posted on January 28, 2004 12:01:05 PM new
The patent, recently granted to Frank Michael Weyer and Troy Kurosh Javaher, both of Beverly Hills, California, grants the patent holder full rights to:
"A method for assigning URL's and e-mail addresses to members of a group comprising the steps of: assigning each member of said group a URL of the form "name.subdomain.domain"; and assigning each member of said group an e-mail address of the form "[email protected];"
Get it? The patent describes what is essentially one of the most basic, most crucial underlying structures of the World Wide Web, namely the domain naming system.
The concept of domains and subdomains, as well as the e-mail addresses associated with them, has been around for years but apparently has been overlooked for specific patent rights since its inception. Weyer, a patent attorney, ( http://www.techcoastlaw.com ) has capitalized on that oversight, and as of December 30, 2003, Weyer owns it. And now he's attempting to make money from his "invention" in court.
On January 9, 2004, Weyer filed suit against Internet domain-name giants Network Solutions, Inc. and Register.com, claiming the two services are infringing upon his newly-granted patent. In the suit Weyer claims damages of an unnamed amount and requests an immediate injunction against the two companies. Weyer states that he hopes to "work with" NSI and Register.com to license his patent. No comment as yet from those companies.
posted on January 28, 2004 12:31:39 PM new
You can't patent something that is prior art. Even if it was just described in detail without being used or built. He may have succeeded in finding a brain dead patent exaiminer but he'll never make it fly in court.
There was an attempt by AT&T to patent the concept of a geostationary satellite for communications when they got ready to launch the first one. It was defeated because the well known Science Fiction author Arthur C Clarke had described the system they were going to use in detail in one of his books. Did not matter that it had not been made - it was detailed as to what altitude and speed it would have to have using the laws of orbital mechanics and how it would maintain position and recieve and transmit radio or video signals.
posted on January 28, 2004 12:48:48 PM new
So, what happens then, Gravid? Does Network Solutions go after the U.S. Patent Office directly, or does it convince the judge hearing this suit that Weyer has no claim to ownership of the URL concept because it already exists? I could see where a judge's ruling against Weyer would open the door for a separate suit specifically seeking to void his patent, or, more specifically, his right to licensing fees.
posted on January 28, 2004 02:14:40 PM new
The patent holder isn't claiming the conventional name.com form, he is claiming the name.subname.com system, along with deriving email addresses from the form.
However the "invention" must be nonobvious. I would posit that the "invention" in question was an obvious minor and un-novel extrapolation of prior art.
posted on January 28, 2004 02:25:33 PM new
"...he is claiming the name.subname.com system, along with deriving email addresses from the form."
Right, Reamond, and even that form was already being used prior to Weyer patenting it. So, why do you suppose the patent was granted in the first place? Is it as Gravid suggests, that Weyer lucked out and found a "brain dead patent examiner" ?
I posted this item because ding-dong lawsuits are partially responsible for over-burdening our justice system and frankly, it pisses me off!
posted on January 28, 2004 05:02:53 PM new
They will defend when they are sued for using the system and have to spend money to do so.
Since he is a lawyer I assume he will be trying to settle for less than it would cost them to defend. Determaining that level can be a delicate balancing act. He can sue cheap but the companies defending have to pay the hourly rate to their retained lawyers. Patent work has never been cheap - don't know what it is now but I'd guess $500 or $600 an hour if you are using one of the junior members of the firm. I hope they don't cave in and pay the slime ball because he should have to pay through the nose for a frivilous action.
posted on January 28, 2004 05:09:56 PM new
Alas, Gravid, Weyer is defending himself...
I agree, when a lawsuit is thrown out of court for being frivolous or unfounded (i.e.: having no basis in Law) those who filed the suit should be billed for every minute of time their escapade ate up. Make them pay all court costs, etc.
As I understand it, that only happens sometimes...
posted on January 28, 2004 07:50:25 PM new
It was my understanding from the news articles the form he patented was not in use, and was only possible when the subdomain registrations actually became available and that's when he made his patent application.
posted on January 28, 2004 08:15:39 PM new
"It was my understanding from the news articles the form he patented was not in use... "
Ah, well then perhaps I misunderstood, Reamond. (Not at all unlikely.)
So, does this ... what shall we call it... "unspecified domain usage" ? ... lend merit to Weyer's suit? If indeed he holds some oddball patent on the "domain.subdomain.com" method of navigating the WWW and the rights to any email addresses that might be issued in that same format, do you think Weyer's suit has a chance?
posted on January 28, 2004 08:39:51 PM new
I don't have the history of the matter - but I doubt that he as a lawyer thought of this addressing scheme all on his own before any of the computer experts thought of it and just managed to squeek in an application before all the rest of the world thought to start using it. It doesn't have to be common knowlege or printed in the Washington Post to be prior art. If the possibility was put forth in some obscure Professional Journel of Domain Name Sytactic Nomenclature Quarterly it is still published.
If on the other hand the guy really thought of it before anybody else and it is non-obvious he deserves every cent he can extract. That would really surprise me though. Very few pwople make brilliant leaps of intuitive extrapolation outside their fields.
Reading the patent I see problems with the form he is suggesting. He seems to think that using a standard usage such as your initial and middle initial followed by your surname can be used as a universal ID ahead of a subdomain such as everydoc. But we know from experiance that there are nmany duplicates of names inside even a limited group such as all doctors and you have to start adding identifying numbers such a JDoe1 and JDoe2 or add additional information to in some way create an index beyond the url itself. So it is in no way a universal and unique means if addressing an individual.
posted on January 29, 2004 12:58:00 AM new
"Professional Journel of Domain Name Sytactic Nomenclature Quarterly"
LMAO, Gravid!
On other points in your post, you're absolutely right. There can only be ONE [email protected] and those added digits designated to distinguish one from the other are tiresome. I have a similar problem being Pat Smith. Try to get an email address or a domain name out of that!
I hope this lawsuit will be thrown out, and that Mr. Weyer will be ordered to pay for its hearing...
posted on January 29, 2004 07:05:00 AM new
Another lawyer that files patents for himself extracted over $30 million from eBay for a "buy it now" patent. Who would have "thunk" it ?
If Weyer's patent in non-obvious and no prior art, then he has a patent.
but I doubt that he as a lawyer thought of this addressing scheme all on his own before any of the computer experts thought of it
How do you know he was not a computer expert and a lawyer? Most patent lawyers hold degrees in engineering and science, including computer science.
