Yahoo sues Facebook for infringing 10 patents

Comments (25)
Felder2 wrote:

The time has come to put an end to software and business process patents. The way they are being used is hindering, not helping innovation.

Mar 12, 2012 4:51pm EDT  --  Report as abuse

Another broke patent squatter siphoning off of the rich. So many of these patents should never have been issued, as ridiculous they are. Issued by offices who clearly didn’t understand what they were doing to businesses that abuse them.

Mar 12, 2012 4:54pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
tdlane wrote:

When will all this patent litigation nonsense ever end? Every form of media from newspapers to magazines to radio to television to the Internet have included advertising as a means of generating revenue. How on earth did Yahoo ever manage to get a patent on it???

Mar 12, 2012 4:54pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
JoeObserver wrote:

This is gonna be a heck of a battle between Yahoo and Facebook.

Mar 12, 2012 4:55pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
lolcoolj wrote:

What do you know? Facebook rips off somebody else, again! I love the fact that facebook itself is just a web forum paired with irc-style chat for noobs. The general public thinks it’s awesome, and it has already exhisted in other forms for about 30+ years. All FB did was make it mainstream with advertisers pulling info out your backdoor with your PERMISSION! I do love that all the initial funders were ex CIA data miners, too. Can’t beat that support, any day!

Mar 12, 2012 4:56pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Tom_AZ_USA wrote:

Facebook should just buy Yahoo, it would be cheaper than going to court with them.

Mar 12, 2012 5:47pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Curmudgeon43 wrote:

Zuckerberg seems to have a history of stealing other people’s stuff.

Time he got shut down.

Mar 12, 2012 6:15pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
TheDude77 wrote:

Yahoo cannot win this and they know it. They will push and push and try and get a settlement out of court.

It is embarrassing for Yahoo! who as a pioneer of the net should be looking to help the internet grow rather than trying to dumb it down.

Patents and the lawyers and companies that enforce them are the scum of the earth.

Mar 12, 2012 6:21pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
jcllings wrote:

How many of the “aggregators” are owned by tech companies or by the owners of the tech companies? For example, Mr. Gates owns MS and his wife, Willinda owns an aggregator? Just an example, but betchya anything this is the kind of thing that goes on.

Mar 12, 2012 6:41pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Nullcorp wrote:

These tech patents were awarded by people who didn’t understand what the applications were for. It would be like awarding a patent for a method of affixing a poster to a wall, or a method of allowing water to flow downhill. I’m not a big Facebook fan, but they should systematically dispute each of these generic “patents” and try to bring about some change in the industry by shining a very bright light on this problem.

Mar 12, 2012 7:33pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
jo5319 wrote:

Many in Silicon Valley had said that Yahoo’s Jerry Yan
let Google get away with “Murder” in violating Yahoo’s
intellectual property rights. The little 200+ million
dollars represented chump change.

Yahoo was the first search engine. If Yahoo strictly enforced
its creative genius in inventing the first search engine,
and charge for that as a patent from the start, Google, Eric
Schmidt and everybody else would still be working for Jerry
Yan and his partner. But the result would be less creative energy
and less blossoming of the Silicon Valley in the 90s. Jerry Yan’s
philosophy was the Asian one, not about making most bucks,
but for the greater good, etc. So many who attack and scapegoat
Asian philosophy just don’t understand it. And Icahn destroyed Yahoo
some more.

It was one of the best thing Jerry Yan for Silicon Valley, to block
the sale of Yahoo to Microsoft, so that healthy competition and innovation can still persist.

Mar 12, 2012 7:42pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
kbingh wrote:

The last bastion of a dying tech company. Become a patent troll.

Mar 12, 2012 7:48pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
JiveDadson wrote:

Ahem. Patent numbers please?

Mar 12, 2012 8:55pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
McBob08 wrote:

I see lawyers are doing their part to make sure that they have jobs well into the future by convincing corporations to constantly sue each other. The companies lose out, and the lawyers make out huge! When are people going to see this Lawyer Scam for what it is?

