Not Being Evil? Google patents Google Doodles

Business, IP Law
By / / 2 Comments / 3 minutes of reading
Share
This image is patented by Google, not being evil

I was reading about the cool Mark Twain Google doodle here and was surprised to find that Google had actually managed to obtain a patent related to the idea of using homepage doodles. The inventor is Google’s co-founder Sergey Brin; the patent application was filed back in April 2001 but not granted as a patent until March 2011. The patent’s title is “Systems and methods for enticing users to access a web site” (PTO version; Google versionwith PDF). The abstract and claim 1 are below:

Abstract: A system provides a periodically changing story line and/or a special event company logo to entice users to access a web page. For the story line, the system may receive objects that tell a story according to the story line and successively provide the objects on the web page for predetermined or random amounts of time. For the special event company logo, the system may modify a standard company logo for a special event to create a special event logo, associate one or more search terms with the special event logo, and upload the special event logo to the web page. The system may then receive a user selection of the special event logo and provide search results relating to the special event.

Claim 1. A non-transitory computer-readable medium that stores instructions executable by one or more processors to perform a method for attracting users to a web page, comprising: instructions for creating a special event logo by modifying a standard company logo for a special event, where the instructions for creating the special event logo includes instructions for modifying the standard company logo with one or more animated images; instructions for associating a link or search results with the special event logo, the link identifying a document relating to the special event, the search results relating to the special event; instructions for uploading the special event logo to the web page; instructions for receiving a user selection of the special event logo; and instructions for providing the document relating to the special event or the search results relating to the special event based on the user selection.

This got me curious as to what other patents Brin might have obtained. Here they are (sigh):

1 8,037,065 Full-Text Information extraction from a database
2 8,024,326 Full-Text Methods and systems for improving a search ranking using related queries
3 8,009,141 Full-Text Seeing with your hand
4 7,912,915 Full-Text Systems and methods for enticing users to access a web site
5 7,650,330 Full-Text Information extraction from a database
6 7,505,964 Full-Text Methods and systems for improving a search ranking using related queries
7 7,366,668 Full-Text Voice interface for a search engine
8 7,136,854 Full-Text Methods and apparatus for providing search results in response to an ambiguous search query
9 7,027,987 Full-Text Voice interface for a search engine
10 6,865,575 Full-Text Methods and apparatus for using a modified index to provide search results in response to an ambiguous search query
11 6,678,681 Full-Text Information extraction from a database
12 6,529,903 Full-Text Methods and apparatus for using a modified index to provide search results in response to an ambiguous search query
13 6,185,559 Full-Text Method and apparatus for dynamically counting large itemsets

Another search reveals 925 patents owned by Google (the thousands of patents acquired from Motorola Mobility are evidently not yet assigned to Google in the PTO database so don’t show up here), plus a bunch of pending patent applications.

You can’t really blame Google for playing the patent game and trying to build up a defensive patent portfolio.1 Still, asserting this patent against innocent companies would surely violate the company motto “Don’t be evil“.

[c4sif]

  1. See, e.g., Google’s Defensive Patent Acquisition; State robs Google of 1760 defensive patents; The Patent Defense League and Defensive Patent Pooling; A Patent “Don’t Be Evil” Policy; and related posts. ↩

Not Being Evil? Google patents Google Doodles Read Post »

Is Power Stupid or Smart?

Fiction Reviews (Movies), Vulgar Politics
By / / 3 Comments / 8 minutes of reading
Share

If you seek power over others, how much of an advantage does raw intelligence gain you?

If you look at the makeup of the U.S. Congress — which now has a 9% percent approval rating — or if you watch the Republican debates, you are not immediately inclined to label either the smart set.  In fact, you have to be a dim bulb to repeatedly say many of the things that seem necessary for electability. On the other hand, a certain amount of cleverness is obviously necessary to outwit the media and your opponents.

Which is it? Two films that explore the relationship between power and brains are “Being There” (1979) and “Limitless” (2011). The films came out thirty years apart but deal with the same issues. “Being There” suggests that being dumb as a chicken is a huge advantage for those who seek political success. “Limitless” suggests that politics is the inevitable trajectory of a person who is far more intelligent than everyone else. Which is more realistic?

