[AccessD] Database Patent

Charlotte Foust cfoust at infostatsystems.com
Mon Sep 10 10:44:30 CDT 2007


Jack,

Thanks for clarifying the situation. The client may have the greatest
thing since sliced bread, but it's unlikely to be unique.  Most of us
don't bother with copyright/patent applications because any competent
programmer could come up with virtually identical code for the same
problem.  It isn't so much that it's in public domain as that there are
a finite number of ways to deal effectively with a problem, and the
developer community tends to share their methods, so eventually the code
is homogenized into something we could all claim as our own.  If the
client created a database engine, that's a different product entirely,
but I suspect you've been sold a pup.

Charlotte Foust 

-----Original Message-----
From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Jack Stone
Sent: Saturday, September 08, 2007 11:03 AM
To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving
Subject: Re: [AccessD] Database Patent

All,

Hello, my name is Jack Stone, new to this forum.  I am the patent,
trademark, and copyright attorney that Rocky referred to that has the
client who got the subject patent, and on whose patent my name is listed
as the attorney of record.  First, I want to express how extremely
impressed I am, not only with the vast wealth of knowledge you guys
collectively have, but also with how you are all so willing to take the
time to share it, for which I am very grateful.

As a patent attorney, I am certainly no expert in databases.  I just
represent a client before the Patent Office with whatever invention
he/she has, and do my level best to get a patent for them.  And with all
the prior art that is apparently out there, I guess I did a good job
with this one.

So while I may not be an expert in databases, after reading the myriad
of email responses that this patent has elicited, I am starting get the
distinct impression that just maybe the Patent Office granted a patent
that should not have been granted (it would not be the first time).
However, in the defense of the Patent Office, when deciding on novelty
(and "non-obviousness"), all the "prior art" they generally consider, or
have the resources to consider, are other patents at the Patent Office.
Hence, what some responses have alluded to as many people not pursuing
patents when they could have, and as a result, the Patent Office not
being fully aware of all the technology out there when granting a patent
is, unfortunately, correct.  If an inventor is aware of any prior art,
he does have a duty to disclose it to the Patent Office, but my client
was evidently not aware of any (he needs to join your forum).

Having said all that, if the invention/technology is out there, but is
not in the public domain, i.e., is kept as a trade secret, then it may
be possible for a second inventor to get a patent on the invention if
he/she subsequently independently develops it, and then charge the
earlier inventor using it as a trade secret with infringement.  Classic
example is if someone independently comes up with the formula for Coca
Cola, they could get a patent on it and shut down Coca Cola (that is, if
they didn't have an "unfortunate" accident and end up face down in a
ditch somewhere).  But it sounds like the prior technology has not been
kept as a trade secret, so my client may be SOL on that count.

But the patent may still have some nuisance value, that is, even if it
could ultimately be invalidated, it may cost a defendant a million
dollars to do that, and so such a defendant may instead settle for
$250,000 to be rid of it or even buy it.  Who knows?  I have seen
stranger things happen.

In this case, the client defaulted on payment of about $40,000 to our
firm, and we obtained a court judgment against him for that amount.  The
client says he cannot pay us, so maybe we would be trying to squeeze
blood from a turnip, which ain't gonna happen.  So we were considering
obtaining title to the patent, if it has any value.  If it did, and any
of you could help us distill that value from it, we would be pleased to
let you keep whatever we can get for the patent in excess of the
$40,000, or maybe work out some other arrangement if you would prefer.

BTW, FWIW, my client is actually using the patented idea at
http://www.webmusicdb.com, not exactly another YouTube.

Re Drew's comment below, he is absolutely correct (except for a "design"
which can sometimes be copyrighted), i.e., "You can't copyright an idea.
You can copyright code, at any time, or a book (Actually, the text
within the book).  But an idea or design must be patented."  But the
problem with a copyright, especially on code, is that it is much more
narrow than a patent, and so is generally easy to design around, and so
is generally of little value.  So we almost always advise clients to
seek a patent on a function performed by code, and rarely ever advise
someone to seek a copyright on code.

