Topic: Who has the patent on the technology? Bitcoin / Crypto Currencies? (Read 1274 times)
That's very reasonable.
But I got a question after reading that wiki page, why did those big companies file the patent application when they have a big team of experienced lawyers? What could they get from the (failed) application?
July 08, 2014, 12:25:14 AM
July 08, 2014, 12:22:12 AM
It's an open-source technology
You can't patent the core technology, you can build on top of the btc protocol and patent your application though
You can't patent the core technology, you can build on top of the btc protocol and patent your application though
July 07, 2014, 04:50:34 PM
I didnt even know there was a such a patent.
Wouldnt this person sue every bitcoin company then? lol.
Wouldnt this person sue every bitcoin company then? lol.
July 07, 2014, 04:23:22 PM
It seems as though companies want to take this angle to defeat the currencies.
http://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/mastercardfilesbitcoinpatent
Claim the patent and stop the development of the technology.
Satoshi is nowhere to be found, so anyone can claim the patent. If the patent was not filed, it's open for the taking.
Right or Wrong?
Now don't all run and file patents now.
http://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/mastercardfilesbitcoinpatent
Claim the patent and stop the development of the technology.
Satoshi is nowhere to be found, so anyone can claim the patent. If the patent was not filed, it's open for the taking.
Right or Wrong?
Now don't all run and file patents now.
Bitcoin, and most of other crypto coins are open-source software, therefore noone to my knowledge can place a patent on that.
On the other hand it wouldnt surprise me if the technology gets slightly altered, and comes up in diferent brand.
Actualy , im quite surprised it still didnt happen.
July 07, 2014, 08:27:01 AM
What does it matter. I really don't see any real effect aside from some possible asinine commentary by the media. Let's assume someone tries it, and for some ridiculous reason they actually get the patent in the US what will it do. First off for anyone not in the US, they are not going to care at all - after all it's a patent in the US and not the whole world. For anyone in the US, its simply not viable for the patent owner to go after every single user and uncover their details (given that Bitcoin is meant to be anonymous by default) and then take them to court.
July 07, 2014, 08:06:56 AM
no one can patent this anymore because basic requirement for patent is that must be something new (not publicly known).
its one of the most common mistake of many inventors, that they make a promotion and introduce their idea on presentation (to some investors) , but then it become known to public and therefore cannot be covered by patent.
its one of the most common mistake of many inventors, that they make a promotion and introduce their idea on presentation (to some investors) , but then it become known to public and therefore cannot be covered by patent.
This.
You can make a claim for anything against anyone at anytime. Winning that position is an entirely different matter. I don't see it sticking.
sure you can make claim (almost everything) and pay a fee but does not mean your claim will be approved an turned to patent.
My point was, it could have been patent covered, but it had to be done in 2010 (prior any public announcement).
so small advice, if you want to patent anything, and you looking for investors. First you should claim "patent pending".
Cost you much less effort, money etc,\.
July 06, 2014, 06:25:54 PM
no one can patent this anymore because basic requirement for patent is that must be something new (not publicly known).
its one of the most common mistake of many inventors, that they make a promotion and introduce their idea on presentation (to some investors) , but then it become known to public and therefore cannot be covered by patent.
its one of the most common mistake of many inventors, that they make a promotion and introduce their idea on presentation (to some investors) , but then it become known to public and therefore cannot be covered by patent.
This.
You can make a claim for anything against anyone at anytime. Winning that position is an entirely different matter. I don't see it sticking.
July 06, 2014, 05:44:34 PM
Relevant : http://preferredembodiment.com/why-patents-matter-to-bitcoin/
QUOTE
“You can’t patent Bitcoin because…”
“…it’s already been invented”
On its face, this is a true statement. The concept of a peer-to-peer payment system relying on proof-of-work and a blockchain ledger is already in the public domain. It is also a true, however, to say that interacting with bitcoin is currently prohibitively difficult for the average person. Cryptocurrency is currently awkward and not yet finished being invented. Companies like Western Union, Visa, and eBay are not patenting “bitcoin”. They are patenting the novel recombinations of bitcoin’s basic building blocks as well as ancillary technologies which will make interacting with the cryptoeconomy and easier and better. Cryptocurrency is a hotbed of innovation and experimentation with many of its developments being patentable. Some of these ideas appear to be very foundational to the future of cryptocurrency. Western Union’s patent on using an automated assessor to help trade bitcoin, and patents like it, may hold prominent control over the future use of bitcoin-related technologies.This is a real threat to the nascent cryptoeconomy. Mainstream tech companies know this threat all too well. Patents from the infancy of the internet have been recently surfacing to sue Podcasters, online retailers using “shopping carts”, and people using scanners. These cases cost millions of dollars in legal fees and accomplish very little good for the community.
