[2014-05-06] Western Union Obtains Alternative Currency Exchange System Patent

[row5_seat47]

Western Union Obtains Alternative Currency Exchange System Patent from USPTO:
Alternative value exchange systems and methods

No Joke Patent 8,688,563 Granted on April Fools Day 2014..was Filed in October 2009

“…Methods and systems for exchanging alternative currencies…”

More Here
https://medium.com/p/23f9de5dc65e

[1714002506]

1714002506

[notthematrix]

bitcoin genises block is from  03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks[2] (genises block)
So it will be prior art , and we all know were the patent is based on.....
on nakamoto's white paper.

[DeathAndTaxes]

This disclosure describes, generally, methods and systems for exchanging alternative currencies. The method includes creating, at an alternative currency platform, a plurality of user accounts and receiving, from a first user in the plurality of user accounts, an alternative currency exchange offer. The alternative currency exchange offer includes one or more offer terms and associated assets. Furthermore, the method includes extending the alternative currency exchange offer from the first user to the second user, in response to receiving acceptance of the offer from the second user, verifying the associated assets of the first user and the second user, and in response to verification of the assets of the first user and second user, providing settlement of the alternative currency exchange offer.

What gibberish.  There is absolutely nothing in there that is novel or new.   As described the exchange of virtual currencies is no different than the exchange of real currencies and trying to patent a "real" currency exchange would be rejected outright.   Maybe I should patent the exchange of "digital currencies".  Copy WU patent word for word and substitute digital currencies for virtual currencies.  See it is "digital" currencies not virtual currencies so it is new and novel right?

[row5_seat47]

bitcoin genises block is from  03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks[2] (genises block)
So it will be prior art , and we all know were the patent is based on.....
on nakamoto's white paper.

huh? this is regards to exchanges.

[notthematrix]

bitcoin genises block is from  03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks[2] (genises block)
So it will be prior art , and we all know were the patent is based on.....
on nakamoto's white paper.

huh? this is regards to exchanges.

YES it means that bitcoin was BEFORE the patent was filed , so bitcoin is first , and probably the patant is based on the papers of satoci nakamoto.
So good luck with this failed patent.

[row5_seat47]

YES it means that bitcoin was BEFORE the patent was filed , so bitcoin is first , and probably the patant is based on the papers of satoci nakamoto.
So good luck with this failed patent.

Again this is in regards to exchanges.  The patent even mentions Ithica hours... which is from 1991.

Think Cryptsy or Gox for that matter.

[FeedbackLoop]

What a joke... what's next? Patent barter?

[row5_seat47]

What a joke... what's next? Patent barter?

Yup

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PTXT&s1=7925541.PN.&OS=PN/7925541&RS=PN/7925541

[Bit_Happy]

Again this is in regards to exchanges.  The patent even mentions Ithica hours... which is from 1991.

Think Cryptsy or Gox for that matter.

They cannot legally try to collect "patent related fees" from Cryptsy (or another exchange), can they?
That would seem ridiculous......I hope they can't.

[seriouscoin]

makes me wonders, who decide all these patent case? I only see dumb patents coming out of US. Like a rectangle shape of a phone......

[Swordsoffreedom]

Well if they use that patent maybe they wouldn't become an obsolete money transfer service in the future

[dave111223]

Again this is in regards to exchanges.  The patent even mentions Ithica hours... which is from 1991.

Think Cryptsy or Gox for that matter.

They cannot legally try to collect "patent related fees" from Cryptsy (or another exchange), can they?
That would seem ridiculous......I hope they can't.

Sometimes it's useful having a ganster pimp (aka Western Union) when a corrupt cop (aka FBI/NSA/IRS/Fed etc..) shows up. 

[Grinder]

Unless WU starts suing everybody doing Bitcoin transfers. Governments might decide that this is a good pretense for getting rid of uncontrolled Bitcoin transfers, and enforce the patent.

[Bit_Happy]

Unless WU starts suing everybody doing Bitcoin transfers. Governments might decide that this is a good pretense for getting rid of uncontrolled Bitcoin transfers, and enforce the patent.

(No direct connection)
That sounds about as absurd as things they let Monsanto get away with.