I’ll state my own view up front: politics is a gigantic waste of brains. If a person really has a gift for high-level thought, almost any profession would be a greater better to society and probably more self-fulfilling in the long run. Whereas it was probably once true that the political life attracted some of the best and brightest, it no longer seems true at all today.

“Being There” is both hilarious and serious, worth sitting down with at least once every few elections seasons. Peter Sellers and Shirley MacLaine star in this adaptation of a novel by Jerzy Kosinski about an illiterate and simple-minded man named Chance who happened to be in the right place at the right time. His utterances are few and most concern what he has done his entire life, which has been to tend one garden on one estate and otherwise watch television. …

Is Power Stupid or Smart?Read More »

Is Power Stupid or Smart? Read Post »

Reason Papers Issue No. 33 Online

Education, Libertarian Theory
By / / 1 Comment / 2 minutes of reading
Share

Issue no. 33 of Reason Papers is now online. Articles listed below:

Issue No. 33 – Fall 2011 (Full Issue)

Symposium: Rand and Hayek on Cognition and Trade

Articles

Discussion Notes

Review Essays

Book Reviews

Afterwords

Reason Papers Issue No. 33 Online Read Post »

Czech Mate on Intellectual Property

IP Law
By / / 1 Comment / 1 minute of reading
Share

My monograph Against Intellectual Property, already translated into six other languages,1 is coming out in Czech (English version), by Mises.cz. Apparently the book will officially be launched at their Christmas libertarian meeting (hey, why don’t we have those over in America? sounds cool). Only libertarians could plan to celebrate a book about intellectual property at a Christmas party. Gotta love ’em.

Anyhoo, now my stuff is in 11 languages other than English. Kinda cool for a boy from Galvez, Louisiana. Actually, I visited Praha (Prague) while doing the backpacking thing in law school in 1990 or so, and my brother lived there for several years–once when I visited him in 1999, I was invited to give a speech (on Crime, Punishment and Restitution) at the Liberální institut by Josef Šíma, now of the Prague University of Economics and now also on the Editorial Board of my journal Libertarian Papers. So it’s nice to have my monograph coming out in Czech.

[C4SIF]

  1. Georgian, German, Italian, Polish, Portugese, Spanish. ↩

Czech Mate on Intellectual Property Read Post »

Rip Immunity Away from D.A.s and Law Enforcement

Legal System, Police Statism
By / / 2 Comments / 8 minutes of reading
Share

What happens to a justice system when it grants legal immunity to those in power for their malicious acts toward the innocent and vulnerable? A 6-year-old boy is charged with first-degree sexual assault for playing doctor with friends; the Class B felony can be punished by up to 60 years imprisonment.

PLAYING DOCTOR BECOMES A FELONY

Last fall, a six-year-old Wisconsin boy played doctor with another boy and girl, both of whom were 5. Depending on whose story is credited, some touching of the girl’s bare buttocks occurred and/or a finger was inserted into the girl’s anus. (The girl denied the penetration to police.)

On November 15, 2011, the parents of the boy filed a federal lawsuit against Wisconsin’s Grant County district attorney, a social worker and a now-retired Sheriff’s Office investigator. The reason? The boy, who is now merely known as “D”, was charged with first-degree sexual assault. He has been so vigorously pursued by Grant County officials that D’s attorney Christopher Cooper states, “I think his life has been ruined, and I think it’s been ruined by reckless conduct by the defendants without any regard for the little boy and his future.”

At 7 years old, D cannot currently be prosecuted or even named in court records. But the parents accuse county officials of using threats to force them to sign a Consent decree (a blanket permission to deal with their son). They claim officials harangued them and D to admit his guilt and to have him receive social and protective services. If a confession was not produced, then the parents were told that D could be listed as a sex offender when he turned 18. That would label him a second-class citizen, both legally and in life’s important opportunities such as career, education, and residency.

If accurate, the parents’ lawsuit reveals a tale of arrogant power, political favors, malice, and utter disregard for a child’s welfare. …

Rip Immunity Away from D.A.s and Law EnforcementRead More »

Rip Immunity Away from D.A.s and Law Enforcement Read Post »

Scroll to Top