Jack Stone
Scheef & Stone, L.L.P.
5956 Sherry Lane, Suite 1400
Dallas, Texas 75225
Direct 214.706.4207
Main 214.706.4200
Fax 214.706.4242
jack.stone at scheefandstone.com

-----Original Message-----
From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Drew Wutka
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2007 11:00 AM
To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving
Subject: Re: [AccessD] Database Patent

You can't copyright an idea.  You can copyright code, at any time, or a
book (Actually, the text within the book).  But an idea or design must
be patented.

Drew

-----Original Message-----
From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Julie Reardon
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2007 10:16 AM
To: 'Access Developers discussion and problem solving'
Subject: Re: [AccessD] Database Patent

I'm really surprised that the US patent office granted this patent.
Maybe
no one else ever applied for one?

I do have four databases registered with the US copyright office.  It
seems to me that the copyright office may be a better alternative for
this type of application.

Julie Reardon
PRO-SOFT of NY, Inc.
44 Public Square, Suite 5
Watertown, NY  13601
Phone:  315.785.0319
Fax:  315.785.0323
NYS IT Contract#CMT026A
NYS Certified Woman-Owned Business
www.pro-soft.net

-----Original Message-----
From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Charlotte
Foust
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2007 11:08 AM
To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving
Subject: Re: [AccessD] Database Patent

Rocky,

I have to chime in on this because it doesn't sound new to me either.  I
didn't even think such a concept could be patented, since there are
built-in provisions in most, is not all, database languages for adding
or dropping fields, changing datatypes, etc. I have to wonder what kind
of database experience this gentleman has, based on his stated
assumptions.

Charlotte Foust

-----Original Message-----
From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Rocky Smolin
at Beach Access Software
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 9:18 PM
To: 'Access Developers discussion and problem solving'
Cc: 'Jack Stone'
Subject: Re: [AccessD] Database Patent

Shamil:

Thanks for your response.  So you see nothing  unique in this patent?
(BTW, the patent is not pending, but has been granted.) Does this look
like "old"
technology to you?  Is it obsolete technology based on what you describe
below as the current methods of implementing changes in the datamodel?

Just out of curiosity - So during the time that the new datamodel is
being tested in the "shadow" database, am I correct in assuming that the
real-time changes that are going on in the production database are also
happening in the "shadow" database?  That it's a mirror?

Rocky



 	
	

-----Original Message-----
From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Shamil
Salakhetdinov
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 8:55 PM
To: 'Access Developers discussion and problem solving'
Subject: Re: [AccessD] Database Patent

Rocky,

I'd think that all the ideas on different adaptable database structures
on conceptual, logical, physical levels were invented in 70-ies-80ies.
Maybe even 60-ies when first flat file/VSAM/hierarchical databases were
introduced and used...

There were zillion of articles written in scientific areas, there were
many research projects - I'd suppose that all these ideas are free to
use because they came from open sources as a result of research of many
scientists/researchers from many countries and these ideas have been
since implemented in many free and commercials DBMSs we use these
days...

If I did get correctly the subject pending patent idea - it reminds me
the principle, which is the core principle of implementing what is
called ADABAS
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adabas ...

I'd also note that there is no any reliable company these days which
would put its online database into maintenance mode for more that a
couple of minutes and only in very unforeseen contexts: I mean when
datamodel changes happen they are done on a shadow copy of the main
database(s), then these changes all are tested online in what is usually
called UAT environments (User Acceptance Test) - when all the tests pass
then in a fraction of second the main database is "replaced" with its
upgraded shadow copy - e.g.
for properly developed ASP.NET 2.0 application switching backends can be
done by just fixing one web.config file - even switching from say MS
Access to MS SQL to Oracle backend - of course for the latter switch
there should be also DAL level code replacement but again it can be done
in "hot" mode if that will be requested and paid for the development of
such "hot" mode switching... )

--
Shamil
 
-----Original Message-----
From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Rocky Smolin
at Beach Access Software
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2007 3:48 AM
To: 'Access Developers discussion and problem solving'
Subject: [AccessD] Database Patent

Dear List:
 
A client who is a patent and trademark attorney is interested in
opinions on a patent - basically it's a way to update databases
on-the-fly by disconnecting the data from the data definition. 
 
You can download the patent by going to this web page: 

http://www.pat2pdf.org/
 

and entering the patent number 7003524.

