The self proclaimed "leader" in Pedigree software is at it again.  Previously, they claimed they were working on filing a patent for routines to "uppercase" the first letter of the words in a dog's name.  When information was sent to them showing numerous public domain shareware programs with "Proper-Case" routines and information about this feature being included in K9-Ped for years the claim was withdrawn and no patent was issued.

Now they are claiming this status for case, space and punctuation insensitive name searches.  K9-Ped has used this feature since the very first version.

The claim for "sounds like" or fuzzy search is just as questionable.  The idea of "sound-like" search pre-dates computers.  K9-Ped has "fuzzy logic" features in the "search for duplicates" function that also has been available for years.  The National Institute of Science & Technology has multiple listings for phonetic coding or "sounds like" search algorithms including Soundex & Metaphone (http://www.nist.gov/dads/HTML/metaphone.html). One of the links on this site provides the following about "Soundex" and its use 126 years ago.

First applied to the 1880 census, Soundex is a phonetic index, not a strictly alphabetical one. Its key feature is that it codes surnames (last names) based on the way a name sounds rather than on how it is spelled. For example, surnames that sound the same but are spelled differently, like Smith and Smyth, have the same code and are indexed together.

The original claim had "patent-application-pending". It has been changed to "patent -pending".  According to the US Patent Office "Some persons mark articles sold with the terms “Patent Applied For” or “Patent Pending.” These phrases have no legal effect, but only give information that an application for patent has been filed in the USPTO. The protection afforded by a patent does not start until the actual grant of the patent."


At initial design time the K9-Ped developer realized case, space and punctuation insensitivity was not only useful but required to avoid duplicate entries.  In the early 1990's using a "packed" value (Uppercase, no spaces & no punctuation) for the database "key" did not meet the "Novelty And Non-Obviousness" requirement for patent acceptance.

Since phonetic coding technology been used for decades and  these routines are very common in many public domain shareware products, thinking about applying for a patent for a "sounds like" search would be absurd.  Also, granting "Data Processing: Software Development, Installation, and Management" patents seems to be fairly rare with less the 0.2% of the patents issued falling into this catagory. (http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/ac/ido/oeip/taf/cbcby.htm)

So if you see anybody claiming "These powerful technologies are patent-application-pending (or patent-pending).  Nobody else has it; and they won't have it!" remember:

• K9-Ped has had similar forms of these features for years.  The "insensitivity" search was built into the basic database structure of the program from the very first version.
  
• "Patent-pending" has no legal effect.  Only after the patent is issued can someone legitimately claim "they won't have it!".
• Claiming a "new technology" status for decades old software routines may cause you to question the technology status of the program.

Two years ago (October 28,2994) the owner of this self proclaimed "Leading Pedigree software" stated in sworn bankruptcy documents "[The program] needs a ground-up rewrite within 12 months".  Did that happen?  Their website has not had any announcement of any "ground-up" rewrite the owner said was needed 24 months ago.  It appears that the only changes announced are trade marking names for decades old software routines and claiming "patent-pending" and unique status for public domain software routines provided by others for years.