Comment by denzil_correa | Hacker News Reader

Comment by denzil_correa | Hacker News Reader

For people to understand more on the context of this link posted, "Kim Dotcom accuses Google, Facebook, and Twitter of violating his two-step security patent" [0]. You may also find his Twitter feed interesting [1].

    I never sued them. I believe in sharing knowledge & ideas for the good of society. But I     
    might sue them now cause of what the U.S. did to me


    Google, Facebook, Twitter, I ask you for help. We are all in the same DMCA boat. Use my 
    patent for free. But please help funding my defense.

[0] http://www.theverge.com/2013/5/22/4357500/kim-dotcom-claims-...

[1] https://twitter.com/KimDotcom

Patent for free if they fund his defense? Pretty sure that's not my definition of "free"

One dose of extortion coming right up!

I think he's about to learn that these companies have more and better patent lawyers than god and more money than the devil to pay for an unending trial.

If a schmuck like me can pop that balloon, I hate to think what a half-competent patent lawyer could do.

The article on The Verge says

    While there are likely many who could lay claim to an innovation such as two-step, 
    Dotcom's patent — filed under his birth name, Kim Schmitz — appears to hold some water. 
    It claims priority back to 1997, which would make it difficult to invalidate, and has 
    wide coverage. Despite its age, it illustrates the current concept of two-step 
    authentication by detailing how a secondary access code could be sent via pager or SMS.

I'm not sure what to believe. A patent lawyer's opinion on HN would help perhaps?

My point, to summarise:

authentication != authorisation.

From which it follows:

Two-factor authentication != two-factor authorisation.

The patent does not cover authentication, on my reading.

He's a humanist!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com