Trolls against Google. Part two.
Google is forced once again to go through the legal vicissitudes in its defense of the existence of the AdSense advertising program.
In fact, the opposition between Google and the patent trolls from Hyperphrase Technologies has been going on since June. Then Google won the case in the District Court of Wisconsin - the judge denied the lawsuit and ruled in favor of Google.
Nevertheless, yesterday the federal appeals court agreed that the AdSense system does not infringe the patent of Hyperphrase Technologies, but it was not lucky about another related technology - AutoLink.
As a result, the court did not reach a consensus on whether Google violated the relevant patent and sent the case back to a lower court for further investigation.
')
I reread it several times with a mind-boggling affair, trying to figure out what Google is doing, what violates this patent, and all I could find is a technology that indexes the page and determines when two words are side by side in the text, to suggest The best options for advertising placed on the page.
For example, using this technology, the system, when indexing the pages of the words “federal” and “court” in the text, will determine that in the context of this page the best advertising option will be the one that focuses on the phrase “federal court”, rather than those that target to separate words "federal" and "court".
Thus, in essence, Hyperphrase claims a patent for the logic necessary for contextual text analysis.
This is not the first time Hyperphrase has sent such claims. "Patent trolls" in federal court. In 2003, the company filed a lawsuit against Microsoft on the violation of intellectual property rights. Hyperphrase claimed a violation of three patents related to the Office XP product and demanded $ 2 billion in damages. Then Hyperphrase lost the case.
- Push. Patent trolls are well written here - http://www.gorodissky.ru/467823/
In fact, the opposition between Google and the patent trolls from Hyperphrase Technologies has been going on since June. Then Google won the case in the District Court of Wisconsin - the judge denied the lawsuit and ruled in favor of Google.
Nevertheless, yesterday the federal appeals court agreed that the AdSense system does not infringe the patent of Hyperphrase Technologies, but it was not lucky about another related technology - AutoLink.
As a result, the court did not reach a consensus on whether Google violated the relevant patent and sent the case back to a lower court for further investigation.
')
I reread it several times with a mind-boggling affair, trying to figure out what Google is doing, what violates this patent, and all I could find is a technology that indexes the page and determines when two words are side by side in the text, to suggest The best options for advertising placed on the page.
For example, using this technology, the system, when indexing the pages of the words “federal” and “court” in the text, will determine that in the context of this page the best advertising option will be the one that focuses on the phrase “federal court”, rather than those that target to separate words "federal" and "court".
Thus, in essence, Hyperphrase claims a patent for the logic necessary for contextual text analysis.
This is not the first time Hyperphrase has sent such claims. "Patent trolls" in federal court. In 2003, the company filed a lawsuit against Microsoft on the violation of intellectual property rights. Hyperphrase claimed a violation of three patents related to the Office XP product and demanded $ 2 billion in damages. Then Hyperphrase lost the case.
- Push. Patent trolls are well written here - http://www.gorodissky.ru/467823/
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/31349/
All Articles