[LiteCoinGuy]

they will adopt it within 2 years is my prediction 

[bryant.coleman]

Unless WU starts suing everybody doing Bitcoin transfers. Governments might decide that this is a good pretense for getting rid of uncontrolled Bitcoin transfers, and enforce the patent.

This patent will be challenged and it will be never imposed. Even if it is somehow forcibly imposed in the US, most of the other nations will not comply with it, especially those nations which are hostile to the US.

[ENEWIT]

How can this be patentable? This is already in the public domain, isn't it?

[turvarya]

makes me wonders, who decide all these patent case? I only see dumb patents coming out of US. Like a rectangle shape of a phone......

Every Country has their own Patent Bureau. So a registered Patent just Count for one Country. That means that an international Company has to patent their Invention in every single country
As far as I know(I worked in a Company that distributed a Software for Intelecutal Property) the USPTO is the worst. So, if they got the patent in the US, it doesn't mean they also get it in other countries.

[RagnarDanneskjold]

How can this be patentable? This is already in the public domain, isn't it?

 

bitcoin is one very specific implementation.   the abstract notion of digital currency isn't claimed by any pub domain systems or processes to my knowledge.  Even if WU or someone else explicitly referenced bitcoin as a mechanism for said business method application, it still would not preclude awarding them patent - in fact, citing btc as prior art might even help their case. fucking savages.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Telephone_Cases
"The Telephone Cases were a series of U.S. court cases in the 1870s and 1880s related to the invention of the telephone, which culminated in the 1888 decision of the United States Supreme Court upholding the priority of the patents belonging to Alexander Graham Bell. Those telephone patents were relied on by the American Bell Telephone Company and the Bell System –although they had also acquired critical microphone patents from Emile Berliner.
The objector (or plaintiff) in the notable Supreme Court case was initially the Western Union telegraph company, which was at the time a far larger and better financed competitor than American Bell Telephone. Western Union advocated several more recent patent claims of Daniel Drawbaugh, Elisha Gray, Antonio Meucci and Philip Reis in a bid to invalidate Alexander Graham Bell's master and subsidiary telephone patents dating back to March 1876. Had Western Union succeeded it would have immediately destroyed the Bell Telephone Company and then Western Union stood to become the world's largest telecommunications monopoly in Bell's place."

http://www.iphandbook.org/handbook/ch10/p01/
"U.S. patent law does not require the patent applicant to search for prior art (that duty falls to the patent examiner). However, if the applicant or inventor is aware of prior art, it must be included. The duty to disclose exists under the requirement that applicants act in “candor and good faith” when dealing with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) during the patent-prosecution process. A breach of this duty can be considered inequitable conduct and may result in the patent being unenforceable, but there is nothing to prevent intentional ignorance of prior art on behalf of the applicant. In fact, since 2001, when the PTO began to record which citations were added by the examiner, 40% of U.S. patents have resulted from applications in which the applicant has listed no prior art at all.16
It is unclear how thoroughly examiners search for prior art. Patents, both domestic and international, are a kind of prior art that allows for relatively easy and expeditious searching. Defensive publishing, however, depends on the ability of patent examiners to find publications in nonpatent prior art searches."

http://keithsawyer.wordpress.com/2009/06/15/can-you-patent-a-process/

[DeathAndTaxes]

There seems to be some confusion (maybe some because people don't read).  The patent is not about digital currency systems in general or a blockchain based digital currency.

The patent is regarding AN EXCHANGE which deals in the conversion of digital currencies for "real" currencies.   The patent is still nonsense and if there is any justice will be thrown out the first time WU tries to enforce it.  In no case would Bitcoins, Bitcoin transactions, the blockchain, mining, miners, mining pools or proof of work fall within the scope of the patent.

If successfully enforced traditional bitcoin exchanges like BitStamp, BTC-e, etc would be the target.  It isn't immediately clear if the scope would cover bitcoin "dealers" and non-traditional systems like coinbase, BitSimple, etc.

So those saying the genesis block is prior art are missing the point.  That would be like saying amazon can't patent "1-click" checkout because the dollar existed two hundred years prior to that, or a commodity exchange can't patent a novel order matching system because Gold has been around for thousands of years.