Veoh had to back off under loud protest from the videobloggers.
Don't tell me the podshow guys are unaware of these issues. I figure they just thought they could get away with it.
Felsefe
· 2 years ago
thanks for nice reading.
ramen noodle
· 2 years ago
I totaly agree. Why not learn from Veoh mistakes.
benDover
· 3 years ago
hehehe. they wouldn't have sued tribe.net..but now that nbc is its sugar daddy, you can bet your bottom dollar that they will be included in the suit.
personally, i think this patent is bogus. way too overreaching. did the del.icio.us founder take out a patten on social bookmarking? what about slashdot founder? patent on "leaving comments on news links."
only the bloody lawyers win with this crap.
Bes Z
· 3 years ago
You bring up some good points. Regarding connecting people based on social networks, didn't Yahoo have a way of finding people based on their age and location long before Friendster came to existenced? Most of the personals sites have been doing the same thing for a long time now, even before Friendster applied for a patent or started doing something in this field. Take Collegeclub.com, for example, a site that had social-networking type features aimed at college students: I have seen it around since 2001, and it probably existed even before that. Friendster, however, was founded in 2002.
I agree that this patent could hurt innovation, and the US Patent office needs to look at this case as being another example that warrants a better guideline system for awarding patents in their office. For example, if a patent is for something that is completely unique, then it can be assigned. However, if it's being done by someone who did not create the idea and the most probable use for that patent would be to sue others, then it should be reconsidered. Having something completely new is good and it's ok to be patented; however, having something that everyone else is doing and patenting it only for royalties is another form of legal extortion.
I had a question for you, Pete: do you think companies like LinkedIn or Myspace (which is basically a News Corp. property now) should take some kind of an action against the awarding of such a patent right now, or should they wait to see what Friendster does (in case it doesn't do anything) and do something after Friendster does something?
David G
· 3 years ago
he he he - this is going to be interesting - imagine a court deciding to uphold this patent and effctively take your (non friendster) friends away
hopefully friendster do force this issue and thereby the realization that these rediculous US patents on logical processes with orthogonal applications is a total farce - at least this time around its not amazon claiming ownership of common sense (one click?)
Brian Balfour
· 3 years ago
Talk about a saving grace for Friendster. Explains why they may have gotten that capital infusion a month ago.
Aidan Henry
· 3 years ago
I think this patent is downright ridiculous. Friendster would simply be enforcing their legal right for the sole purpose of profiting off competitors.
In the end, the only winner would be Friendster (should their claims hold up against the other social networks). The backlash in the online community would work against Friendster and disadvantage them in the long run. Indeed, this would make Friendster the loser.
Shame on Friendster...
Aidan Henry
David G
· 3 years ago
Just read it - rediculous - what was Abrams thinking?
The only good response to this is to KILL YOUR FRIENDSTER PROFILE - only after first pingin your friendster friends with the suggestion that they do the same - AFAIC, they no longer exist. Who is with me?
Pete Cashmore
· 3 years ago
David,
Dude, all the cool people killed their Friendster profiles *last* year. ;)
Brittany
· 2 years ago
wow?
Aidan Henry
· 3 years ago
I'll second that Pete...
Aiko
· 2 years ago
I dont know that . .can you tell me something about it?
full disclosure I never signed up; I find my friends on mashable
Swifty
· 3 years ago
I think it's highly likely that Myspace will be targeted. It's a perfect chance to reclaim competitive advantage. I'm sentimental, so my Friendster profile remains, but then, the majority of people in South East Asia are still pretty into Friendster (in fact, Myspace is almost unheard of over here in Malaysia).
Fish
· 3 years ago
You folks sound like a bunch of commies. The U.S. patent system exists for the sole purpose of encouraging people to take risks with new ideas by spending time and money to invent them, with a then reasonable time period to enjoy the fruits of their labor. Patents are a good thing, a very good thing. And so is this one. If Linkedin and others have to pay Friendster a royalty, well, that is proof positive that good old American capitalism is alive a well. I think this "its all free for me" Internet culture has somewhat lost track of the hard work and capital it takes to launch these things to being with.
Gideon Marken
· 3 years ago
Strange news...
Fortunately, it seems to be heavily focused on the relationships between people and degrees of separation.
While those connections are important, the more important relationship of 'social networks' is that which people are interested in - their common likes, favorite music genres, favorite bands, and the general cross linking that forms across people's profiles.
Based on this definition of the data that the social networks are generated from - I would have to say that most sites out there that are currently called "Social Networks" are going to be OK.
