Coffeehouse Thread

14 posts

Scientigo owns the patent to XML ?!?

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    phreaks


    http://www.scientigo.com/innovation/

    Scientigo.com wrote:
    In addition, Scientigo™ owns patents that address a set of key technical protocols, referred to as XML.(Extensible Mark-up Language), a popular standard used to support the exchange of data over the Internet. These protocols are embedded in software developed by large and small companies, including, for example Microsoft and IBM. Scientigo™ has retained and formed an exceptional intellectual property team that has implemented a comprehensive intellectual property strategy and will assist to secure additional intellectual property protection on its other inventions.


    Patents

    # 5,842,213
    # 6,393,426
    # 6,516,320
    # 6,370,534

    Pending Patents

    Topification

    Are these people serious?

  • User profile image
    billh

    I'm no patent lawyer, but I'll play one on Channel 9. Wink

    Check out the dates of these patents (in order as you listed them)...

    November 24, 1998
    May 21, 2002
    February 4, 2003
    April 9, 2002

    Over on Wikipedia, here is a snippet of history of XML:

    Wikipedia wrote:
    The XML Working Group never met face-to-face; the design was accomplished using a combination of email and weekly teleconferences. The major design decisions were reached in twenty weeks of intense work between July and November of 1996. Further design work continued through 1997, and XML 1.0 became a W3C Recommendation on February 10, 1998 .
    From the fine folks at Scientaco (their first patent):

    Scientaco wrote:
    Method for modeling, storing, and transferring data in neutral form. The present invention simplifies the data modeling process and simplifies its full dynamic versioning by employing a non-hierarchical, non-integrated structure to the organization of information.
    Just that piece alone makes me think of file formats like binary, text, etc. Those have been around...how long now? Non-hierarchical? XML is hierarchical (well, it is supposed to be). Looks like somebody trying to cash in to me.

  • User profile image
    phreaks

    billh wrote:
    I'm no patent lawyer, but I'll play one on Channel 9.

    Check out the dates of these patents (in order as you listed them)...

    November 24, 1998
    May 21, 2002
    February 4, 2003
    April 9, 2002

    Over on Wikipedia, here is a snippet of history of XML:

    Wikipedia wrote: The XML Working Group never met face-to-face; the design was accomplished using a combination of email and weekly teleconferences. The major design decisions were reached in twenty weeks of intense work between July and November of 1996. Further design work continued through 1997, and XML 1.0 became a W3C Recommendation on February 10, 1998 .
    From the fine folks at Scientaco (their first patent):

    Scientaco wrote: Method for modeling, storing, and transferring data in neutral form. The present invention simplifies the data modeling process and simplifies its full dynamic versioning by employing a non-hierarchical, non-integrated structure to the organization of information.
    Just that piece alone makes me think of file formats like binary, text, etc. Those have been around...how long now? Non-hierarchical? XML is hierarchical (well, it is supposed to be). Looks like somebody trying to cash in to me.



    Yeah, I noticed the dates as well.

    The obvious question is, how the hell did they actually receive a patent for XML which they generalize as "Method for modeling, storing, and transferring data in neutral form" in the first place?

    That seems to be a very general idea. Does the US patent office really issue patents for such generalized nonsense without even submitting an implementation?

  • User profile image
    billh

    Did some more digging. Even on their own site! Let's start here. The "innovation" page.

    http://www.scientigo.com/innovation/

    The "innovation" page lists the patents you mentioned (again). When you click on the product links on the product page, they take you nowhere...they are all untagged # signs (bookmarks).

    -1 credibility

    Off to the Partners page.

    http://www.scientigo.com/partners/

    Listed partner: Sun Microsystems!

    -1 Association

    Off to the History page.

    http://www.scientigo.com/company/index.php?section=history

    Scientaco wrote:
    Development of the technology, the foundation of Scientigo™'s unique capabilities, started in the mid 1990s and resulted in four issued patents: No. 5,842,213, No. 6,393,426, No. 6,516,320 and No. 6,370,534. The company has several applications pending and many under development as part of its ongoing licensing strategy.

    We are confident these unique, emerging technologies will prove to be key to maintaining our competitive advantage as well as being among the most technologically significant Business Process Improvement tools in the market.

    Sense a pattern here? No real history listed. Just the patent thing again.

