Comments on: Carbon software company claims broad patent

Verisae, whose software tracks and reports corporate greenhouse gas emissions, is awarded a patent in the burgeoning field of carbon accounting applications.

[NickH]

I think this is a perfect example of just how broken some aspects of the patent system are. The world could be facing global catastrophe, yet patents are granted around the concept of people compiling their greenhouse gas emmissions.

Not only is is a ridiculous thing to have granted a patent on, it is also just plain immoral.

The patent system was created to provide a incentive to drive innovation or disclose discoveries, such that the greater advantages was gained by society, and not the patent holders. In this case, its hard to see any advantage to anyone but Verisae, and I think it would not be a stretch to even say this was actually harmfull to everyone else.

[GreenPatentBlog]

I think your conclusions are premature. Perhaps through sales of the product or licensing of the technology, the patented system will have a positive impact.

[odubtaig]

I thought business methods had been ruled as invalid where patents are concerned?

[GreenPatentBlog]

Not invalid, but harder to demonstrate eligibility for patent protection.

[bj1126]

Is this the company Al Gore has invested millions in?

[mlamonica]

No. Al Gore was involved in funding Hara Software. See here: http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-10252910-54.html?tag=mncol;txt

[Joe Real]

There's a plethora of FREE PUBLIC literature that talks about all kinds of emissions from various sources, including the tracking of carbon as just one of the items. I believe the existing scientific literature has much broader knowledge and proven methodologies than this software.

For example, the free program from GREET has Life Cycle Analysis computations of various emissions from oil drilling, refining, distribution, manufacturing, building construction, cars, equipments. From the cradle to the grave analysis, both direct and indirect, all are accounted for, and it is not only carbon that is being tracked, but many other pollutants as well. There are similar programs in the University of Washington as well as University of California. There are many projects in the California Energy Commission about carbon tracking. There are worldwide standards for calculating how much the total carbon emissions where spent for one piece of staple for example, all the way to the tile on the roof. There is an international database for that you can subscribe to.

There are many carbon cycling and tracking models built for various companies. One of these excellent modeling software for such analysis,is Umberto, developed in Gmbh, Germany. It can be tied to various scientific international databases, like those of EcoSpold and Eco Invent that has been keeping inventories of various materials and activities, compiling emission data and energy use data of almost any kind of anthropogenic items you come across.

There are many such software that talks about carbon emissions, and most are free, as scientific knowledge published are public data.

I am sure you can always dig around for previous literature to invalidate whatever patent claims these guys have. The best that they can do is a copyright protection. The process of compiling data, method of collecting and analyzing, they have been done. There's previous literature to invalidate any patent claim around such topic.

But the irony of it all is that the impact of using such software on minimizing our emissions is hard to quantify.

[Joe Real]

There's a plethora of FREE PUBLIC literature that talks about all kinds of emissions from various sources, including the tracking of carbon as just one of the items. I believe the existing scientific literature has much broader knowledge and proven methodologies than this software.

For example, the free program from GREET has Life Cycle Analysis computations of various emissions from oil drilling, refining, distribution, manufacturing, building construction, cars, equipments. From the cradle to the grave analysis, both direct and indirect, all are accounted for, and it is not only carbon that is being tracked, but many other pollutants as well. There are similar programs in the University of Washington as well as University of California. There are many projects in the California Energy Commission about carbon tracking. There are worldwide standards for calculating how much the total carbon emissions where spent for one piece of staple for example, all the way to the tile on the roof. There is an international database for that you can subscribe to.

There are many carbon cycling and tracking models built for various companies. One of this excellent modeling software for such analysis is Umberto, developed in Gmbh, Germany. It can be tied to various scientific international databases, like those of EcoSpold and Eco Invent that has been keeping inventories of various materials and activities, compiling emission data and energy use data of almost any kind of anthropogenic items you come across.

There are many such software that talks about carbon emissions, and most are free, as scientific knowledge published are public data.

I am sure you can always dig around for previous literature to invalidate whatever patent claims these guys have. The best that they can do is a copyright protection. The process of compiling data, method of collecting and analyzing, they have been done. There's previous literature to invalidate any patent claim around such topic.

But the irony of it all is that the impact of using such software on minimizing our emissions is hard to quantify.

[LuvThatCO2]

Very weak. The EPA itself offers web based software for CO2 tracking, and has for many years. As have a lot of other companies. But I guess the patent office cant be bothered to research these things. Its easier for them just to approve the patent and then let the claiments fight it out in court. Small companies will now enter this realm at their own risk, because most cant afford to fight off a patent lawsuit. All these nuisance patents do nothing other than protect large corporations from being threatened by smaller ones. This lead to the exact opposite of their purpose - crushing innovation in favor of the status quo.

[solson01]

I don't think their patent has to do about publicly available papers. That would have been shot down by the patent office so quickly. Reading the patent, it looks like the software, and the patent is around deriving carbon emissions for "enterprises" through billing information from utilities, using predictive analysis to provide estimated impacts, and tracking emissions at an asset level. It looks like from the article, that assets in this case reference specific equipment.

It looks like its tied to their other patents pending on "managing enterprise assets" as well as fugitive emissions "tracking and management."

Also looks like they reference IPCC, EPA, the WRI protocol and other published tables and docs but aren't taking credit for them.

If their claims are specific to their functionality, then how does this "crush" innovation? Patents are meant to protect intellectual property and if their software, or anyone elses, has unique inventions why should they not be protected?

Also looks like they filed this in early 2007 and provide some commercial product so it looks like they patented their product before any of these other companies were even in existence.

Sure is a lot of emotion over a patent.

[contentcreator--2008]

It's seems like an attempt to patent the idea of keeping track of something, without any actual innovation --- ie it falls in the category of obviousness to anyone who wishes to do business in the area, to anyone skilled in the art of CO2 emissions and computers. Hardly a reason to be granted a legal monopoly. Compete in the marketplace, not the courts.

[odubtaig]

"That would have been shot down by the patent office so quickly."

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!