ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Siri's (Apple) Patent Application

To: "edbark@xxxxxxxx" <edbark@xxxxxxxx>, "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Matt Kaufman <mkfmncom@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 10:08:33 -0700
Message-id: <699AA1DB-31B7-4946-BC6F-3A7DF13485EC@xxxxxxxxx>
2nd Wonderful Post In this Thread Since Yesterday.     (01)

I really appreciate being able to read this mailing list.    (02)

Matthew M. Kaufman
503-881-6906    (03)

Sent from my iPhone    (04)

On Oct 19, 2011, at 9:53 AM, Ed Barkmeyer <edbark@xxxxxxxx> wrote:    (05)

> 
> 
> Kristof Van Tomme wrote:
>> If you are in this field and you might be doing things that infringe
>> on this patent, I would advise you to not read any of this or at least
>> not comment on it, unless you have the money and reason to dispute the
>> validity of these patents. In the other case, if you ever get
>> prosecuted it will save you a lot of money if you didn't know about
>> the exact claims that have been granted.
>> 
> 
> I would be surprised to find that this advice is supported by 
> experience.  In most engineering activities, the engineer or his/her 
> staff is expected to do a patent search before committing a design to 
> production.  The purpose of the search is to protect the company from 
> potential patent infringement claims after committing significant monies 
> to production and marketing.  The whole idea is that one can determine 
> whether the central features of the design are patented by others, thus 
> negating all value in the design, and whether there are 'touching 
> patents' whose potential claims can be avoided by making minor 
> modifications to the design.  In patent infringement cases, ignorance of 
> prior patent is /not/ a defense, unless the domain and function of the 
> patent was described in terminology that was not readily recognizeable 
> as the same as the domain and function of the claimed infringement.  
> (This latter is more of an international patent issue, in that it arises 
> from language translations and  inconsistencies in terminology across 
> national boundaries, notably British terminology vs. American 
> terminology.  But it also arises across specialized discipline areas, 
> like pharmaceuticals vs. chemical agricultural products.)  Standard 
> practice is to do the patent search.  If you didn't do the patent 
> search, you are liable.  You can only be excused if a reasonable search 
> might not have identified the patent as relevant, and even that doesn't 
> free you from future liability.  (That is why they send 'cease and 
> desist' letters -- if you were ignorant, now you aren't.)
> 
> I repeat what is becoming a mantra:  Knowledge engineering and software 
> engineering are engineering disciplines, and they are finally becoming 
> exposed to the expected behaviors in good engineering practice.
> 
> -Ed
> 
> -- 
> Edward J. Barkmeyer                        Email: edbark@xxxxxxxx
> National Institute of Standards & Technology
> Manufacturing Systems Integration Division
> 100 Bureau Drive, Stop 8263                Tel: +1 301-975-3528
> Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8263                Cel: +1 240-672-5800
> 
> "The opinions expressed above do not reflect consensus of NIST, 
> and have not been reviewed by any Government authority."
> 
> 
> 
>> cheers,
>> Kristof
>> 
>> 
>> On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 7:16 AM, Matt Kaufman <mkfmncom@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> 
>>> Wonderful Post on IP and the Startups.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> On Oct 18, 2011, at 7:30 PM, "Rich Cooper" <rich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Dear Ali,
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Patents were not created to help professors write papers or to help
>>> journalists write articles.  Jefferson created the patent system in response
>>> to the custom of the times where an apprentice would be working for a master
>>> craftsman who would share his knowledge about a trade with the apprentice,
>>> but would retain the rights to the product or service he produces.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I wouldn’t ask a banker what semantic methodology works best for what
>>> problem specification; I would ask a semantic engineer.  By the same token,
>>> I wouldn’t expect lawyers, even IP lawyers, to understand the business 
>model
>>> of innovative companies.  So why would those articles (quoted below) shed
>>> any light on the problems of bringing new fundamental technology to market?
>>> They are all written by law school profs and journalists!
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Ask startup founders if you want the perspective that does the work.  Ask
>>> advisors if you want details to help you with the peripheral issues.  Ask
>>> the people who do the actual work for the reasons they work, for the
>>> constraints they perceive, and for the best way to improve technology with
>>> the smallest amount of resources.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> JMHO,
>>> 
>>> -Rich
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Sincerely,
>>> 
>>> Rich Cooper
>>> 
>>> EnglishLogicKernel.com
>>> 
>>> Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com
>>> 
>>> 9 4 9 \ 5 2 5 - 5 7 1 2
>>> 
>>> ________________________________
>>> 
>>> From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
>>> (•`'·.¸(`'·.¸(•)¸.·'´)¸.·'´•) .,.,
