lj_biz: Ideaflood subdomain patent

Brad Fitzpatrick (

bradfitz) wrote in

lj_biz,
@ 2004-03-31 14:24:00

Ideaflood subdomain patent
Yes, we too are being threatened by Ideaflood for our user subdomains. They apparently patented user subdomains, trivial as it is?

Some reading:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/36707.html
http://www.hosthideout.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=8603
http://computercops.biz/postt27421.html
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/03/30/0240215
And the patent

Still doing more research. I suspect there's metric tons of prior art. And it's certainly trivial, so it seems a fight worth fighting. Others are already fighting it I read, so we might just join in one of their fights?

Crap like this really drains all fun out of programming. Makes me want to retire.

(BTW, I've been suspecting crap like this would happen one day, and we've warchested money to fight it if it comes to that....)

Page 1 of 2
<<	[1] [2]	>>

(Post a new comment)

riotlounge
2004-03-31 02:25 pm UTC (link)

Did they invent the idea of user subdomains, like actually brought them into existence? This seems like a copyright issue, rather than a patent issue. How odd, and how trivial really. Technically because the user subdomains for your site only, I doubt how you are taking money away from them, considering that free sites also use user subdomains. Hell, people like me and my friend make "user" subdomains for our friend's sites. How can you patent something that is in essence a redirected part of a site...ANY site?

(Reply to this) (Thread)(Expand)

	bradfitz 2004-03-31 02:28 pm UTC (link)
	Anybody can patent anything these days, it seems. I've heard the US Patent Office is understaffed and grants patents too easily. (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)

	virga 2004-03-31 03:08 pm UTC (link)
	yeah, exactly. subdomains are by definition inherent in DNS, and isn't something you can just patent on an afternoon in 99. boggles (Reply to this) (Parent)

	azurelunatic 2004-03-31 02:32 pm UTC (link)
	Assorted hugs and encouragement, as applicable, but no actual useful help... (Reply to this)

	bc 2004-03-31 02:32 pm UTC (link)
	wow, that's interesting. can't believe it. (Reply to this)

	lizzie9208 2004-03-31 02:33 pm UTC (link)
	That's crap. How much is the license fee they are asking for, btw? (Reply to this) (Thread)

	bradfitz 2004-03-31 02:34 pm UTC (link)
	Haven't asked. Don't care. I'm not going to encourage that sort of behavior. Give the bully your lunch money once and he'll keep coming back. I'd rather burn the money so they can't get it. (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)

	polyfrog 2004-03-31 02:34 pm UTC (link)
	(BTW, I've been suspecting crap like this would happen one day, and we've warchested money to fight it if it comes to that....) Thanks for having the foresight, Brad. You rock. (Reply to this)

	voldsom 2004-03-31 02:35 pm UTC (link)
	Umm, if I'm reading any of this correctly in my brain fried state, isn't the link to the patent itself using the equivalent of a user subdomain? (Reply to this) (Thread)

	jeroen 2004-03-31 02:36 pm UTC (link)
	you'd almost think it's an april fools day joke (Reply to this)

	blonnie 2004-03-31 02:36 pm UTC (link)
	i don't understand law.. i don't understand how they can do that. rolls eyes i am getting so tired of other people. i just might turn into someone like ted kaczynski one day but i'm not as smart.. so i'd probably just do the living in a cabin with only an outhouse in the woods part. yeah. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	blonnie 2004-03-31 03:37 pm UTC (link)
	having a few more thoughts about this... i find it ironic that people can/have-the-right-to sue people who had the foresight to purchase things like madonna.com for capitalizing on their success... yet, this is legal? eh?! (Reply to this) (Parent)

	jarodrussell 2004-03-31 02:39 pm UTC (link)
	Um, my knowledge of DNS isn't what I'd like it to be, but... Isn't anything-dot-TLD prior art in the case? (Reply to this) (Thread)

	ladysorka 2004-03-31 02:40 pm UTC (link)
	Good gods, that's ridiculous. (Reply to this)

	zzyzx 2004-03-31 02:45 pm UTC (link)
	Mmm... flagrant litigation. patents punctuation (Reply to this) (Thread)

