RSS
Twitter
GoDaddy Sued For Violating Patent On Auto Configuration Of New Servers
from the this-is-patented? dept
The patent system is supposed to provide incentives for big new innovations, while helping explain to others how those innovations came about. Yet, these days, with the patent system allowing patents on just about everything, it seems like it's more often being used not to promote innovation, but to stop actual competition -- which is bad for just about everyone. The latest example is that a smaller domain registrar has decided to sue GoDaddy for violating a patent on automatically configuring a network server. This is a concept that it's hard to believe most people wouldn't consider quite obvious. Basically, when a new customer uses an online configuration tool to select what features and services they want on a new domain hosting account, the system automatically configures the servers to provide those features and services. It's hard to understand why that deserves any kind of special protection, yet, because it has special protection a lot of money is about to go to lawyers, rather than to providing better services to customers.
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
Sucks to be them.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Perhaps they Want an ROI on their Patent
Behind many IT patents lie hard work and creativity and an investment -
...so without knowing ALL the facts in the case - it does appear that Web.com should be allowed maximize the Return on their Investment ....
especially when a RICH competitor is utilizing it
if it means getting a payment from each of the users of their patent, for a small company, that could collectively be a signicant sum that would help them maintain themselves.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Can you say Prior Art?
WTF is wrong with these people?
I am going to patent a method for inputing text by use of fingers, then I am going to sue Microsoft and IBM for selling my patented technology.....the keyboard.
Will this ever end?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Can you say Prior Art?
You do realize there actually are several patents on keyboards, yes? Here's the story of the patent of the qwerty based keyboard configuration.
http://home.earthlink.net/~dcrehr/whyqwert.html
My point, just because it's obvious doesn't mean it shouldn't (and wasn't) patented
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Agreed....but
I see your point re: the keyboard, but that was at a time a new invention people did not have it before.
Unless these guys have some old patent, the ability to manipulate a server via web page is both obvious and should not be patentable.
I have no problem with people patenting things, inventions, even lines of code. But when you have these broad, vague patents it becomes simply silly. I mean if you read the patent
"A network server runs a routine that is triggered by an external database management program. The routine receives configuration parameters from the database, and configures application programs resident on the server in accordance therewith."
Then, they should sue MS for its IIS Management interface in windows 2000/2003. C'mooon its a joke man.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Uhhhh?
Is that a quote directly from the patent? If so, someone screwed up big time. Anything that vague is not supposed to be patentable. That is akin to Intel suing AMD because their CPUs perform the same task as Intel's. It would never happen, because it's ridiculous. Web.com needs to stop being a bunch of dicks. Godaddy is better anyway. This is just going to make people hate web.com. Maybe if their service didn't suck so badly, they wouldnt need to sue other companies just to stay in the black.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Perhaps they Want an ROI on their Patent
what unadulterated, complete and total HOGWASH.
software patents were a bad idea from the start, period.
the fact that our "gubbmint" does a well beyond shitty job of administering them makes it all the more horrid. (does ANYONE actually believe that the gubbmint patent clerks do more than check off the box that says they considered "prior art" when granting a patent on software?)
"zero config" has been a holy grail in the computer industry since before i started writing code for money 28 years ago. that the gubbmint granted some joker a patent on an idea for "zero config" just shows how broke this system really is. tweaking a server out based on how a user checks off a form is just an extension of how DEC reconfiged VMS back in the day or how "plug&pray" was supposed to work (to name just two examples). this patent is an extension of prior art, nothing more, and the owner of said worthless scrap of paper is being way over-compensated if ANYONE gives so much as one ruble for it.
software patents need to be ABOLISHED. NOW. FOREVER.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Once again it blows.
Once again our super pantent system fails. If this doesn't show a need for reform nothing does.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Once again it blows.
And still the European Union still wants to shove the same patent system through our throats... Even though it is clear from every point of few that it is very flawed.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Agreed
As I have said elsewhere, software is copyrightable, but not patentable... but what do I know - I only write software for a living...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
yes software patents should be abolished. there really is no exscuse for an exception.
code shoule however have all and maybe a little more from/for copyrighting it.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: Can you say Prior Art?
My point, just because it's obvious doesn't mean it shouldn't (and wasn't) patented Actually yes, in the case of should. AN obvious patent should NOT be allowed to be patented. Patents are supposed to be for original innovations, not takign a blatently obvious idea and trying to prevent anyone else from using it.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
This is GoDaddy, did you expect anything else?
They are a terrible web hosting company that should have stuck with just domain registrations.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Add Your Comment