>>> Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2011 12:31 PM
>>> To: rwheeler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; [ontolog-forum]
>>> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Siri's (Apple) Patent Application
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Aside from the dubious premise that patents actually encourage innovation
>>> (at least in software), see:
>>> 
>>> http://www.stlr.org/volumes/volume-x-2008-2009/torrance/
>>> 
>>> http://www.sciencemag.org/content/280/5364/698.full
>>> 
>>> 
>http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/open-enterprise/2009/07/g8-on-intellectual-monopolies-not-so-great/index.htm
>>> 
>>> 
>http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/2008/07/07/intellectual-property-regime-stifles-science-and-innovation-nobel-laureates-say/
>>> 
>>> among many many others.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> In the case of Open Source, one can claim prior art -- though such a
>>> response still extracts a rent on the actual innovators(!)
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I recall the Ontolog IPR series
>>> 
>(http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OpenOntologyRepository_IPR/Discussion),
>>> it might be worthwhile to set up a patent monitoring network, and if
>>> possible get some legal help to aid in streamlining the challenging of
>>> overly broad patent claims, that perhaps through the use of creative
>>> language cleverly skirt prior art.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> As far as I can tell (and hopefully an IP lawyer can help clarify), it is
>>> cheapest to attack a patent when in application stages. Options for the open
>>> source community seem to be to make sure prior art is widely known and
>>> develop support networks to help ensure that patents aren't granted that
>>> wade into the territory. Alternatively, to actually start building a patent
>>> portfolio, but that would require significant funds behind it.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Tools such
>>> as: 
>http://www.ambercite.com/our-approach/network-patent-analysis/network-patent-analysis-%28npa%29-201011101.html
> could
>>> help make the first option more viable. Of course, all this seems like such
>>> a distraction from actual, useful, productive work and you know...
>>> innovating.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Ali
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 3:12 PM, Ron Wheeler
>>> <rwheeler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> 
>>> On 18/10/2011 2:55 PM, Rich Cooper wrote:
>>> 
>>> Dear Peter,
>>> 
>>> Agreed re the FTF vs FTI.  The many inventors I
>>> know are upset about this new law, and working
>>> hard to reverse it, so perhaps that will be
>>> changed.  But it will take years.
>>> 
>>> The motivation for FTF was that it fits with the
>>> international patent treaty (PCT) agreements in
>>> force in other countries.  It also wreaks fewer
>>> wrinkles in litigation because the facts do not
>>> include "intention", which is so hard to prove or
>>> disprove, and for which every inventor is
>>> convinced he "intended" the invention exactly one
>>> year before he filed it.  FTF clears up a lot of
>>> those debatable points, but has lots of drawbacks
>>> compared to FTI.
>>> 
>>> Yet the US has been more prolific in invention
>>> than any other country using FTI for 200+ years,
>>> and the statistics for countries (e.g. Canada)
>>> that have changed from FTI to FTF are not good.
>>> This could hamper innovation efforts in many
>>> fields.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> This will destroy the open source movement.
>>> 
>>> Projects will develop a new technology, someone outside the project will see
>>> it, patent it and then the open source project will have to remove the code
>>> from their project in order to avoid being sued by the patent holder.
>>> 
>>> Not sure how Apache is planning to deal with this but it puts all of us that
>>> use open source at risk of future legal action.
>>> Very stupid idea in spite of its simplicity.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Ron
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Sincerely,
>>> Rich Cooper
>>> EnglishLogicKernel.com
>>> Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com
>>> 9 4 9 \ 5 2 5 - 5 7 1 2
>>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
>>> Behalf Of Peter Yim
>>> Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2011 11:17 AM
>>> To: [ontolog-forum]
>>> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Siri's (Apple) Patent
>>> Application
>>> 
>>> [AH]  Thoughts?
>>> 
>>> [ppy]  while I totally admire the way they have
>>> executed it, and am
>>> happy for the Apple/Siri folks for finally
>>> bringing ontology and
>>> semantic technology to the mass market with such
>>> fanfare ... I am, at
>>> the same time, saddened by the fact that we (in
>>> the US) too, are now
>>> under a "first to file" patent regime (and that
>>> "first to invent" is
>>> no longer relevant!)
>>> 
>>> Regards. =ppy
>>> --
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 10:44 AM, Ali SH
>>> <asaegyn+out@xxxxxxxxx>  wrote:
>>> 
>>> A few years ago Adam Cheyer and Tom Gruber were
>>> 
>>> kind enough to present an
>>> 
>>> overview of Siri on ontolog
>>> 
>>> ( http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?Conferen
>>> ceCall_2010_02_25 ), were
>>> 
>>> subsequently bought out by Apple and a few weeks
