|
|
 |
|
|
Pages: 1
AOL Gets ICQ Patent
(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)
Posted by: TotalRecall
atnewyork.com reports:
AOL Time Warner is the new owner of a patent that could give it an edge in the wars for control over desktop instant messaging, as well as a number of emerging areas of communications.
The patent, No. 6,449,344, had originally been granted based on work done by a team of developers at Mirabilis, which marketed the first public IM sensation, ICQ. (America Online acquired Mirabilis and its intellectual property in 1998, a year after the Israeli startup filed for U.S. patent protection.)
Posted by: SKYHN
Ugh. Prepare for the legal battles and IM Pay services...
Posted by: Ion Silverbolt
I think they will stick to advertising. Because no one would pay for it.
Posted by: SKYHN
 Quote:
Originally posted by Ion Silverbolt
I think they will stick to advertising. Because no one would pay for it.
|
We can only hope so. I dont see though how a patent can be filed on Instant Messaging. That be like someone filing a patent on email. Maybe Aol's crappy broadband department will kill off Aol.
Posted by: Shalome
SKYHN, the patent isn't on instant messaging as whole.. it's on ICQ. This patent isn't the equivalent of "patenting email" it's more like Microsoft patenting Outlook, which people use to send and receive e-mail.
Posted by: SKYHN
Quote:
Originally posted by Shalome
SKYHN, the patent isn't on instant messaging as whole.. it's on ICQ. This patent isn't the equivalent of "patenting email" it's more like Microsoft patenting Outlook, which people use to send and receive e-mail.
|
Well then the article is misleading, as it says:
That's a host of functionality common among all of the major public IM platforms, including those marketed by Microsoft (Quote, Company Info) and Yahoo! (Quote, Company Info) -- AOL's rivals in the consumer instant messaging space, and soon, in the enterprise IM sector as well. All three companies either already have corporate-class IM products on the market, or promise them within coming months.
Spokespeople from the three major IM networks declined to comment. Sources close to AOL, however, said that the media conglomerate is likely to seek some form of licensing revenue from its rivals instead of filing lawsuits outright -- but, the sources added, AOL is still considering its strategy with regard to the patents.
Since Aol would be able to get licensing revenue from the other IM programs, that to me says that its not just a patent on ICQ.
Posted by: Ion Silverbolt
There are way too many alternatives to Instant messaging for them to start charging. Hell if we had to, we could start using the chatroom here.
Posted by: Shalome
My bad, SKYHN... I misunderstood the article. I looked up the patent number, and the patent was granted in 1997. The granted patent could most likely be successfully challenged by someone with enough money:
The present invention discloses a communication system including a communications network, a multiplicity of communications terminals which are connectable to the communications network and which can be employed by users to communicate via the communications network, the user not necessarily being identified with a given communications terminal, apparatus for monitoring whether or not a user is connected to the communications network irrespective of which of the multiplicity of communications terminals that user is employing, and apparatus for annunciating to a seeking user, currently connected to the communications network via any of the multiplicity of communications terminals, network connection status information relating to other users who are in a set of sought users, which set is definable by the seeking user, and for providing the seeking user connection address information relating to those sought users who are currently connected to the communications network.
Microsoft could easily challenge AOL in a court battle, monetarily. Someone out there has the ability to challenge this patent on the basis of prior art. Messenging systems existed long before 1997 (for instance, "talk," "ytalk," Telemate, IRC), and this patent makes no mention of a GUI, which is what made ICQ different from the earlier interfaces. Now, I'm not a patent lawyer, but I know enough about the law to say this patent never should have been granted, and can probably be overturned in court.
Posted by: redwench
hmmm, after wading through that verbiage (oh what fun), the patent wouldnt apply to something like IRC. the patent applies only to ICQ type systems. basically, as im sure we all know, you can take something thats in common use, add one or more significant things, and get a new patent for it. thats what was done.
oh, and if shal is correct, and the patent was granted in 97, then it was filed much earlier, i presume in israel.
therefore, in order to block the patent, the interested party would have to prove that an IMsystem similar to ICQ was around prior to the patent filing.
Posted by: Null Actor
Microsoft could challenge it easily. NT has had net send for years.
Posted by: redwench
ah, but is it similar to icq? other than just being a standard IM. never having used it, i havent the foggiest.
|
|
|
|
|
