Re: Microsoft patents emoticons!
From: David Schwartz (davids_at_webmaster.com)
Date: 07/30/05
- Next message: WTH: "I'm looking into writing an OpenGL based multiplayer game..."
- Previous message: Nick Maclaren: "Re: ELF, weak symbols and lazy dynamic binding"
- In reply to: David Schwartz: "Re: Microsoft patents emoticons!"
- Next in thread: Lee Sau Dan: "Re: Microsoft patents emoticons!"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Sat, 30 Jul 2005 04:14:18 -0700
Just to explain this in more detail, for the benefit of those who may
not understand how to read patents: Every patent has to do two fundamental
things. First, it must describe the invention in sufficient detail that a
person of ordinary skill (in whatever field the invention is in) can make
and use the invention. Second, it has to set out specifically what element
or elements it claims are new and unobvious such that it is clear to anyone
else what would infringe on the patent (this is called the 'scope' of the
patent).
These two obligations are logically separate. The description does not
have to set out the protected scope and the scope doesn't have to explain
the invention. The description can, however, specify what words used in the
scope mean. Generally, if a word in the scope is ambiguous, it will be given
the meaning it has in the description.
Patents have evolved into several sections that help to explain these
two things. First is usually an 'abstract' which just gives the basic idea
of what was invented. It isn't very detailed. For example, if I invented a
new type of hammer, it might just describe a hammer.
Generally next is a description of the field the invention is in. This
is to make sure the patent examiner doesn't expect the detailed description
to allow a florist to make and use an invention that has to do with bridges.
Next is usually a description of the prior art so that the invention can
be distinguished from the prior art. Often this explanation is strained so
as to make it seem like there's a major problem with every previous device
ever made (which the invention coincidentally fixes).
Next is the detailed description. The purpose of this is to allow
someone to make and use the invention. It does not set out the scope of the
invention, however, any invention not make obvious by this description can't
be claimed. (That doesn't mean the claims can't cover it!)
Last is the claims. This sets out the actual legal scope of the
invention. These are the most important section and often involve the most
back and forth with the patent office. There are two types of claims,
dependent and independent claims.
The dependent claims usually just prevent other people from patenting
obvious extensions to your claims. They say things like "the system of claim
1 wherein the computing means is a personal computer". Nobody could do this
anyway, because anything that is the system of claim 1 with something else
is the system of claim 1. But they prevent someone else from claiming that
using a personal computer in claim 1 is something new you didn't think of.
However, the independent claims set up the "simplest" combination that
the patent claims is novel and protected. So these is the part of the patent
you look at to see what the patent grants exclusive right to. However, you
do look to the detailed description if either you have no idea how those
claims could constitute an invention or if the meaning of a word in those
claims are unclear.
Now here are Microsoft's independent claims for the emoticon patent:
"1. A method, comprising: selecting pixels to be used as an emoticon;
assigning a character sequence to the pixels; and transmitting the character
sequence to a destination to allow for reconstruction of the pixels at the
destination.
21. A system, comprising: a means for performing real-time communication
between a first computing client and a second computing client; a means for
sending a real-time first communication that includes a character sequence
representing the graphics data of an emoticon; a means for sending the
graphics data of the emoticon in a separate communication from the first
communication; and a means for replacing the character sequence in the
real-time first communication with the graphics data from the second
communication.
23. A custom emoticon engine, comprising: an image selector to create an
emoticon from an image, wherein the emoticon is representable as pixels; a
character sequence assignor to associate a sequence of characters with the
pixels; and a transmitter to send the character sequence to a destination,
wherein the pixels replace the character sequence at the destination.
30. A computer readable medium containing instructions that are executable
by a computer to perform actions comprising: selecting an image associated
with an emoticon; representing the image as pixels for the emoticon;
assigning a character sequence to the emoticon; and transmitting the
character sequence to a destination to allow for reconstruction of the
emoticon at the destination."
Generally, the shortest one will give you the best idea of what has
actually been patented. So let's look at the elements of claim 1 in detail.
We have:
A) Selecting pixels to be used as an emoticon, that is, a bitmap or other
image of an emoticon.
B) Assigning a character sequence to the pixels, that is, some sequence of
characters is assigned to the emoticon graphic.
C) Transmitting the character sequence to a destination to allow for
reconstruction of the pixels at the destination, that is, the destination
machine maps the characters to the pixels.
The two other independent claims say the same thing. They say nothing
about particular image sizes or other such nonsense.
Almost every patent has, before the claims, a statement that the
description is merely intended to explain how to make and use the invention
and that the claims set out the scope of the invention. This patent has this
statement at the end:
"The foregoing discussion describes exemplary custom emoticons, methods of
creating and transferring emoticons, and an exemplary emoticon engine.
Although the subject matter has been described in language specific to
structural features and/or methodological acts, it is to be understood that
the subject matter defined in the appended claims is not necessarily limited
to the specific features or acts described above. Rather, the specific
features and acts described above are disclosed as example forms of
implementing the claims."
For some reason I never figured out, patents do not appear online in
their normal order. The claims appear online after the abstract. No clue why
the difference.
DS
- Next message: WTH: "I'm looking into writing an OpenGL based multiplayer game..."
- Previous message: Nick Maclaren: "Re: ELF, weak symbols and lazy dynamic binding"
- In reply to: David Schwartz: "Re: Microsoft patents emoticons!"
- Next in thread: Lee Sau Dan: "Re: Microsoft patents emoticons!"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
