5978791: Data Processing System Using Substantially Unique Identifiers to Identify Data Items, Whereby Data Items Have the Same Identifiers.
6415280: Identifying and Requesting Data in Network Using Identifiers Which Are Based On Contents of Data.
6928442: Enforcement and Policing of Licensed Content Using Content-based Identifiers.
7802310: Controlling Access to Data in a Data Processing System.
7945539: Distributing and Accessing Data in a Data Processing System.
7945544: Similarity-Based Access Control of Data in a Data Processing System.
7949662: De-duplication of Data in a Data Processing System.
8001096: Computer File System Using Content-Dependent File Identifiers.
8099420: Accessing Data in a Data Processing System.
All software infringes something, so it should get interesting. Hopefully the absurdity will stink so badly that even the U.S. congress will do something.
Apologies. This comment is not worthy of a HN regular, but I am feeling really cranky these days.
It's also largely controlled by old money and Eastern money, not nuevo riche California tech money.
2. Patentocalypse is a great way to kill off startups that actually succeed and open source projects, so big business campaign contributors will keep congresscritters from doing anything about it.
3. This won't really hurt the big public corporations too much, once the dust settles a little, because they'll just reach detente to avoid mutually assured destruction.
If something changes things for the better, it will almost certainly be the general public ultimately reaching a point where everyone ignores patent law altogether, thus making it irrelevant.
INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 5,978,791
On November 2, 1999, United States Patent No. 5,978,791 (the “’791 patent”)was duly and legally issued for an invention entitled “Data Processing System Using Substantially Unique Identifiers to Identify Data Items, Whereby Identical Data Items Have theSame Identifiers.” PersonalWeb was assigned the ’791 patent and continues to hold all rightsand interest in the ’791 patent. A true and correct copy of the ’791 patent is attached hereto asExhibit A.13.
Google has infringed and continues to infringe the ’791 patent by its manufacture, use, sale, importation, and/or offer for sale of its products and services utilizing Google’s Query-Serving System and Google’s File System and its contributing to and inducement of others to manufacture, use, sell, import, and/or offer for sale infringing products. Google is liable for its infringement of the ’791 patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271.14.
What else left to patent? "Method and apparatus to read a bit"?
One file system that comes to mind using the approach described in the patent is Venti though: http://www.stanford.edu/class/cs240/readings/venti-fast.pdf
In fact, before the growth of the internet, Identifying and Requesting Data in Network Using Identifiers Which Are Based On Contents of Data would sound almost exactly like a long winded academic description of finding a book through the public library inter-lending network.
And then, the next time this shit happens, the patent defenders would all go “How would these children get their basic needs met if it weren't for patents? Why do you hate children?”
It would be glorious.
Someone should take away Level 3's patent card. And PersonalWeb really ought to be liable for abuse of process.
Saying that this patent is invalid because it uses hashing would be similar to invalidating every patent describing a device made of iron because iron was invented before.