The Patent Timeline Debate: A Critical Challenge to Tech Infringement Claims

Recent allegations by DFINITY founder Dominic Williams, claiming NEAR Protocol's Intents feature improperly utilized its threshold ECDSA signature technology, have sparked industry discussion. In response, Dragonfly managing partner Haseeb Qureshi issued a detailed counterargument on October 24, highlighting significant chronological inconsistencies in the accusation's foundation.

Unveiling Patent Status: The Long Path from Application to Approval

Qureshi shared screenshots of the patent application status, clarifying that the technology patent in question was only formally approved in late July 2023. Prior to that, it remained in a "patent application" state without legally enforceable protection.

"If a technology patent wasn't approved at the time of the alleged infringement, the claim lacks legal grounding," Qureshi emphasized. "Patent protection begins upon grant, not application."

Algorithm Update Timing: A Narrow Window of Dispute

The alignment of timelines presents another crucial point. Public records indicate NEAR Protocol's modification to the relevant algorithm in its Intents feature occurred in September. This suggests any potential infringement window would be confined to the period between late July (patent approval) and September (algorithm update)—roughly one month.

  • Key date one: Disputed patent approved in late July
  • Key date two: NEAR's algorithm update completed in September
  • Potential dispute period: Approximately one-month window

Academic Origins: The Open-Source Roots of the Technology

Qureshi further noted that the threshold ECDSA signature technique originated from an academic paper published under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license. This license permits free use, sharing, and adaptation of the research with proper attribution.

"NEAR appropriately cited the original paper in its implementation, adhering to academic norms and open-source principles," he stated. "Defining the use of technology derived from open academic work as patent infringement is not only tenuous but could hinder technical progress and collaboration in blockchain."

This dispute extends beyond corporate conflict, touching on a central issue for the blockchain industry: balancing innovation protection with open-source collaboration. As more details emerge, discussions regarding the boundaries between technology patents and open-source agreements are expected to intensify.