

Facebook Granted Patent Covering Location-Based Social Networks And Checkins - ssclafani
http://techcrunch.com/2010/10/06/facebook-patent-location-checkins/

======
mgrouchy
This is why I hate Software patents.

The whole patent system in general is screwed up, but its stuff like this that
drives me crazy. Software patents as broad as this can basically kill
innovation(which is contradictory to the actual purpose of patents). IANAL,
but we can speculate with a patent like this, Facebook could essentially kill
foursquare and gowalla with Litigation.

~~~
kj12345
And even if Facebook never litigates, this still distracts entrepreneurs from
solving useful problems. Every meeting or hour of research that foursquare or
gowalla or some new startup has to give to this is time wasted.

------
mycroftiv
Reading stories like this greatly decreases my motivation for creating
software and services. Based on the evidence, it seems that anything I create,
even if it is wholly original to me, will probably get me sued for patent
infringement if I ever start making any money from it. It seems even the most
obvious and easy to implement software functionality is now covered by
multiple overlapping patents. When I was a kid in the mid 1980s, my best
friend and I spent countless hours brainstorming what the computers of the
future would be used for. We correctly anticipated just about everything and
if our 10 year old selves had found a good patent lawyer, I guess I'd be a
rich patent troll instead of just another developer Angry at the Man.

~~~
LiveTheDream
Take the opposite approach and start creating more software and more services
_right now_. Then when some big player comes knocking, you'll have documented
prior art.

------
harryh
Google's similar patent (applied for at the time of the dodgeball
acquisition):

[http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-
Parser?Sect2=PTO1&Sec...](http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-
Parser?Sect2=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=/netahtml/PTO/search-
bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&d=PALL&RefSrch=yes&Query=PN/7593740)

The fact that patents are granted on this sort of stuff is, imho, total
bullshit. Anyone who puts their name on this sort of thing should be
embarrassed.

------
yock
I may be wrong, but can't you essentially patent anything you want so long as
it's unambiguous and no similar patents exist? Since Gowalla and Foursquare
have been around for so long prior to this I'd expect the patent to be
invalidated if it were ever asserted against those companies, who seem to me
to have an abundance of evedence for prior art.

IANAL.....

~~~
ssclafani
The patent was filed in February of 2007. Long before Foursquare and Gowalla
were launched.

~~~
sbov
I'd still think it still should get thrown out due to prior art, since others
came before it (from this thread no less):
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1764925>

------
_emice
There was a lot of buzz about location based/aware services for years before
this, see HP Cooltown, which dates back to 2001.

<http://www.w3.org/Mobile/posdep/HPw3cwapref.html>

Developers interested in creating location based services had to wait until
carriers allowed the requisite devices and started offering reasonable data
plans. It was only in the second half of 2008 that Apple's app store launched.
As a Palm developer around 2002 I talked with fellow enthusiasts about leaving
digital "graffiti" at various locations using GPS, for only friends or subsets
thereof. I looked into developing for Verizon with J2ME and BREW, but there
was no clear path to getting an app published, no public API to get location,
and data plans were out of reach for most of the public.

Apple managed to pry its way in with the 2007 release of iPhone, allowing
users to see what is possible when carriers relax their restrictions. Other
competitors are still effectively locked out though, due to device
"subsidies". Your monthly bill on AT&T remains the same whether you buy a
$200-$300 subsidized smart phone or spend $300 more for an unsubsidized model
not sold by the carrier. Most people don't seem to understand this and simply
see unsubsidized phones as a rip off. There is a big penalty for choosing a
phone outside the carrier's selections, and in the case of Verizon, outside
choices aren't possible. This leaves little incentive for new players to enter
the smart phone market, because after all the R&D, you are likely to be locked
out.

It was only by around 2007 that there were indications that the carriers may
offer a path to developing a location based services, with check ins and
tracking friends being one of the most basic applications. Just about the time
this patent was filed for. By that point though, a lot of location based
service ideas had been floated around by enthusiasts for a couple years
already.

------
danielsoneg
IA(ALSO)NAL, but it looks like the patent [1] was filed in Feb '07 - 4Sq
didn't exist until '09.

Doesn't mean I Like it - or software patents in general - any more, but it
doesn't look like they were as late to this game as their actual launch
implied.

[1] [http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-
Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sec...](http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-
Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=/netahtml/PTO/search-
bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PTXT&s1=facebook&OS=facebook&RS=facebook)

~~~
ryanwaggoner
Foursquare was hardly the first startup to do this:

Dodgeball was created by Crowley (one of the founders of Foursquare) in 2000.
Loopt was founded in 2005. Whrrl, buzzd, and brightkite were all founded in
2007. There are probably dozens of other examples.

EDIT: Had the wrong date for Dodgeball. Thanks Batsu!

~~~
Batsu
Close - Dodgeball was created in 2000 and acquired by Google in 2005. In 2009,
they discontinued Dodgeball in favor of Google Latitude.

It looks as though prior art existed well before Facebook even existed. I
don't think anyone has anything to worry about.

~~~
batasrki
If it's not enforceable, why the hell is it granted? That's total bullshit,
seriously.

~~~
jdunck
Because the patent system in the US, particularly software patent, is entirely
broken: [http://www.bnet.com/blog/technology-business/patent-
office-a...](http://www.bnet.com/blog/technology-business/patent-office-
admits-the-truth-things-are-a-disaster/5419)

------
krishna2
All I can think of is a missed opportunity at a clever(er) title. Something
involving "check in" and "check out".

My simple attempt: "Check in companies, check out the check in patent"

~~~
jholman
Patents check in, innovation checks out.

------
marclove
Filling out my patent application for the "method of typing data into a text
box and submitting it to a server for storage in a database". I'll see you all
in court.

------
code177
I wonder how this affects Latitude... I can't imagine facebook would want to
litigate with google?

------
rwhitman
The question is, what is better - having the patent owned by Facebook or owned
by patent trolls?

~~~
yellowbkpk
Third option: patent is not "owned" by anyone. Anyone can implement the
feature without worrying about wasting time/money due to the threat of
litigation.

~~~
atari
Indeed, if other companies developed the technology and did not patent it, it
should be in the public domain.

------
binspace
The premise of patents is that Facebook would not have done this innovation if
it was not protected by patents. I highly doubt that is the case.