QUOTE: ================ Descriptive Data. Information that describes a user or characteristics of a user. For example, descriptive data might include a first and last name. Or it might include elements that describe attributes of the user, such as gender, marital status or occupation. ================
I think there would be a lot more to worry about if the above description included "peoples likes, interest, and geographic region"
Isaac Timothy
· 3 years ago
Hi. I've been reading your blog for sometime and I think it is a great blog.
I was wondering if Fish's comments (comment 13) are missing the point. I do believe that no one here is against protecting intellectual property and the intention of the patent system which is to do just that.
I believe the issue everyone is contending is that the problem is not the good intentions of the patent system, but the bad actions. In this case, the bad actions would be the way patents are actually awarded.
I would like to know your opinions on some thoughts I am having after reading through what I can find on the patent from the US patent site.
I know little about patent law, but I was wondering, can ideas actually be a form of intellectual property (and if they are, should they be so?) when a single idea can be executed and implemented differently? The idea of degrees of separation originated from Stanley Milgram's work. Sociologists since then have grappled with the issues of social networks, network structure and how people are linked based on the idea of degrees of separation and how people can exist and act within these social networks.
The method of calculating these relationships have been known to sociologists before Friendster came about. They have also represented these networks and relationships (maybe not in digital form on a website).
Friendster's concept is not new although I think it was probably the first site that made such an idea mainstream and it became real popular.
The problem with this patent (and I hope I'm correct in saying this) is that because of its broad nature (which is mentioned in the post) is that it allows the possibility for people to claim monopoly of the idea for the mode of implementation of an idea/concept.
Clarifying, the idea of social networks and analysis of them, degrees of separation and its calculation and the analysis of relationships are not Friendster's and belong to and originated from the theoretical and intellecutal domain of sociologists and mathematicians and what these patent has allowed is Friendster to claim ownership of the idea that the computer and internet can help do all this.
I am thinking that these kind of opens a floodgate. The computer and internet can help implement a lot of other ideas that already exist in the real world. For example, say direct marketing. Every good salesman know that the best way to sell someone something is to try to sell him what he is already most predisposed to buy. What if someone patents the idea to use a database of users and their preferences to match what products to email them about. I'm probably stretching the example but I hope someone gets my point.
I guess the patent system if it really wants to protect intellectual property shouldn't be a 'fastest finger first' contest where the first one to apply wins. Sometimes, the real innovator(s) might not want to file for patent (for whatever reasons be it lack of knowledge on these matters or naivety) and shouldn't be punished because a vulture (disclaimer: not implying Friendster is one) swoops in.
Oscar Muyal
· 3 years ago
I would like to point out that Friendster might still "not use " the patent, e.g. state publicly that they got the patent and will allow anybody else to use it. In this case, they are actually increasing the competition (which is good) because no other evil company can claim it. Will this happen?
If they don't my, profile will be removed.
Cheers\
Oscar
Ed
· 3 years ago
To my understanding, The US patents are only valid in the US and does not protect the author abroad. The only catch is that a patented item that is made abroad cannot be imported or shipped into the US. How would this work in the web domain. If somebody was to make a social network abroad and broadcast it on the world wide web.
hey.. uhm. where will i create an artist account in friendster? please help guys!! =_=
IActuallyReadIt
· 3 years ago
If anyone actually bothered to read the whole patent, you would find that it describes search a social network to n degrees of separation and displaying this relationship. Many "social networks" these days are just merely a display of direct relationships and don't allow any form of limiting a search to n degrees of separation. Therefore these would qualify as a basic forum as described in the patent under the Description section. These types of forums/profiles/blogs are specifically excluded from this patent.
I come from Indonesia I tell to you all that we want to know you and be your friend
putra
· 2 years ago
boku no namae wa putra yoroshiku onegaishitaimashu
Bob
· 2 years ago
I had a question for you, Pete: do you think companies like LinkedIn or Myspace (which is basically a News Corp. property now) should take some kind of an action against the awarding of such a patent right now, or should they wait to see what Friendster does (in case it doesn’t do anything) and do something after Friendster does something?
All Comments
This is going to be a very interesting development to watch.
The largest sites will probably be the targets. All we can do is wait and let it unfold.
i need help cause every user besides me there css reloader works.
Veoh had to back off under loud protest from the videobloggers.
Don't tell me the podshow guys are unaware of these issues. I figure they just thought they could get away with it.
personally, i think this patent is bogus. way too overreaching. did the del.icio.us founder take out a patten on social bookmarking? what about slashdot founder? patent on "leaving comments on news links."
only the bloody lawyers win with this crap.
I agree that this patent could hurt innovation, and the US Patent office needs to look at this case as being another example that warrants a better guideline system for awarding patents in their office. For example, if a patent is for something that is completely unique, then it can be assigned. However, if it's being done by someone who did not create the idea and the most probable use for that patent would be to sue others, then it should be reconsidered. Having something completely new is good and it's ok to be patented; however, having something that everyone else is doing and patenting it only for royalties is another form of legal extortion.