    -2 Credibility

    Wait. Let's look into the Press Releases/News section. There is an article link to ZDNet. Wonder what it says...hmmmm....

    http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-5905949.html

    ZDnet wrote:
    Patent lawyer Bruce Sunstein, a co-founder of Boston-based Bromberg & Sunstein, viewed Scientigo's patents and concluded that the company will have difficulty in enforcing claims over XML. Sunstein noted that XML is derived from SGML, which dates back to the 1980s. SGML, in turn, is based on computing concepts from the 1960s. If Scientigo's claims were ever litigated, the company would have to address all the prior work on data formats.

    "You can wish them good luck if you want, but there is a lot of history this patent will have to deal with, and the fat lady has not finished singing on this one yet," Sunstein said.


    -1 Credibility

    Let's tally that up. That's -4 Credibility, and -1 for Association.

    It's crap like this that clogs up the legal system. Constantly.

  • User profile image
    phreaks

    billh wrote:


    Let's tally that up. That's -4 Credibility, and -1 for Association.

    It's crap like this that clogs up the legal system. Constantly.



    Absolutely Ridiculous.
    I am still not understanding exactly how they obtained these patents in the first place.

    Is there no proces at all to obtaining a legitimate patent?

    Perhaps I should go down and apply for a patent for, "Transporting energy from one location to another."

    Then I can sue all the electric and gas companies.

  • User profile image
    littleguru

    Hahah... This must be a joke.

    XML is a simplified SGML, which is around since the late 70s.

    If this is a valid patent I'm going to patent windows: rectangles (or other 2 dimensional space) that can hold complex structures and show them to the user in a clickable way.


    The whole patent system is a big JOKE!

  • User profile image
    phreaks

    littleguru wrote:
    Hahah... This must be a joke.

    XML is a simplified SGML, which is around since the late 70s.

    If this is a valid patent I'm going to patent windows: rectangles (or other 2 dimensional space) that can hold complex structures and show them to the user in a clickable way.


    The whole patent system is a big JOKE!


    You should try it. By the look of things I really wouldn't be surprised if they actually issued you a patent for such a thing.

     I really get a kick out of how they name XML as their "Invention", yet they had no part in it's development or adoptation.

  • User profile image
    littleguru

    IT patents are such a joke. Well, let my try to explain it better: the current incarnation of the patent system for IT is a joke.
    I guess it won't be updated to a "version 2.0" until big companies really suffer from it.

  • User profile image
    y2k4life

    http://www.find.com

    and tigo serach can't find web site.

    http://domainsmagazine.com/exec/view.cgi?archive=1&num=983

    Scientigo, Tigo Search - Scien  Tigo


    http://carolinanewswire.com/news/News.cgi?database=topstories.db&command=viewone&id=3856&op=t


    Reading things I wonder is it technology that was patent that uses XML or XML was patent.

    Scientigo say they patent XML

    In addition, Scientigo™ owns patents that address a set of key technical protocols, referred to as XML.(Extensible Mark-up Language), a popular standard used to support the exchange of data over the Internet.

    New's articles say "patented XML technology"

    Scientigo's tigo|search blends artificial intelligence, machine learning, rules-based systems, and patented XML technology to deliver a fast, flexible platform that will enable users of FatWire's Content .........


    Either way if someone words it correctly could get a patent on the air we breath and then start to charge money for it. Ohh wait is there not an oxygen bar somerwhere.



  • User profile image
    Joe_Suchy

    They must have been working with Al Gore when he invented the internet!  Too bad he didn't patent it!

  • User profile image
    littleguru

    Yah. Just call it:

    "A combination of transparent gases that allows mammals to fulfil their goals without suffering death."

    I guess they give you a patent for it. Btw it allows you also get money from cows, birds, cats, dogs,...

  • User profile image
    phreaks

    wikipedia wrote:
    Scientigo is a United States company based in Charlotte, North Carolina that began asserting patent claims over XML technology in 2005. Since the technologies behind XML were almost 20 years old at the time, and the patents were applied for in 1997, Scientigo has been accused of being a patent troll for taking this action.

  • User profile image
    ScanIAm

    Joe_Suchy wrote:
    They must have been working with Al Gore when he invented the internet!  Too bad he didn't patent it!


    hahaha.  It's funny cuz it's true:

    http://www.sethf.com/gore/

    oh, wait, not it isn't:

    http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp

  • User profile image
    staceyw

    I just patented English and am waiting for some pay.  Thinking about doing "==" equal sign and ">" greater then sign next.

Comments closed

Comments have been closed since this content was published more than 30 days ago, but if you'd like to continue the conversation, please create a new thread in our Forums, or Contact Us and let us know.