Yahoo’s still around? I stopped using them almost a decade ago. Their search engine and instant messenger are crap; the only real way I use them is through the Webcrawler search engine (seriously; the best search engine around. It’s Google, Bing, and 8 other top search engines rolled into one interface!). Yahoo should just gracefully accept that they lost out in the internet crapshoot. In a few years’ time, it’s going to be Facebook that’s desperately struggling to survive, so don’t get too attached to your internet/social media companies — even the best of them is only temporary.

Mar 12, 2012 9:05pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
DooDahDay wrote:

Yahoo probably has a very strong case, and just wants a little of that IPO sugar. So it goes.

Mar 12, 2012 10:40pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
LoopGaroo wrote:

Cripes, another case of software patents granted for incandescently obvious ideas by idiotic patent examiners, to be enforced by our retarded judiciary. When will we end this foolishness?

Mar 12, 2012 11:36pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
SavageNation wrote:

Funny, during the Dot-Con run up, there was a startup ‘org in Silicon Valley against “Lawsuit Abuse”. It was (allegedly) “backed” by many Tech companies at the time. With the gaggle of IP lawsuits in the past decades, it is increasingly obvious the corporations were only concerned with lobbying politicians to pass laws thwarting CONSUMERS and SHAREHOLDERS from suing companies, but weren’t interested in stopping their own litigious tendencies.

Mar 12, 2012 11:43pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
pplranimals wrote:

Patents should only be about what the customer experiences

Mar 12, 2012 12:21am EDT  --  Report as abuse

I thought the whole precedent when Microsoft and Apple were fighting over Windows(95) was that you couldn’t patent ‘look and feel’.

Mar 12, 2012 12:44am EDT  --  Report as abuse
KrisCraig wrote:

Just another symptom of our grown IP-abuse epidemic in this country. I should file a patent for filing frivolous patent lawsuits, then I could sue Yahoo and all these aggregators. Poetic justice FTW!

Mar 13, 2012 6:18pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
nieldevi wrote:

Trade Facebook to China for $100B of our debt…

Mar 13, 2012 9:46pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
mrpeanut wrote:

We can’t trade FB to China, that would just make it easier and legal for China to spy on you. Not that FB ISN’T already selling your information to the Chinese.

Mar 14, 2012 11:02am EDT  --  Report as abuse
pjchooch wrote:

Someone patented toast, in 2000! You should not be able to patent software… period. (I am a software developer.) The vast majority of software patents are duplicates of existing patents. The only point in having them is the ability to sue others, or to protect yourself from being sued. They fly in the face of what patents are designed to do, which is to spur innovation. They actually do exactly the opposite of that.

Mar 14, 2012 11:17am EDT  --  Report as abuse
HansenIPLaw wrote:

If you are interested in how this case may play out, today we posted a blog at hanseniplaw.com/blog which discusses a key issue that may arise in the case: whether the patents cover “statutory subject matter.” This concerns whether the patents cover the type of thing that can be patented, regardless of how new it is. The law is very muddy in this area, but it may provide fertile ground for Facebook to attack. It may also present an opportunity for the courts to do a better job of clarifying what can and cannot be patented.

Mar 15, 2012 6:32pm EDT  --  Report as abuse

The patents Yahoo! is asserting against Facebook underwent extensive claim amendments AFTER Facebook was incorporated in 2004. In other words, the asserted Yahoo! patents have the dual benefit of a pre-2004 application date and a post-2004 visibility into technologies that Facebook had already reduced to practice.

However, Facebook faces a Catch-22. Should the company elect to prove that they “invented” what Yahoo! amended into their patents, they may prevail, but the proof of inventorship would then be ammunition to invalidate their own too-late-applied-for portfolio (you only have a year of commercial use before you’re disqualified from seeking or gaining patent protection).

Read a full report here: http://www.m-cam.com/patently-obvious/defriending-facebook-intellectual-property-analysis-yahoo-inc-v-facebook-inc

Mar 16, 2012 2:58pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.