King34Maine Posted July 23, 2019 Share Posted July 23, 2019 6 hours ago, JohnnieWalker said: Vinnie Who's Vinnie??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shuz Posted July 23, 2019 Share Posted July 23, 2019 Who did leak the patent? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zedy44 Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 33 minutes ago, Shuz said: Who did leak the patent? Filed patent applications (i.e. patent pending) in the US are publicly available. Just need to hunt for what you are looking for and unfortunately many patent applications are quite ambiguous by design. They are often submitted in legal language that greatly expands on the design of the patent. What started as 2 pages at your desk turns into 60 pages when the attorneys are done with it. Shuz 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panmores Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 The slightly whitening Brad looks great with his beard - also this opening photo Bloomberg posted, forever young Brad WillGetThere 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmbartley Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 There's much more out there if you look... Ripple set up an office in Luxembourg and has filed patents under that subsidiary (https://patents.justia.com/assignee/ripple-luxembourg-s-a). Makes you wonder if they've filed patents from other offices as well... 402 Technologies S.A. is a patent holding company that seems to be owned by Ripple or Ripple affiliates (http://patentvue.com/2018/01/12/blockchain-patent-filings-dominated-by-financial-services-industry/ , https://opencorporates.com/companies/lu/B198312). Here are some other interesting patents: Stefan's name is misspelled: https://patents.justia.com/patent/20190087598 This Accenture patent cites Stefan and Ripple heavily: https://www.lens.org/lens/patent/105-607-665-958-650 Wells Fargo mentions XRP: https://www.lens.org/lens/patent/176-057-244-124-991/fulltext cryptoxrp, King34Maine, Benchmark and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Pablo Posted July 24, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted July 24, 2019 Maybe it's my cynical, reptilian lawyer brain but I read this very differently. This patent is equivalent to Craig Wright claiming a patent over the internet. Combined with Sony's patent of the minidisc. Ridiculous and fruitless? Yes. But still really irritating for many. Including, I suspect, Brad. Here's my thinking: The patent seems to attempt a re-invention based on a xRapid/xCurrent/Hyperledger mash-up. If you read the flow-chart in Fig 4, it looks like your average PoW blockchain solution. The references to Ripple are odd because it keeps referring to a prefunded “ripple” settlement scheme in Fig 6 and then treats the Ripple DLT as a last mile settlement step through the ILP in Fig 7. That looks like xRapid. They even make the ballsy claim to be Introducing Real-Time Settlement. Hang on, where's the novelty in any of this? AYFKM? I suspect the real reason for Brad's demeanour is that the BoA is defensively patenting across Ripple's own technology roadmap and Brad was chuckling at the brazen effort to do so. He admitted he was "surprised" and I think he was referring to more than just the timing of patent application. As an aside, most banks take a default position in negotiations with their IT suppliers to own, outright, any new technology, patents and patentable inventions discovered or developed during an engagement. Most suppliers push back hard and the parties reach a compromise based on (A) the uniqueness of the bespoke solution for the particular bank and (B) whether the supplier can re-use any discoveries to increase the value of its own technology for future clients. Is there anything Ripple can do about this patent? Sue BoA? Challenge the patent application? Not really as these are sure to backfire... Hence the chuckle and raised eyebrows. If we look at the other side of this ledger, does BoA have the wherewithal and tech chops to do anything with the patent? Nope. But it certainly puts a spanner in the works for any other bank trying to commercialise or monopolise blockchain based settlement networks. Congratulations BoA, you've just created another walled garden. The whole point is to create open networks and get the benefit of network effects and scale efficiencies, you numbnuts! OK, where does this leave us and why am I still smiling here at the keyboard? Because one of the world's major banks is hustling to stake out some territory in the very space Ripple is already working. This is customer FOMO in full effect. Maybe BoA even has a legitimate concern about potential patent litigation that stymies the use of the XRPL and blockchain based settlement networks. I would like to think Ripple has that covered off in their various patents but the bank may have a lot at stake here and is in deeper than many of us realise. Spartaksus, Johno, cryptoxrp and 8 others 4 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Javim777 Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 58 minutes ago, Pablo said: Maybe it's my cynical, reptilian lawyer brain but I read this very differently. This patent is equivalent to Craig Wright claiming a patent over the internet. Combined with Sony's patent of the minidisc. Ridiculous and fruitless? Yes. But still really irritating for many. Including, I suspect, Brad. Here's my thinking: The patent seems to attempt a re-invention based on a xRapid/xCurrent/Hyperledger mash-up. If you read the flow-chart in Fig 4, it looks like your average PoW blockchain solution. The references to Ripple are odd because it keeps referring to a prefunded “ripple” settlement scheme in Fig 6 and then treats the Ripple DLT as a last mile settlement step through the ILP in Fig 7. That looks like xRapid. They even make the ballsy claim to be Introducing Real-Time Settlement. Hang on, where's the novelty in any of this? AYFKM? I suspect the real reason for Brad's demeanour is that the BoA is defensively patenting across Ripple's own technology roadmap and Brad was chuckling at the brazen effort to do so. He admitted he was "surprised" and I think he was referring to more than just the timing of patent application. As an aside, most banks take a default position in negotiations with their IT suppliers to own, outright, any new technology, patents and patentable inventions discovered or developed during an engagement. Most suppliers push back hard and the parties reach a compromise based on (A) the uniqueness of the bespoke solution for the particular bank and (B) whether the supplier can re-use any discoveries to increase the value of its own technology for future clients. Is there anything Ripple can do about this patent? Sue BoA? Challenge the patent application? Not really as these are sure to backfire... Hence the chuckle and raised eyebrows. If we look at the other side of this ledger, does BoA have the wherewithal and tech chops to do anything with the patent? Nope. But it certainly puts a spanner in the works for any other bank trying to commercialise or monopolise blockchain based settlement networks. Congratulations BoA, you've just created another walled garden. The whole point is to create open networks and get the benefit of network effects and scale efficiencies, you numbnuts! OK, where does this leave us and why am I still smiling here at the keyboard? Because one of the world's major banks is hustling to stake out some territory in the very space Ripple is already working. This is customer FOMO in full effect. Maybe BoA even has a legitimate concern about potential patent litigation that stymies the use of the XRPL and blockchain based settlement networks. I would like to think Ripple has that covered off in their various patents but the bank may have a lot at stake here and is in deeper than many of us realise. Thanks for your analysis. This is exactly what I was thinking about regarding this mysterious patent. Pablo 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johno Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 2 hours ago, Javim777 said: Thanks for your analysis. This is exactly what I was thinking about regarding this mysterious patent. Unlike me. I was just thinking I would like to have the capacity to think of the things in Pablo’s analysis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now