	beginning 2004-03-31 07:15 pm UTC (link)
	I call "breathing oxygen"! You all, off my planet. (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)

	mlfoley 2004-03-31 02:45 pm UTC (link)
	Seems anyone can patent anything nowadays. This is ridiculous. (Reply to this)

	axiem 2004-03-31 07:11 pm UTC (link)
	I have been advocating for quite some time now that the American people sue the National BAR Association for incurring billions of dollars of costs to the American public and their tax dollars over FRIVOLOUS LAWSUITS. Yes, it is an American thing, but I'm American dammit :P (Reply to this) (Parent)

	tokimi 2004-03-31 03:03 pm UTC (link)
	Jesus, that's ridiculous. Good like on the fight if it comes to that. I'm just happy to note that my paid account's up to be renewed towards the end of April. My little contribution. :) (Reply to this) (Thread)

	tokimi 2004-03-31 03:03 pm UTC (link)
	Good luck... I hate my typing. The sentiment's still the same, however. :) (Reply to this) (Parent)

	macguyver 2004-03-31 03:03 pm UTC (link)
	I continue to not believe in software patents. It leads to this exact situation, companies whose sole existance is to collect royalties, buy other people's patents and go around suing. Dirt stupid. (Reply to this)

	pinterface 2004-03-31 03:06 pm UTC (link)
	Send 'em a glossed copy of our friendly neighborhood sysadmins, and call it a day. `;)` (I'd suggest publicly flogging them, but I hear that's illegal now? Crazy laws... you can't give nobody a good whoopin' no more without gettin' arrrested for it!) (Reply to this) (Thread)(Expand)

About

Help

Get Involved

Legal

Store

LJ Labs

	virga 2004-03-31 03:09 pm UTC (link)
	emphasis on the fig newtons ;) (Reply to this) (Parent)

	icanreadyourmnd 2004-03-31 03:07 pm UTC (link)
	can LJ get a TM (trademark)? and would that protect you/us? just a thought.... (Reply to this) (Thread)(Expand)

	ghewgill 2004-03-31 03:15 pm UTC (link)
	What, like http://bradfitz.tm.livejournal.com? It doesn't seem to quite have the same fluidity to it. :) (Reply to this) (Parent)

	markf 2004-03-31 03:08 pm UTC (link)
	Assuming there is sufficient evidence of there being prior art, which there has to be, it would make sense to fight this as well as possibly filing a counter-claim for racketeering, as this seems like a fairly clear cut case of extortion. Then again, I'm no lawyer :P (Reply to this) (Thread)(Expand)

	kittybean 2004-04-01 12:09 am UTC (link)
	i think what you say makes sense. by their "patent" bullshit logic, you'd have to buy a license from them to have a website at all due to that www subdomain thing. idiots. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	Prior art pw201 2004-03-31 03:19 pm UTC (link)
	Demon Internet have been allocating subdomains of demon.co.uk to their customers since at least 1994 and probably before. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	Re: Prior art fleetfootmike 2004-03-31 11:24 pm UTC (link)
	Not using wildcard A records, though: each had an IP (I know, I worked there). They did, though, use wildcard MX's, and the user webspace (www.USER.demon.co.uk) was I believe done using an early version of mod_vhost_alias and (I would assume) wildcard A records. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	nichiyume 2004-03-31 03:20 pm UTC (link)
	ill renew and add to the warchest' i like the sound of that (Reply to this)

	adrasteah 2004-03-31 03:34 pm UTC (link)
	You know it's April Fool's Day in the UK already and that was my immediate thought because it's the only possible explanation for this! Oh my, so they want a fee for pretty much every (except @) A record one adds to a host file. I want some of the drugs they're smoking ... ;-) And heh, didn't realise The Register was read anywhere but our tiny little island :-) (Reply to this)

	soundofthemoon 2004-03-31 09:08 pm UTC (link)
	If I remember correctly, Xerox's Clearinghouse system did something amazingly similar back in the mid 80s. And the V system (research project at Stanford, late 80s) also implemented a hierarchical distributed namespace that included wildcarding. There's so much prior art these people will be crushed in a matter of weeks. (Reply to this) (Parent)