>>> 
>>> ago Apple released Siri as
>>> 
>>> that "one more thing" part of their
>>> 
>>> presentations - deeply integrating it
>>> 
>>> into the iPhone4S and their new iOS'es. Some
>>> 
>>> claim it is a break out point
>>> 
>>> for mass acceptance of AI technologies, and its
>>> 
>>> cultural / technological
>>> 
>>> consequences are on par with the mouse or GUI's.
>>> Regardless, I thought people here might be
>>> 
>>> interested in their patent
>>> 
>>> application, which is reviewed on this site:
>>> 
>>> http://www.unwiredview.com/2011/10/12/how-siri-on-
>>> iphone-4s-works-and-why-it%E2%80%99s-a-big-deal-ap
>>> ple%E2%80%99s-ai-tech-details-in-230-pages-of-pate
>>> nt-app/
>>> 
>>> while this one looks at the surrounding patent
>>> 
>>> protections Siri and Apple
>>> 
>>> (and I suppose SRI) may have built around the
>>> 
>>> technologies
>>> ( http://startupsip.com/2011/10/14/is-apple-siri-o
>>> us-about-ip/ ). The claims
>>> 
>>> on the '790 patent are incredibly broad
>>> 
>>> An automated assistant operating on a computing
>>> 
>>> device, the assistant
>>> 
>>> comprising:
>>> 
>>> an input device, for receiving user input;
>>> a language interpreter component, for
>>> 
>>> interpreting the received user input
>>> 
>>> to derive a representation of user intent;
>>> a dialog flow processor component, for
>>> 
>>> identifying at least one domain, at
>>> 
>>> least one task, and at least one parameter for
>>> 
>>> the task, based at least in
>>> 
>>> part on the derived representation of user
>>> 
>>> intent;
>>> 
>>> a services orchestration component, for calling
>>> 
>>> at least one service for
>>> 
>>> performing the identified task;
>>> an output processor component, for rendering
>>> 
>>> output based on data received
>>> 
>>> from the at least one called service, and
>>> 
>>> further based at least in part on
>>> 
>>> a current output mode; and
>>> an output device, for outputting the rendered
>>> 
>>> output.
>>> 
>>> Fwiw, I believe that Leonid Kravets has
>>> 
>>> misunderstood the "language
>>> 
>>> interpreter" claim, and I doubt Apple is
>>> 
>>> referring to Nuance, but the
>>> 
>>> NLP/ontology interpretation that Siri is doing
>>> 
>>> w/ the Nuance speech-to-text
>>> 
>>> strings...
>>> There's recently been another, much narrower
>>> 
>>> patent application to do with
>>> 
>>> ontologies and NLP, titled "Method and system
>>> 
>>> for generating an ontology"
>>> see: http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sec
>>> t1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPT
>>> O%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=8,027,948.PN.&OS=P
>>> N/8,027,948&RS=PN/8,027,948 for
>>> 
>>> more details.
>>> Thoughts?
>>> 
>>> (•`'·.¸(`'·.¸(•)¸.·'´)¸.·'´•) .,.,
>>> 
>>> __________________________________________________
>>> _______________
>>> Message Archives:
>>> http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
>>> Config Subscr:
>>> http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-f
>>> orum/
>>> Unsubscribe:
>>> mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
>>> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>>> To join:
>>> http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePa
>>> ge#nid1J
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
>>> Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
>>> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
>>> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>>> To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Ron Wheeler
>>> President
>>> Artifact Software Inc
>>> email: rwheeler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> skype: ronaldmwheeler
>>> phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
>>> Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
>>> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
>>> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>>> To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> 
>>> .
>>> 
>>> (•`'·.¸(`'·.¸(•)¸.·'´)¸.·'´•) .,.,
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
>>> Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
>>> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
>>> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>>> To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
>>> Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
>>> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
>>> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>>> To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> ****************************************************
>> 
>> ir. Kristof Van Tomme
>> CEO
>> Skype: kvantomme
>> http://twitter.com/kvantomme
>> http://be.linkedin.com/in/kvantomme
>> 
>> PRONOVIX
>> 9940 Sleidinge, Akkerken 6, Belgium
>> 6721 Szeged, Vidra utca 1B, Hungary
>> Web: www.pronovix.com
>> 
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
>> Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
>> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
>> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>> To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/  
> Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/  
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
> To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
>     (06)

_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/  
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/  
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J    (07)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>