6 ms·

I don't have the time to read it and verify but could this be a patent for the algorithm? If so, does it make any difference anyway? http://www.google.com/pate

• rwmj 12y ago
  Interesting that the patent was filed 17 years after initial publication of the algorithm.
  • networked 12y ago
    The patent is for Metaphone 3, a new version of the algorithm that was released in October 2009 and improves on the previous ones. The differences are why the Ruby gem, which already has Metaphone and Double Metaphone implemented, got a discussion going about porting Metaphone 3 from Java. Edit: wording.
    • deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
    • charlesdm 12y ago
      If he's the holder of that patent, "Lawrence Brooke Frank Philips", then he can enforce it no? At least in the United States.
• mistercow 12y ago
  Minor point, but that's actually an application, not a patent. It might be a patent later, but it isn't yet.
• pronoiac 12y ago
  I thought best practice for software developers was to not look at patents?
  • chippy 12y ago
    Especially if they are working in the same field. I think so, yes.
• arfar 12y ago
  That patent has actually been abandoned. Can't find any continuations filed on it either. So as far as I can tell, he doesn't have any patents on the algorithm/process