Part of it is obvious. Part of it may be trivial. However, a key element in Nomadix' patent is the ability to transform the connection with a computer without any user configuration. That means it works even with a static IP address on someone's laptop. Much of their patent technology may carry over to WiFi. But the patent doesn't seem to speak about WiFi in particular.
See below... Pay close attention to this phrase, "the user computer remains configured for accessing the home network." Also, the patent text describes several existing portal systems and mentions AOL's portal by name. Whether or not the patent covers WiFi portals, or even captive portals in general will be up to the patent lawyers. And of course, it's up to Nomadix if they even want to enforce it. Here's an excerpt from the patent text: "According to another embodiment of the invention, a method for redirecting users having transparent computer access to a destination network is disclosed, wherein the users otherwise have access to a home network through home network settings resident on the users' computers, and wherein the users can access the destination network without altering the home network settings. The method includes receiving at a gateway device a request from a user for access to a destination address, such as an Internet address, and redirecting the user to a portal page, wherein the user computer remains configured for accessing the home network, and wherein no additional configuration software need be installed on the user's computer." -Mike O. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of jo3 Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2004 12:02 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [SOCALWUG] New License Fee May Face Hotspot Operators But again, this is obvious and trivial. How can the USPTO be so simple minded? The trend toward software patents is dangerous, and it is a very slippery slope... Joseph Hsieh wrote: > Although I don't agree with the "patent", I just wanted to clarify that > a web redirect is completely different then the implementation of a > gateway redirect commonly used in most wireless gateways. > > A gateway redirect spoofs the DNS and "hijacks" the intended destination > page. It therefore acts as a guardian to OTHER sites' pages as opposed > to a website redirect where it can only protect its own content. > > ~Joseph > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Chris Kelly > Sent: Monday, January 26, 2004 11:35 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [SOCALWUG] New License Fee May Face Hotspot Operators > > On 26 Jan 2004 at 20:30, Ronan Higgins, Cafe.com wrote: > >>Surely URL "capture" predates wi-fi and wireless hotspots? Wasn't it > > used > >>in some traditional dial-up ISP NAS (Network Access Server) > > applications? > > Go to (for instance) any latimes.com story URL and it will redirect you > to a login page if you > aren't already logged in. I'm sure other sites have been doing something > similar since very near > the start of the web. > >