“You can’t patent bitcoin because…”
“…bitcoin is Open Source”
Again, sure… You may feel some personal duty to open source your cryptocurrency invention but no one is under any obligation to follow your lead. In the US, the right to file for patent protection on anything novel and unobvious invention stems from the Constitution and trumps any open source agreement that you and you buddies might have. Many of those who want to limit cryptocurrency and maintain the status quo have large budgets and brilliant engineers tasked with developing and patenting the next big thing in bitcoin. They have every right to patent their innovations and exclude us from their use for the next 20 years.Just so we are clear: there are thousands of patents which cover various embodiments of “open source” technology. For example, there 362 patents relating to Linux have which have been asserted in 1208 different patent lawsuits. Microsoft owns hundreds of Linux related. A “portfolio licensing” company called IP Innovations has alone filed 24 separate patent infringement lawsuits for a company’s use of the Linux Kernal.
“We shouldn’t patent Bitcoin because…”
“…patents are Bad”
Admittedly, the nature of patents as a government granted monopoly over an idea is a controversial one in our modern technology driven economy. This debate will rage for decades to come. Regardless of where your loyalties lie, everyone can agree that patents are very powerful tools that can be used to limit the adoption of a technology. The 3D printer community didn’t realize this and its growth has been hampered for the last 20 years. With traditional transaction companies actively patenting cryptocurrency related technology, opting out of the system is not wise.Engaging the patent system is good for the cryptocurrency community for many reasons:Patents are an effective deterrent to patent litigation. Except for a few notable exceptions, competing entities with large patent portfolios rarely sue each other. Typically, cross-licenses are signed which allow each company to compete on the quality and usefulness of their offerings.
Patenting clarifies the prior art. Patent examiners only have a limited time to look for prior art and they typically look to the patent database first because it is well-indexed and they are familiar with how to navigate it. Additionally, a granted patent is proof that a technology has been formally “enabled”, and therefore prior art, rather than simply envisioned which may not be.
Getting a patent on your invention gives YOU the choice about how the technology is used. In our first-to-file patent system, two competitors may independently invent the same technology. The patent goes to the first inventor to file a patent application. If you choose not to patent your invention because you want to “free” the information, it’s still possible that your competitor may obtain a patent on the same invention and exclude everyone from its use. It is better to patent the technology and then make an active decision to free the information.
“We shouldn’t patent Bitcoin because…”
“…We should open source everything”
Patents are powerful tools we can use to shape our economy. As builders and innovators, these tools are laid at our feet by the liberal democracies in which we live. If we decide not to pick them up and these tools only reside in the hands of those who want to stop cryptocurrency, they will do so without a fight. Open sourcing your innovation may give you warm fuzzy feelings but it does nothing to actually keep your technology “open”. Those with the patents will decided which technologies are offered to the public and at what price. The Cryptocurrency Defense Foundation asks you to make a better choice. Patent your innovation and license it freely to all those who agree to respect the openness of the growing cryptoeconomy. For those who intend to use the patent system to retard the adoption of cryptcurrency, let your patent stand as a strong deterrent.
QUOTE
“You can’t patent Bitcoin because…”
“…it’s already been invented”
On its face, this is a true statement. The concept of a peer-to-peer payment system relying on proof-of-work and a blockchain ledger is already in the public domain. It is also a true, however, to say that interacting with bitcoin is currently prohibitively difficult for the average person. Cryptocurrency is currently awkward and not yet finished being invented. Companies like Western Union, Visa, and eBay are not patenting “bitcoin”. They are patenting the novel recombinations of bitcoin’s basic building blocks as well as ancillary technologies which will make interacting with the cryptoeconomy and easier and better. Cryptocurrency is a hotbed of innovation and experimentation with many of its developments being patentable. Some of these ideas appear to be very foundational to the future of cryptocurrency. Western Union’s patent on using an automated assessor to help trade bitcoin, and patents like it, may hold prominent control over the future use of bitcoin-related technologies.This is a real threat to the nascent cryptoeconomy. Mainstream tech companies know this threat all too well. Patents from the infancy of the internet have been recently surfacing to sue Podcasters, online retailers using “shopping carts”, and people using scanners. These cases cost millions of dollars in legal fees and accomplish very little good for the community.
