that's about as dead-simple as passwords? How is this a good thing for
inventors?

~~~
homosaur
We've well established at this point that the archaic US Patent System and
software patents in general are not good for inventors, consumers, or the
economy in general.

They are good for lobbyists and entrenched megacorporations, however, which
means we can ignore all that and it's good for the public. Now go take your
medicine, slave.

~~~
dreamdu5t
It is not well established or popular opinion. I work at a startup and many of
my co-workers support patents, copyright, and intellectual property while
simultaneously decrying patents like this.

~~~
alipang
I don't find it helpful to mix in copyright/intellectual property into this
discussion as there is no reason why you can't support these while not
supporting the patenting of ideas.

Personally I don't regard two-step authentication, or software patents in
general as a kind of "invention", and don't find they should be patentable,
much like "prime numbers" or "the periodic table".

~~~
dreamdu5t
I'd be interested in the reasoning you would support copyright but not
patents? Copyright and patents have the exact same justification, just one is
for published works and the other for "inventions." Both copyright and patents
are titles of ownership to information.

~~~
alipang
I support patents, just not software patents. You can spend billions
developing a new drug, and companies need to get reimbursed somehow for that,
or everybody loses.

How much you think was been spent "inventing" two-factor authentication?

Can you give an example of software that you'd argue wouldn't have been
developed if there were no software patents?

------
nolok
Patent link: <https://www.google.com/patents/US6078908>

Granted in 1998 and referenced by pretty much every tech giant. Ought to be
interesting.

~~~
jacques_chester
I read it yesterday.

The patent refers to _authorisation_ , not _authentication_. They are
different. The usage described is distinct from 2-factor authentication as
practiced by Google et al.

IMO he's just grandstanding and will be rightly ignored.

IANAL, TINLA.

------
aolol
It's interesting because this is the type of patent system abuse that we often
rally so hard against. Now that the objective is somehow more 'noble' will we
ignore that this approach is still fundamentally opposed to the prevailing
opinion on the patent system and those who abuse it?

~~~
nicholassmith
I wouldn't have called this as patent abuse, he came up with a neat idea, and
applied for a patent. He didn't use it, but that doesn't invalidate that he
came up with the idea, he just moved on. He hasn't sold it to anyone, he's
never used it aggressively. He's being a dick now and saying "I might have to
sue you!", but it's not patent abuse in the way Intellectual Ventures
approaches it.

Edit; Actually, I don't think it's patent abuse as much as it is good old
fashioned extortion.

~~~
genwin
> I don't think it's patent abuse as much as it is good old fashioned
> extortion.

Precisely. Large companies routinely employ such negotiation, as does the US
gov't to an extreme. Kim Dotcom is no worse.

~~~
mintplant
But then, he isn't any better for it, either. This is patent trolling, plain
and simple - I don't see why people are rallying around him in this.

~~~
resu_nimda
Because he is The Little Guy, and there is a massive and highly publicized
campaign by the US government against him. This is him doing what he can to
fight back.

I think it says something that he never did anything with the patent until
now, I believe that he has good intentions and no desire to be a patent troll.
Given his unique situation, and his flair for drama and unorthodoxy, I think
it makes perfect sense.

~~~
mintplant
Yes, let's attempt to extort defense funds from large corporations. That will
surely get them on his side.

Just because he's "The Little Guy" doesn't make it any better. Holding someone
hostage to raise money for a cancer research foundation wouldn't make the act
itself morally justified.

~~~
resu_nimda
Well, I don't know what to say, I think we have basic ideological differences.
I think every situation is unique and needs to be judged in full context, you
seem to have a more rigid moral code. If that act actually moved the needle on
cancer knowledge, I might support it.

This particular situation appeals to my romantic and absurdist philosophies,
it's ballsy and interesting if nothing else.

~~~
mintplant
In my opinion, it damages the arguments against such abuses of the patent
system. A public outpouring of support for this case makes it seem like
there's a double standard: that people oppose it in the typical context
because of a general bias against large corporations, rather than a problem
with patent trolling itself.

~~~
wnight
Well sure. I doubt Kim lobbied for software patents.

I oppose the use of land-mines in general but I support their placement in the
boardrooms of corporations that manufacture them. Because heartless execs are
nothing like innocent children. Context matters.

------
C1D
If a company does actually help his legal battle the US gov won't be happy. I
hope he does get help with his legal problems and I want to see how this whole
thing plays out. It's likely that companies like FB, google and twitter will
ignore him so I want to see how he's going to respond to that.

~~~
famousactress
On the other hand, this sort of high-profile strong arming could be helpful in
changing opinions about software patents. Someone using software patents to
blackmail companies into pouring money into a case against the US govt might
be exactly what we need to change the opinions of some congresspeople...

------
kbenson
If you look at the SecurID wikipedia[1] page, in the references you can find a
paper discussing two factor authorization in 1996[1]. Also, it's not defining
two factor authentication, it assumes the reader knows what it is.

[1]: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SecurID>

[2]: <http://www.homeport.org/~adam/dimacs.html>

------
guelo
The smart threat would be to put the patent up for auction. The fear of the
trolls getting the patent would bring the big guys to the table.

