Google Invented Reading Lists?
Well-known podcaster and RSS pioneer Dave Winer is critical about Google's reading list patent. In a recent blog post, Winer explains how Google filed a patent laying claim to "a method of subscribing to a collection of feeds". Winer's own Scripting News discusses OPML file subscriptions or "reading lists" much earlier than the patent application and from what I understand, BlogBridge has also supported dynamic reading lists for years.
The Google invention idea seems similar to the company's Bundles product - a tool that allows users to create Google Reader lists and share them as either a link, widget or subscription.
Nevertheless, Winer makes the assertion that Google should state the process of invention and apologize if the company is disproved as the inventor and found to have stolen from the RSS community. Given Winer's prominence as a member of the RSS community, it's understandable why he should feel frustrated.
If you've got examples of "reading list" style references that pre-date the Google patent application, let us know in the comments below.
Photo Credit: Mykl Roventine
Share
Facebook
Comments
Subscribe to comments for this post OR Subscribe to comments for all ReadWriteWeb posts
I guess this is a useful function.
I would like to share my reading with friends.
Marshall, I'm really not livid. That's a very strong word. In fact I have a mix of emotions. I'm happy in a way because this will get the tech world to think about reading lists. I've been having trouble getting them to do that.
That's how these things really work. And I'm optimistic that when Google's lawyers really understand that this is much like an open source community, and that what they've done is equivalent to taking the source code of a GPL application and made modifications that they didn't share with everyone, and may well try to commercialize, that they will change their standing.
It's not a good idea to characterize people's emotional state with such charged words. It polarizes things right off the start. Maybe "frustrated" or "sad" -- but livid? No way.
Please correct that. Thanks.
Furthermore I do not feel slighted. These ideas reflect how you would feel if you were in my shoes. But that's not fair to me. Ask how I feel. Don't presume to know.
Dave, I think you raised an important criticism and don't think this should be a story about you being 'livid.'
Dave, I've replaced the words "livid" with "critical", and "slighted" with "frustrated." Hope that is better, apologies if we caused offense.
I read your post and it's really amazing. and wondering how, throughout history, the inventor and the patent holder are often different folks.
Dave, I respect your work immensely, my apologies if the wording in the article was too strong.
My first Reading List Feb 8 2006 (which I called glist), like blog for weblog, since it was actually a listeninGLIST
URL for an old glist: http://everybuddy.org/2006/02/08/tech-podcast-glist/
http://www.scripting.com/stories/2009/09/18/googleOpenCommunitiesPaten.html
Someone is always trying to attack Google whether it's a book lawsuit or a patent dispute. I think people just hate to someone or something on top for too long, which is why other search engines and people are trying so hard to compete with Google, or attack the company with lawsuits.
Unless Google came up with the specific idea, and documentably did it first - then they don't have a case. Obviously, when you have a company as large as Google, they are going to do some things to push people around a bit if they feel that one of their trademarks or something they feel they have an exclusive right to is being threatened. Granted, any business has a right to pursue redress if their trademark is being infringed on, but you can get a situation where...I don't know, Facebook sues MySpace for the idea of social networking, or Ford sues Chevrolet for selling cars when they did it first, or something along those lines.
And yes, the patent holder and the owner are often not the same person. A lot of people, for instance, know that Edison wasn't the first to invent the incandescent light bulb, merely the first to patent it - and he beat the other fellow by a window of a few days.