Oracle patents content management systems

[System]

From the "stupidity of patents department" comes the fact that Oracle was allowed to secure a patent on "content management systems".  Similar to the .gif patent, one has to wonder if they now intend to sue every Web site on the Internet.  

From the original article at http://lwn.net/Articles/93245/ :

Patent 6,745,238 was awarded to Oracle in June; it is titled "self service system for web site publishing." "[color=990000]The web site system permits a site administrator to construct the overall structure, design and style of the web site. This allows for a comprehensive design as well as a common look and feel for the web site. The web site system permits content for the web site to originate from multiple content contributors. The publication of content is controlled by content owners. This permits assignment of content control to those persons familiar with the content.[/color]" This patent was filed in March, 2000; prior art should, one would think, be relatively easy to find.

[minator]

prior art should, one would think, be relatively easy to find.

Systems like that existed before 2000, probably long before 2000.  If software patents manage to get through in Europe we can only hope our patent office isn't so hopelessly incompetent as the US one.

[Glaucus]

This patent makes the .gif patent seem legit. Even if Oracle doesn't intend to enforce this patent, the patent office really needs to consider the effects of issuing such a patent. Theoretically, this could shut down the internet over night if Oracle decided to - and in a way, I hope Oracle does just to highlight the stupidity of the patent office.

  - Mike

[Matt_H]

Ick. Better Oracle than Micro$oft, though.

[fuzzylogic]

I created a database driven system that does exactly this 1998/99. To me it was 'just another' web application, never thought it would be patentable.

check out a couple of customers I have that use the system.

http://www.michbiznet.com/gm
http://www.michbiznet.com/quinnsessentials

[fuzzylogic]

...that is I created it IN 1998.

[Twin]

I work in Intellectual Property, and we see patents which are invalid all the time (more so from the US than from Europe)

Don't worry, if they tried to enforce it all someone has to do is point out it is invalid (and prove it).  Then Oracle can either go away or if they persue it you can try and have the patent revoked.

[Argo]

Sounds more like a Wiki type system.

[bhoggett]

I recently read an article where the US patent system was rather aptly described as "a train wreck". 'Nuff said.

I gather some Australian bloke even managed to get a patent for... - wait for it -  ...THE WHEEL!

Sadly, there is no reason to expect any European system to be any different, particularly since the law will have been pushed through by discarding democratic decisions and debate and just waving a few thousand euros under the noses of the right politicians.

Patents in general are wrong, and software patents in particular are an abomination. Ideas should be no more patentable than human genes. Oh, wait...
 :-x  :-x  :evil:  :evil:  :evil:  :evil:  :-x  :-x

[System]

Patents in general are wrong, and software patents in particular are an abomination. Ideas should be no more patentable than human genes. Oh, wait...

I politely disagree. Without patents and trademarks, there is no reason for anyone to write anything with the purpose of selling it.  This would kill software creation (if not design and innovation).  Now that being said, do I think the patent system desperately needs an overhaul?  Yes.  Absolutely.  

In the early 1900's when it was designed, patent applications numbered in the very low thousands per year.  With a staff of 50, that was manageable and everyone could easily decide if something infringed on another patent or idea.  In 2004, they expect to see well over 16 million patent applications, yet they don't have a staff of a million people to sort it all out.