College Libraries: Forget The Books, Host LAN... >>
<< Supreme Court To Weigh In On State Laws...
 tdicon 


(Mis)Uses of Technology

by Mike Masnick

Tue, Jun 26th 2007 6:49pm





Local Search... Patented! Again!

from the well-this-ought-to-be-fun dept

Just a couple weeks ago we were writing about a patent holding company that was claiming a patent on location-based search, with plans to sue just about everyone. Apparently, they're not the only one. A company called Local.com put out its own press release today claiming it now has a location-based search patent. While the company doesn't announce that it's going to sue everyone, you don't put out such a press release for no reason. Also, the CEO of the company claims: "we believe the methods covered have subsequently become the de-facto standard for information retrieval in the local search industry." Of course, in saying that, he's basically admitting that the idea was pretty obvious, because everyone moved in that obvious direction. Won't stop them from demanding licensing fees though. The patent itself was filed in 2005 -- by which point just about everyone in the space had already begun investing heavily in local search offerings. While the patent supposedly explains one method of doing local search, as you read through it, it does seem like a pretty damn obvious way of doing local search. There must be some prior art on this. In the meantime, though, if you were wondering what a patent thicket is, now you know.

5 Comments | Leave a Comment..


If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
 

Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 26th, 2007 @ 11:27pm

    i think i read some where that in US owning the patent isnt enough you actually have to be the 1st to have used/invented the technology, so unless some1 can prove they are the 1st then it doesn't matter who owns the patent.

    or am I miss informed?

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  

    To commenter #!

    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 27th, 2007 @ 1:08am

    I wish you were right but I think you aren't.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  

    If there are really 2..

    identicon
    A N Other, Jun 27th, 2007 @ 2:42am

    ...then surely atleats one of them was not valid due to the prior art in the other. It may end up that both get over thrown durning that battle of who's was right.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  

    Re: To commenter #!

    identicon
    Shaun, Jun 27th, 2007 @ 2:45am

    Yeah the theory is that you have to be the first to "invent" a non-obvious idea I believe but it seems fairly shakey on both points.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  

    Re: First to Invent vs. First to File

    identicon
    Randomizer, Jun 27th, 2007 @ 7:31am

    The first poster is correct. In the US, First to invent trumps first to file, so proving you did it first invalidates the patent. Everywhere else it's first to file counts.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>


College Libraries: Forget The Books, Host LAN... >>
<< Supreme Court To Weigh In On State Laws...
 tdicon 

A word from our Sponsors...
Follow Techdirt
Flattr rss rss

Powered by Postrank

From the Techdirt Archive...
A word from our Sponsors...

Close

Email This