innovators-patent-agreement

When I was working there I implemented my patent during a hack week (given a set of follows return the list of matching tweet ids, very similar to his prototype): https://patents.google.com/patent/US20120136905A1/en (licensed under Innovators Patent Agreement, https://github.com/twitter/innovators-patent-agreement) I could have definitely served all the chronological timeline requests on a normal server with lower latency that the 1.1 home timeline API. There are a bunch of numbers in the calculations that he is doing that are off but not by an order of magnitude. The big issue is that since I left back then Twitter has added ML ads, ML timeline and other features that make current Twitter much harder to fit on a machine than 2013 Twitter.

"Business models for open-source software" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_models_for_open-sourc... ... - https://github.com/google - https://github.com/GoogleCloudPlatform - https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes (Apache 2.0) - https://github.com/uber - https://github.com/apple (Swift is Apache 2.0) - https://github.com/microsoft - https://github.com/github - https://github.com/twitter - https://github.com/twitter/innovators-patent-agreement - https://github.com/facebook ... - "GNU Social" (GNU AGPL v3) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_social ... http://choosealicense.com/appendix/ has a table for comparison of open source software licenses. http://tinyurl.com/p6mka3k describes Open Source Governance in a chart with two axes (Cathedral / Bazaar , Benevolent Dictator / Formal Meritocracy) ... as distinct from https://en.wikiped

What are your thoughts on things like https://github.com/twitter/innovators-patent-agreement ?

You should lobby [[zuck]] to use the Innovators Patent Agreement developed by Twitter legal found here: https://github.com/twitter/innovators-patent-agreement

Twitter have a public agreement to use patents only defensively, so hopefully these won't be used offensively now. https://github.com/twitter/innovators-patent-agreement

Even if the only outcome was to identify the root company and individuals profiting from the suit it would help. It would then be easier to craft ToS of that would exclude them from the internet entirely. In the interim, get your company to adopt the Innovators Patent Agreement: https://github.com/twitter/innovators-patent-agreement

I realize that we all have strong opinions about the topic of software patents, but in an effort to radiate more light and less heat, I think it is important to understand the official Twitter position on this topic as well. Introducing the Innovator's Patent Agreement Note: Emphasis is mine. "We will implement the IPA later this year, and it will apply to all patents issued to our engineers, both past and present." [1] "The Innovators Patent Agreement (IPA) is a new way to do patent assignment that keeps control in the hands of engineers and designers. It is a commitment from a company to its employees that patents can only be used for defensive purposes. The company will not use the patents in offensive litigation without the permission of the inventors. This control flows with the patents, so if the company sells the patents to others,

Do you think that twitter's innovators patent agreement fails at addressing your concerns about defensive patents? > The Innovators Patent Agreement (IPA) is a new way to do patent assignment that keeps control in the hands of engineers and designers. It is a commitment from a company to its employees that patents can only be used for defensive purposes. The company will not use the patents in offensive litigation without the permission of the inventors. This control flows with the patents, so if the company sells the patents to others, the assignee can only use the patents as the inventor intended. And the agreement text: https://github.com/twitter/innovators-patent-agreement/blob/...

It's also on Github for comment: https://github.com/twitter/innovators-patent-agreement

On GitHub: https://github.com/twitter/innovators-patent-agreement