I had a question for you, Pete: do you think companies like LinkedIn or Myspace (which is basically a News Corp. property now) should take some kind of an action against the awarding of such a patent right now, or should they wait to see what Friendster does (in case it doesn't do anything) and do something after Friendster does something?
hopefully friendster do force this issue and thereby the realization that these rediculous US patents on logical processes with orthogonal applications is a total farce - at least this time around its not amazon claiming ownership of common sense (one click?)
In the end, the only winner would be Friendster (should their claims hold up against the other social networks). The backlash in the online community would work against Friendster and disadvantage them in the long run. Indeed, this would make Friendster the loser.
Shame on Friendster...
Aidan Henry
The only good response to this is to KILL YOUR FRIENDSTER PROFILE - only after first pingin your friendster friends with the suggestion that they do the same - AFAIC, they no longer exist. Who is with me?
Dude, all the cool people killed their Friendster profiles *last* year. ;)
gud day
full disclosure I never signed up; I find my friends on mashable
Fortunately, it seems to be heavily focused on the relationships between people and degrees of separation.
While those connections are important, the more important relationship of 'social networks' is that which people are interested in - their common likes, favorite music genres, favorite bands, and the general cross linking that forms across people's profiles.
Based on this definition of the data that the social networks are generated from - I would have to say that most sites out there that are currently called "Social Networks" are going to be OK.
QUOTE:
================
Descriptive Data. Information that describes a user or characteristics of a user. For example, descriptive data might include a first and last name. Or it might include elements that describe attributes of the user, such as gender, marital status or occupation.
================
I think there would be a lot more to worry about if the above description included "peoples likes, interest, and geographic region"
I was wondering if Fish's comments (comment 13) are missing the point. I do believe that no one here is against protecting intellectual property and the intention of the patent system which is to do just that.
I believe the issue everyone is contending is that the problem is not the good intentions of the patent system, but the bad actions. In this case, the bad actions would be the way patents are actually awarded.
I would like to know your opinions on some thoughts I am having after reading through what I can find on the patent from the US patent site.
I know little about patent law, but I was wondering, can ideas actually be a form of intellectual property (and if they are, should they be so?) when a single idea can be executed and implemented differently? The idea of degrees of separation originated from Stanley Milgram's work. Sociologists since then have grappled with the issues of social networks, network structure and how people are linked based on the idea of degrees of separation and how people can exist and act within these social networks.
The method of calculating these relationships have been known to sociologists before Friendster came about. They have also represented these networks and relationships (maybe not in digital form on a website).
Friendster's concept is not new although I think it was probably the first site that made such an idea mainstream and it became real popular.
The problem with this patent (and I hope I'm correct in saying this) is that because of its broad nature (which is mentioned in the post) is that it allows the possibility for people to claim monopoly of the idea for the mode of implementation of an idea/concept.
Clarifying, the idea of social networks and analysis of them, degrees of separation and its calculation and the analysis of relationships are not Friendster's and belong to and originated from the theoretical and intellecutal domain of sociologists and mathematicians and what these patent has allowed is Friendster to claim ownership of the idea that the computer and internet can help do all this.
I am thinking that these kind of opens a floodgate. The computer and internet can help implement a lot of other ideas that already exist in the real world. For example, say direct marketing. Every good salesman know that the best way to sell someone something is to try to sell him what he is already most predisposed to buy. What if someone patents the idea to use a database of users and their preferences to match what products to email them about. I'm probably stretching the example but I hope someone gets my point.
I guess the patent system if it really wants to protect intellectual property shouldn't be a 'fastest finger first' contest where the first one to apply wins. Sometimes, the real innovator(s) might not want to file for patent (for whatever reasons be it lack of knowledge on these matters or naivety) and shouldn't be punished because a vulture (disclaimer: not implying Friendster is one) swoops in.
If they don't my, profile will be removed.
Cheers\
Oscar
Email me and let me know what you think.
amady1@gmail.com
the best search engine
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
b,,,,,,,i,,,,,,,,t,,,,,,,,c,,,,,,,,,,,,h,,,,,,,,
i'm aGree.,,,,,,,,,??
LuPh all.,,..,
I am single and available.
http://www.games.new7ob.com
http://www.new7ob.com/vb
http://www.new7ob.com/video
http://www.new7ob.com/vb/download42/
www.travelturkei.net
www.dahili.org
www.mobilyaci.gen.tr
im chirag
my a.21 mumbai
Regards,
http://www.antivirusdown.com