Hacker News Reader

Comment by jmugan | Hacker News Reader

Funny. I filed a patent for this same thing in 2015 and it was rejected for not being novel. https://patents.google.com/patent/US20160332079A1/en

View on HN

From looking at your application, you were not patenting a chatbot, but a vastly different thing. The word "chat" only appears once in your application, but only as an input source, not a conversation tool.

But is a chat bot novel?

Some are. It depends on how they work. Remember utility patents are about how things work, not what they are.

There are probably 1000's of issued patents for chat bots each one claiming different hows.

The chatbot part was a subset of what I was doing.

It was the patent application supporting Happy Cyborg https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/20140927011544-42285562-you-a...

The patent app you linked doesn't mention a chatbot in any claims, which is all that matters. Saying it was for some project has zero relevance to the patent system.

Care to list the claims in your patent you think are the same as the MS claims?

"Chatting" is just another kind of action.

So by not mentioning something in patent claims this nonetheless would have patented it?

I don't quite follow. The link to the blog post was just for background information. Let's agree to disagree and leave it at that.

It was probably rejected by patentbot2000.

I haven't looked at the google patent listings before. What are the 'Similar Documents' at the bottom about? Black Twitter? https://patents.google.com/scholar/10521028305159378504

Reply on news.ycombinator.com