“You can’t patent bitcoin because…”
“…bitcoin is Open Source”
Again, sure… You may feel some personal duty to open source your cryptocurrency invention but no one is under any obligation to follow your lead. In the US, the right to file for patent protection on anything novel and unobvious invention stems from the Constitution and trumps any open source agreement that you and you buddies might have. Many of those who want to limit cryptocurrency and maintain the status quo have large budgets and brilliant engineers tasked with developing and patenting the next big thing in bitcoin. They have every right to patent their innovations and exclude us from their use for the next 20 years.Just so we are clear: there are thousands of patents which cover various embodiments of “open source” technology. For example, there 362 patents relating to Linux have which have been asserted in 1208 different patent lawsuits. Microsoft owns hundreds of Linux related. A “portfolio licensing” company called IP Innovations has alone filed 24 separate patent infringement lawsuits for a company’s use of the Linux Kernal.
“We shouldn’t patent Bitcoin because…”
“…patents are Bad”
Admittedly, the nature of patents as a government granted monopoly over an idea is a controversial one in our modern technology driven economy. This debate will rage for decades to come. Regardless of where your loyalties lie, everyone can agree that patents are very powerful tools that can be used to limit the adoption of a technology. The 3D printer community didn’t realize this and its growth has been hampered for the last 20 years. With traditional transaction companies actively patenting cryptocurrency related technology, opting out of the system is not wise.Engaging the patent system is good for the cryptocurrency community for many reasons:Patents are an effective deterrent to patent litigation. Except for a few notable exceptions, competing entities with large patent portfolios rarely sue each other. Typically, cross-licenses are signed which allow each company to compete on the quality and usefulness of their offerings.
Patenting clarifies the prior art. Patent examiners only have a limited time to look for prior art and they typically look to the patent database first because it is well-indexed and they are familiar with how to navigate it. Additionally, a granted patent is proof that a technology has been formally “enabled”, and therefore prior art, rather than simply envisioned which may not be.
Getting a patent on your invention gives YOU the choice about how the technology is used. In our first-to-file patent system, two competitors may independently invent the same technology. The patent goes to the first inventor to file a patent application. If you choose not to patent your invention because you want to “free” the information, it’s still possible that your competitor may obtain a patent on the same invention and exclude everyone from its use. It is better to patent the technology and then make an active decision to free the information.
“We shouldn’t patent Bitcoin because…”
“…We should open source everything”
Patents are powerful tools we can use to shape our economy. As builders and innovators, these tools are laid at our feet by the liberal democracies in which we live. If we decide not to pick them up and these tools only reside in the hands of those who want to stop cryptocurrency, they will do so without a fight. Open sourcing your innovation may give you warm fuzzy feelings but it does nothing to actually keep your technology “open”. Those with the patents will decided which technologies are offered to the public and at what price. The Cryptocurrency Defense Foundation asks you to make a better choice. Patent your innovation and license it freely to all those who agree to respect the openness of the growing cryptoeconomy. For those who intend to use the patent system to retard the adoption of cryptcurrency, let your patent stand as a strong deterrent.
July 06, 2014, 05:17:22 PM
It seems as though companies want to take this angle to defeat the currencies.
http://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/mastercardfilesbitcoinpatent
Claim the patent and stop the development of the technology.
Satoshi is nowhere to be found, so anyone can claim the patent. If the patent was not filed, it's open for the taking.
Right or Wrong?
Now don't all run and file patents now.
http://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/mastercardfilesbitcoinpatent
Claim the patent and stop the development of the technology.
Satoshi is nowhere to be found, so anyone can claim the patent. If the patent was not filed, it's open for the taking.
Right or Wrong?
Now don't all run and file patents now.
no one can patent this anymore because basic requirement for patent is that must be something new (not publicly known).
its one of the most common mistake of many inventors, that they make a promotion and introduce their idea on presentation (to some investors) , but then it become known to public and therefore cannot be covered by patent.
July 06, 2014, 01:48:29 PM
I don't think anyone has Patent on technology , if there were any patent the number of altcoins would be far low..!
Although the bitcoin Logo was patented by gox. the copyright was actually bought/owned by Mt. Gox or Karpales in early days to avoid anyone else taking control , sadly they turned into a sad story themself.
Although the bitcoin Logo was patented by gox. the copyright was actually bought/owned by Mt. Gox or Karpales in early days to avoid anyone else taking control , sadly they turned into a sad story themself.
July 06, 2014, 12:50:32 PM
It seems as though companies want to take this angle to defeat the currencies.
http://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/mastercardfilesbitcoinpatent
Claim the patent and stop the development of the technology.
Satoshi is nowhere to be found, so anyone can claim the patent. If the patent was not filed, it's open for the taking.
Right or Wrong?
Now don't all run and file patents now.
http://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/mastercardfilesbitcoinpatent
Claim the patent and stop the development of the technology.
Satoshi is nowhere to be found, so anyone can claim the patent. If the patent was not filed, it's open for the taking.
Right or Wrong?
Now don't all run and file patents now.
Jump to: