2014-01-28 Alcatel-Lucent files Bitcoin Patent Application: Vault to Wallet

[row5_seat47]

Alcatel-Lucent files Bitcoin Patent Application: Vault to Wallet Transfer System

Alcatel-Lucent filed for Patent Application WO2013127713 A1 “Decentralized Electronic Transfer System” with the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) on Feb 25th, 2013 and it was published on Sep 6th, 2013...

"...The essence of the patent is a system whereby a decentralized currency such as Bitcoin is stored in a secure environment known as a Vault (i.e. secured repository) and a smaller unsecured portion of funds are stored in an unsecured Wallet (i.e. unsecure repository).  An unsecured wallet would be on a mobile phone for example.  Funds are doled out from the secure vault to the less secure wallet to provide the wallet holder with less cumbersome and frictionless experience when spending bitcoin in day to day transactions..."  



http://letstalkbitcoin.com/alcatel-lucent-files-bitcoin-patent-application-vault-to-wallet-transfer-system

[BTCIndia]

Can you please provide us with patent number for further reading?

[Cyrus]

Can you please provide us with patent number for further reading?

Alcatel-Lucent filed for Patent Application WO2013127713 A1

More about it on Google Patents: http://www.google.com/patents/WO2013127713A1?cl=en

[TraderTimm]

Here's Alcatel-Lucent's institutional stock holders:

http://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/alu/institutional-holdings

Big names, as expected.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcatel-Lucent

They are a global organization that also owns Bell Labs. This is an interesting development. It isn't some patent-troll trying to do a shakedown. I wonder what they are planning...

[No_2]

...
"...The essence of the patent is a system whereby a decentralized currency such as Bitcoin is stored in a secure environment known as a Vault (i.e. secured repository) and a smaller unsecured portion of funds are stored in an unsecured Wallet (i.e. unsecure repository).  An unsecured wallet would be on a mobile phone for example.  Funds are doled out from the secure vault to the less secure wallet to provide the wallet holder with less cumbersome and frictionless experience when spending bitcoin in day to day transactions..."  
...

Hopefully this is already sufficiency common place to prove prior art. Hopefully...

[runam0k]

Hopefully this is already sufficiency common place to prove prior art. Hopefully...

Yes, but is the secure environment known as a Vault?

I wonder if they're talking about some sort of auto-top-up-from-cold-storage for your spending wallet. That would be neat.

[BTCIndia]

Can you please provide us with patent number for further reading?

Alcatel-Lucent filed for Patent Application WO2013127713 A1

More about it on Google Patents: http://www.google.com/patents/WO2013127713A1?cl=en

Thanks a lot Cyrus! Much appreciated!

[subSTRATA]

Hopefully this is already sufficiency common place to prove prior art. Hopefully...

Yes, but is the secure environment known as a Vault?

I wonder if they're talking about some sort of auto-top-up-from-cold-storage for your spending wallet. That would be neat.

I think they are creating another centralized wallet service like blockchain.info but with some extras.

[defxor]

The only relevant things in a patent are the claims. Usually all you need to do is read claim #1 and see if it either exists already or doesn't - or whether it actually describes what you're worried about infringing.

In this case:

Claims
1. Method for use in a decentralized electronic transfer system, the method comprising the steps of:
- Generating a first digital code representing a first transaction from a first user's secure repository to the first user's unsecure repository;
- Sending the digital code to a secure storage memory related to the unsecure repository to be stored in an area of the memory;
- Generating by a processor related to the unsecure repository a second digital code representing a second transaction from the unsecure repository to the second user's repository;
- Connecting the processor to the internet;
And the subsequent steps of :
- Retrieving by the processor the first digital code stored in the secure storage memory;
Publishing by the processor via the internet connection of the retrieved digital code to validate the first transaction;
Publishing by the processor via the internet connection of the second digital code to validate the second transaction .

One of the limiting factors above would be "a secure storage memory related to the unsecure repository". That seems slightly uncommon. Also, it seems both transactions (secure repository to unsecure repository as well as unsecure repository to second user) needs to be published. I guess that happens naturally if they're both Bitcoin transactions.

So, either there's not an issue due to the "secure storage memory" or this describes something already done. Any takers?

(Yes, I do patent claim reading professionally)

[odolvlobo]

X = offline computer
A = online computer
B = payee's address
S = secure storage on online computer

1. X creates the transaction X -> A and stores it in S.
2. A creates the transaction A -> B.
3. A sends X -> A and A -> B to the Bitcoin network.

Compare this to Armory:

1. A creates the transaction X -> B and sends it to X (via USB stick)
2. X signs X -> B and sends it back to A (via USB stick)
3. A sends X -> B to the Bitcoin network.

IANAL, but in my opinion, the only "novel" part of the patent might be S, but that is pushing it.

[seriouscoin]

X = offline computer
A = online computer
B = payee's address
S = secure storage on online computer

1. X creates the transaction X -> A and stores it in S.
2. A creates the transaction A -> B.
3. A sends X -> A and A -> B to the Bitcoin network.

Compare this to Armory:

1. A creates the transaction X -> B and sends it to X (via USB stick)
2. X signs X -> B and sends it back to A (via USB stick)
3. A sends X -> B to the Bitcoin network.

IANAL, but in my opinion, the only "novel" part of the patent might be S, but that is pushing it.

You dont seem to understand how Armory works.....

There is no such thing "sent" from A. A does not send anything, itt just generates an unsigned transaction that need private key holder (offline Armory) to sign it and then broadcast it.

Now there will be a hw device that work like an offline Amory that ppl can just sign tx (holding private key)

None of these is related to the topic on hand.

The Vault can be a private key holding service....thus it requires trust and insurance.

[cbeast]

I think it's more likely they are developing a Bitcoin derivative and not planning to offer storage for Bitcoin wallets. That would just be dumb as there is far better open source projects already available from M of N transactions to BIP 38. If they are simply patenting cold storage, they are a few years behind the curve.
Seriously, do they think they are smarter than the Open Source Bitcoin community? Then again I remember Dean Kamen. This could just be a dog and pony show for the upity ups.

[odolvlobo]

X = offline computer
A = online computer
B = payee's address
S = secure storage on online computer
1. X creates the transaction X -> A and stores it in S.
2. A creates the transaction A -> B.
3. A sends X -> A and A -> B to the Bitcoin network.
Compare this to Armory:
1. A creates the transaction X -> B and sends it to X (via USB stick)
2. X signs X -> B and sends it back to A (via USB stick)
3. A sends X -> B to the Bitcoin network.
IANAL, but in my opinion, the only "novel" part of the patent might be S, but that is pushing it.

You dont seem to understand how Armory works.....

There is no such thing "sent" from A. A does not send anything, itt just generates an unsigned transaction that need private key holder (offline Armory) to sign it and then broadcast it.
Now there will be a hw device that work like an offline Amory that ppl can just sign tx (holding private key)
None of these is related to the topic on hand.
The Vault can be a private key holding service....thus it requires trust and insurance.

I do understand, but I was trying to write like a patent lawyer . In Armory's case, "sends" in #1 and #2 means "copies the transaction to a USB stick and tells the user to plug it into the other computer".

[Kosta#]

My understanding of this patent is slightly different. Note that patent mentions the fact that "secure" and "unsecure" wallets relationship is 1-to-1, and also that compromising "unsecure" wallet also compromises the "secure" one, but not immediately, so that owner would have time to "clear" the "secure" wallet. Both former and latter do not make sense in the context of the "Armory" model.

[Peter R]

Seriously, do they think they are smarter than the Open Source Bitcoin community? Then again I remember Dean Kamen. This could just be a dog and pony show for the upity ups.

I suppose investors get a warm and tingly feeling when they see that your company has applied for patents.  We're currently filling a entire suite of patents for a device that we haven't even prototyped yet (non-bitcoin related).  Apparently we need this to secure the next round of funding.....

While meeting with one of our patent lawyers in Vancouver last month, he cautioned against doing a diligent prior art search.  When he found out how much research I had already done, it was like, hmm, "well, now we have to disclose that."

Dog and pony show for the upity-ups indeed.

[Peter R]

I should add that I think this development is very promising and that I'm glad to see it!

(Despite my rant against the patent system)