Peer to Patent, Community Patent Review

APPLICATION LIST|ARCHIVED APPLICATIONS|US PATENT CLASSIFICATIONS

Home > Archived Applications > 20070300076 > Discussion

Pre-Grant Publication Number: 20070300076

Method for generating mnemonic random passcodes

Collaborate on the process of community review for this application. Posting will not be forwarded to the USPTO. Flagging a post as an ACTION ITEM signals further research. Flagging SPAM and ABUSE helps to manage discussion. Placing double brackets around a reference to a claim or prior art will create a hyperlink to the original ex. [[claim 1]] and [[prior art 2]].

Please review the Community Code of Conduct prior to posting

Discussion (5)

View: Date|Claims|Prior Art|Action Item|

Facilitator's Comment

Action Item

Show without Noise

John Kelley (8 months ago)

Forgive me if I'm misreading the claims (I'm a peer2patent newbie), but I'd be worried about trying to claim the phrase pattern algorithm for generating lexically scannable/memorable phrases. That sort of thing has been around for a long time. One program from the 80's called Shakey generated pseudo Shakespearean prose. Here's a more contemporary example:
http://watchout4snakes.com/creativitytools/RandomWord/RandomPhrase.aspx

I didn't find patents per se on either of those, but they are certainly in the public domain.

James Grimmelmann (8 months ago)

The claims in this patent all have to do with "passcodes," So memorable/scannable generators are relevant, but what would be especially significant would be anything linking those generators to password mnemonics.

Susan Murray (8 months ago)

Yes -- James is bringing in important aspects of the claim. Also keep in mind that you need to be able to show a date prior to the filing date of the Sun application.

Jouni Seppänen (9 months ago)

Dan Kaminsky's cryptomnemonics could constitute prior art. Slides and video at
http://www.hackaday.com/2006/10/27/dan-kaminskys-cryptomnemonics/

James Grimmelmann (8 months ago)

The presentation was in October 2006, which is after the patent's filing date in June 2006. This talk itself can't count as prior art, but if there's earlier documentation of Dan's work, that could be

0 days left