I guess I'm looking for opinions on whether this is a solution to a
problem that exists and whether there is something of value in this
approach. 

I know there's some deep database design talent on this list so I'm
thinking this is the best place to start the research.

Here's a teaser.  From the patent:

TECHNICAL FIELD

The invention relates generally to databases and, more particularly, to
the underlying schematic structure of databases.

BACKGROUND

Large databases running in publicly accessible environments are
notorious for their inability to accommodate change. In today's world of
massive access to large databases via the Internet, it is increasingly
common to encounter messages to the effect of "database is down for
maintenance"
instead of the actual data requested.

In a conventional database environment, when a change needs to be made
to the schematic structure of a database, the data in the database must
be extracted from the database in the old structure and re-written to
the database in the new structure. If new data were to be inserted into
the database while said changes were being effected, it could cause
unpredictable effects to the database. Such effects could include
corruption of pre-existing data, misapplication of database changes,
misalignment of data relative to internal data boundaries, or any number
of problems that could render the database effectively incoherent. Such
results are untenable in most live database deployments.

Conventionally, the most common solution to the problem of updating
during changes to the schematic structure is to simply disallow it.

Conventional databases also require a tight bind between the data type
and the data storage. Users require that the data they request be
presented in a manner consistent with the expected usage of the data.
For example, a date may be stored in the database as a string of decimal
digits (e.g., 20010303), but to present the data to the user in its raw
form would be unacceptable. A conventional computer user requires that
it be presented in a manner consistent with its usage (e.g., Saturday,
3, Mar. 2001. In order for the date to be presented in a manner
consistent with its usage, the database must carry type-related
information along with each unit of data.

Binding between data and type is conventionally accomplished by
organizing the data into metaphorical rows and columns. Rows of data are
divided into pre-defined columns, where each column represents a
particular data type and/or use of the data. Such data/type binding
allows a computer program to make assumptions and inferences about the
data appropriate to its type.
Additional rows of data may be readily added to a database. However, if
a new column is desired in a database, then the database must typically
be made unavailable for a period of time so that data can be converted
into the new format. Modifications to pre-existing programs would have
to be made, along with the requisite testing and debugging necessary to
validate any new code.

It is also worth noting that in conventional databases there tends to be
redundancy in the storage of data. For example, cities, states, zip
codes, and telephone area codes may be repeated among a number of rows
of data.
Such redundancy results in inefficient use of memory.

In light of the foregoing, it is apparent that there is a need for a
system and method for modifying the schematic structure of a database
without making the database unavailable for the entry of new data.
Preferably, such a system and method would, among other things, also
minimize redundancy of data in a database.

SUMMARY

The present invention, accordingly, provides a database in which an
application program accesses data stored in a records data set (RDS) and
a categories data set (CDS). The RDS contains at least one RDS entry
having a data field configured for representing data. The CDS contains
at least one CDS entry configured for being associated with at least one
RDS entry and having at least one data type field sufficient to describe
the type of data contained by the at least one associated RDS entry.

The invention thus provides a database whereby data is isolated from its
definition, thus avoiding the problems associated with the
rows-and-columns model enumerated above, and permits the underlying
schematic form of the database to be changed based on modifications to
the CDS, without requiring any actual changes to the schematic structure
of the RDS or the underlying database. By virtue of this same isolation
it is also possible to reduce data redundancy with varying levels of
granularity and create an object-oriented data model.


MTIA

Rocky

 	
	

--
AccessD mailing list
AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com

--
AccessD mailing list
AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.485 / Virus Database: 269.13.8/993 - Release Date: 9/6/2007
3:18 PM
 

--
AccessD mailing list
AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com

--
AccessD mailing list
AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com

--
AccessD mailing list
AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com The information contained in
this transmission is intended only for the person or entity to which it
is addressed and may contain II-VI Proprietary and/or II-VI
BusinessSensitve material. If you are not the intended recipient, please
contact the sender immediately and destroy the material in its entirety,
whether electronic or hard copy. You are notified that any review,
retransmission, copying, disclosure, dissemination, or other use of, or
taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or
entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited.


-- 
AccessD mailing list
AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com

-- 
AccessD mailing list
AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com




More information about the AccessD mailing list