Few announcements have rocked the computer industry more than Compton's NewMedia crowing about its newly granted patent for what amounts to inventing multimedia. In particular, Compton's patent (5,241,671) covers "a search system in which a multimedia database consisting of text, picture, audio and animated data is searched through multiple graphical and textual entry paths."
Sound familiar? It should, because it describes the underpinnings of just about every multimedia or interactive database on the market or under development. Compton's, with patent in hand, will license the patent for from 1 to 3 percent of gross revenues of your interactive products or services. Although the patent will likely be challenged through the U.S. Patent Office's re-examination process or courts, there's no question who will be king of the interactive hill if Compton's defends and holds onto this patent.
The criteria for granting a patent is that an invention be novel and nonobvious to skilled practitioners of the art. With this in mind, DDJ reviewed the 40-page patent document, looking for uniqueness. But that's not what we found. For instance, the patent describes a multientry search system into a multimedia database. As contributing editor Tom Genereaux points out, this technique was (and is) used by the Prodigy System and its forebears. The Prodigy database is a multikeyed tree of intermixed graphics and text. That the medium supports a higher level of graphical detail is irrelevant in this case: Prodigy is constrained by the need to deliver its images over telephone lines using least-common-denominator modems.
The technique claimed by Compton's has also been used in the Orion system at MCC (first described in 1985) and the EDC system at General Electric (described in 1982). In fact, multiple-keyed game discs date back to the mid '80s: Dragon's Lair (a game based on a laser-disc technology) used a similar system to deliver keyed sequences of moving images.
The menuing system described in Compton's patent has been used in the Star system from Xerox and in document-imaging systems developed at Wang. Again, that a higher-bandwidth medium is now available is irrelevant. Keyed animation playbacks have been in common use in graphics laboratories and companies for a decade, and the part of the patent that purports to be unique--the keying of text and graphics--was used by Star and Wang workstations to access images.
Nor does the patent necessarily pass the nonobviousness test: A "textual entry path means and said graphical entry path means_for assisting a user in searching said graphical and textual information" is something we're all familiar with--a user interface. But don't take my word for it: We've uploaded the bulk of the patent's text into the DDJ Forum on CompuServe so that you can check it out yourself. While we haven't included the flowcharts, there's still enough legalese to give you a taste of the patent.
What Compton's has to gain from this is obvious--money, and lots of it, particularly if the company cuts deals with cable TV and telephone companies. However, the patent licenses themselves may be a drop in the bit bucket compared to what the company really hopes to gain. Compton's is willing to forgive royalties if you license their SDK, form a strategic alliance with them, or let them be the exclusive distributor of your interactive media. Getting a hammerlock on the distribution channels is where the real money is, and the patent can be a carrot or stick to make this possible.
But Compton's road may still be rocky. Not only will the company have to deal with the inevitable challenges to its patent by competitors who have equally deep pockets (Microsoft, for one), the multimedia giant wanna-be may also have to worry about Britannica, its former owner. Compton's NewMedia is owned by the Tribune Publishing Company, which bought Compton's from Encyclopedia Britannica in 1993 for $56 million, a surprising amount approximately twice the level of revenues. Reportedly, Britannica, which still co-owns the patent, is miffed over Compton's broad claims and the way in which the patent was announced.
Compton's patent isn't the real problem, however. When you get down to it, the issue is how patents are granted. There's no question that all developers and inventors deserve intellectual property protection, but even U.S. Patent and Trademark Commissioner Bruce Lehman admits that far too many existing software patents should never have been granted. Consequently, the Patent Office is for the first time undertaking a review of the software-patent process, starting with a pair of public hearings entitled, "Request for Comments on Intellectual Property Protection for Software-Related Inventions." These hearings will take place at the San Jose Convention Center (San Jose, California) on January 26--27, 1994, and Crystal Forum (Arlington, Virginia) on February 10--11, 1994. No matter how you feel about software patents, here's your chance--maybe your only chance--to really be heard.
Jonathan Erickson
editor-in-chief
Copyright © 1994, Dr. Dobb's Journal