~~~
resu_nimda
At the end of the article:

“Want to buy the worldwide license to my two-factor-authentication patent? (13
countries incl. US & China) Email: twitter@kim.com,” he concludes.

edit: I may be wrong, is buying " _the_ worldwide license" different from
buying the patent?

~~~
smnrchrds
I guess he means he will license his patents more than one company. In
contrast, if he sells all the patent rights, he can't sell them to anyone else
and those who want to acquire a license should negotiate with the buyer.

------
mpobrien
But isn't suing to enforce his patent rights _also_ an expensive legal battle
that he would need to somehow fund? I don't see how this threat could be seen
as effective.

~~~
genwin
Some other group who buys the patent from him, paying his bills and then some,
would sue to enforce the patent rights.

------
footoverhand
Perhaps he missed the memo which clearly states that patent's are used to
protect multinational corporations and governments, not individuals or small
corporations.

------
aidos
So I guess this wouldn't cover, for example, Google Authenticator (what I
think of as 2-factor auth)? There's no transport mechanism and the agreement
is via a shared secret so it's seems like a different kettle of fish. Then
again, I'm no expert on security so don't take my word for that....

------
bsenftner
Starting to love this guy

~~~
feralmoan
He's a smart guy, you'd think he'd try to broker these deals through more
discrete channels if he were actually serious. All this theatre ensures the
companies Kim's trying to court won't touch him with anything like a $50m
pole. He's fun to watch but a bit of a trainwreck.

------
cunac
I don't see how this is valid patent. He just changed delivery method from
mail; as described in prior art section; to more modern (SMS etc..) but he
didn't invent any new process. Why change of delivery medium would be
sufficient to grant patent?

~~~
genwin
The patent clerk has about 7 hours on average to examine prior art. The clerk
may not be technologically savvy.

~~~
dtp
Exactly. And even once the patent is granted, prior art can be re-examined in
the courtroom when a lawsuit is brought. I'm not an expert or anything, but I
wouldn't expect this patent to stand up in court.

~~~
genwin
The court is usually in Eastern Texas. Expect the unexpected there.

------
GoofballJones
“I never sued them. I believe in sharing knowledge & ideas for the good of
society. But I might sue them now cause of what the U.S. did to me".

So in other words, you believe in the "good of society", but now that you have
legal fees, screw society?

------
adventured
$50 million in legal bills? Not a chance that's accurate.

~~~
mtgx
Aaron Swartz needed a few million dollar for his defense (probably the main
cause of suicide).

I don't think $50 million for someone like Kim who was probably at the top of
the list of the Obama administration along with Osama Bin Laden, is that
outrageous.

------
lquist
Blackmail. Pure and simple.

~~~
genwin
But no worse than what large companies and the US gov't routinely do.

------
1337biz
I just wish Kim would start something like Startup Chile for New Zealand - but
only for privacy and security related startups. He would have the right
swagger to make this thing successful and (at least over the more recent past)
a credible track record for standing up for what he believes in.

------
nevir
Where was he years ago when this sort of 2-factor auth was starting to get
popular?

Don't you have to actively defend your patent? Sitting on it for 15 years and
then deciding to sue on a whim can't look good in a court's eyes...

~~~
rlpb
> Don't you have to actively defend your patent?

No, you don't. You may be thinking of trademarks, which you do have to defend
or license to avoid dilution.

You may say that this is a problem with the patent system. But here on HN, we
already know how broken the patent system is, don't we?

------
genwin
What a twist! There seems to be a lot of related prior art referenced by the
patent. I thought patents were valid only for the country that issued them.
How is this a worldwide patent? Trade agreements?

------
onemorepassword
If people would actually read what he writes on twitter instead of the
sensationalist blog posts derived _only_ from those tweets, they would get a
much more nuanced picture.

------
hcarvalhoalves
Let's see if he even _manages_ to sue the tech giants, let alone what the
judge rulings will be like when the patent owner is an individual instead of a
tech giant.

~~~
genwin
I could see a company or investor group buying this patent from him at $50M+.
It's worth more even at a penny per authentication.

------
lignuist
This guy is in the wrong business. He should run a tv show, because he is so
entertaining.

------
staticfish
You must be joking, right?

------
youngerdryas
HN becomes a bag full of stupid when fetishizing Kim Dotclown.

