.

A L S O_ T O D A Y 21st Log Intel eludes the antitrust maelstrom   T A B L E__T A L K What's the dream operating system for cruising the Internet? It's another Mac vs. Windows go-round in the 21st area of Table Talk   Search for technology books, software and more at barnesandnoble.com Search by:  Keyword Title Author     ____________________ Technology news from GeoCities shares the wealth with members ____________________   R E C E N T L Y Fortress Microsoft By Tony Seideman Redmond's scorched-earth spin strategy has turned into a PR nightmare (03/08/99) Let's Get This Straight: By Scott Rosenberg Why hasn't the software industry given us more tools to get our lives in order? (03/05/99) Gathering of the Linux tribes By Andrew Leonard Hackers and suits eye each other warily amid LinuxWorld hoopla (03/04/99) Molotovs and mailing lists By Austin Bunn When bomb-throwers target e-mail discussions, no one can escape the carnage (03/03/99) Terrors of the Amazon By Lev Grossman A writer journeys into the strange, savage land of his readers and finds himself performing unspeakable acts (03/02/99) - - - - - - - - - - BROWSE THE 21ST FEATURES ARCHIVES - - - - - - - - - -

How can they patent that? THE TORRENT OF PATENTS FOR E-COMMERCE SCHEMES RAISES NEW QUESTIONS ABOUT AN OLD-FASHIONED SYSTEM. - - - - - - - - - - BY PETER WAYNER Hey you, downloading audio or video clips from the Net -- yeah, you! Drop that animated GIF. Put down that QuickTime movie. Forget about those MP3 files. Didn't you know that buying copies of those things over the Internet is patented? If someone doesn't pay royalties, someone's going to be liable. Patent fear is gripping the Net these days, as media coverage highlights new patents covering the flow of multimedia, music, money and whatnot over the Internet. In the past, news stories about patents were tales filled with strange chemicals, weird industrial processes, arcane contraptions with odd levers or microscopic things. To get a patent in the old days, you couldn't be just any schmoe -- you needed horn-rim glasses and a white lab coat. But the latest batch of patents that focus on the Internet aren't anywhere near as impressive. In fact, they look as if any schmoe did "invent" them -- by taking some everyday occurrence and adding to it the phrase, "with a computer network." Consider U.S. Patent 5848161, which describes the flash of genius that hit two Canadians and an American: They "invented" the practice of locking up the data traveling over the Internet between the customer and the store -- that is, they use encryption functions to hide credit card account numbers from prying eyes. Or consider patents 5191573 and 5675734, created by Arthur Hair when he lived in Pittsburgh. He claims to have invented the concept of "selling electronically ... through telecommunications lines, the desired digital video or digital audio signals" -- in short, pay-per-view over the Internet. It's not really fair for me to single out these three patents, because there are many more like them. Plus, it's hard to summarize the scope of a complex legal document in a short paragraph. (And no doubt some readers will want to point to similar patents I've been granted over the years: They're not exactly a cure for polio, either -- they don't even make the short cut of my résumé.) The problem is that the patent system wasn't meant to be just an opportunity to pad the resume of a person or corporation. Patents are meant to reward inventors of products by giving them the sole right to control who uses their invention. This is usually enforced by another invention popular in America, the lawsuit. Most people don't really begrudge the inventor of something truly new, novel and useful the right to force royalties from everyone using the invention. This sort of quid pro quo is what the Founding Fathers imagined when they deemed that inventors would get exclusive rights for a limited time (the current period is 20 years) in compensation for disclosing the invention to the public; after that time, the invention is free to everyone. This is a pretty good deal for the public if the invention is something like a vaccine for a big disease. But no one is happy when a bright person grabs a patent on something that doesn't seem particularly new or novel -- especially when he or she demands royalties. This is just what some of the "inventors" of the Internet patents are doing, to the consternation of many. They're sending out letters demanding payment of royalties and backing the demand with the threat of a lawsuit. Half the people who get the letter are wondering, "Is that really patentable?" -- and the other half are kicking themselves for not filing the patent first. The good news is that most of the truly silly patents will fall by the wayside, and the patent system still works for protecting serious and important ideas, providing ample reward for the folks who do something like cure AIDS. The bad news is that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office isn't particularly helpful, and the process only works when fueled by plenty of cash. N E X T_P A G E .|. You can't patent the "obvious" -- but who's to say what's obvious?