Okay; I'll bite; I read your post. You have absolutely no claim here and the whole thing reads like the ramblings of someone who needs serious help. It actually gets worse the further down the page I read.

If you find my blog post as "ramblings", then how come you come to the conclusion that I have "absolutely no claim"?

This man is a credible person in NANOG. He completed my paper and started to defend me there. https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg99136.html

Which is why Apple engineers started to read my paper in Feb 2019 and "sign in with apple" ready by June 2019.

Have you ever thought about it the other way? You find my technical post as ramblings because you don't have enough technical skills to understand the merits of my work?

Sorry, let me clarify; your ramblings contain no _valid_ claim.

Your link to NANOG (incidentally, the wrong forum for your queries) does not contain any defense of your "Sign in with Apple" ramble, it's for something unrelated which appears to be you trying to invent antispam methods.

Your post is not of a technical nature and there is no merit to your claims that Apple copied you. It is all hearsay with no proof of any sort.

What Apple selling as "Sign in with Apple" is one of the "tool" I created to fix email spam. It is very much related. This is the problem of throwing arguments without understanding the context. If you had gone through that blog post and read the section "what is the real invention" carefully, then you would understand how "sign in with apple" system is very much related to my antispam methods.

I added some more info in an other comment. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24425853

Giving you the benefit of the doubt, since I didn't read everything, all you have proven is they came to the same implementation(s) as you have. That doesn't mean they literally copied your work.

But since you seem to have a patent, good luck in the patent fight.

> The following table describes the list of ideas copied from the paper I published. For the sake of clarity, I published my white paper in February 2019. Apple released "Sign in with Apple" in June 2019.

So they copied it and released it, in 3 months?

Yes, they have enough resources for that. "Sign in with Apple" is a very simple system.

This is what I sent to Tim Cook on June 06, 2019

https://www.domboxmail.com/assets/images/apple/1.png

The very next day, techcrunch published this article.

https://techcrunch.com/2019/06/07/answers-to-your-burning-qu...

Question 4 and 9 reveals how they are stealing my work. I actually lied about the patent filing date in the mail I sent to Tim Cook. Once you file the patent you cannot add new content. That's why they boldly published that techcrunch post.

I lied about the patent date because I sensed Apple looking at my iCloud files without my permission and I was right. This is what I had in Apple's iCloud.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/n1v5i9cymts1lgi/Screenshot_2020-07...

https://www.dropbox.com/s/e26gsw47skhd1cq/Screenshot_2020-07...

That's why they bought it when I told them "I filed the patent in 2018". I filed only the provisional patent application. I fixed most of the technical loopholes after that.

This is what I had in my white paper. https://www.domboxmail.com/assets/images/apple/spapi3.png

My white paper says "javascript-only". Apple stole it using the word "Javascript-based". Please see Techcrunch question number 4.

https://www.domboxmail.com/assets/images/apple/149.jpg

My white paper says "e.g. Signup Forms, Facebook Connect , Google Connect etc.".

Apple stole that with this excuse. "Note that Apple is not saying “social” login though. It’s saying “third-party,” which is more encompassing.". I.e. They categorized "Facebook Connect , Google Connect" as "Social Login" buttons to steal it. Please see Techcrunch question number 9.

On June 10, 2019, an Apple lawyer replied to me.

https://www.domboxmail.com/assets/images/apple/2a.png

https://www.domboxmail.com/assets/images/apple/2b.jpg

https://www.domboxmail.com/assets/images/apple/2c.jpg

You can clearly see he goes like "possibly because the patent office yet has to publish it". That's because he bought what I sold.

If you pay attention to his response he goes like "Apple's products or marketing strategies might seem similar".

If you take a closer look at the mail I sent to Tim Cook, you can see that I never mentioned anything about "Strategy". They are stealing both my product as well as strategy. That's why he explicitly mentioned the word "strategy" to convince me.

For the record, they didn't release the product on June 3, 2019. They only announced it at that time. It took them few more months.

This message is the one why Apple went through my 300 page paper. https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg99136.html [see the date]

Apple realised I fixed the technical loopholes. After that they started to cover their asses.

For example by wording their terms like this. https://www.domboxmail.com/assets/images/apple/prohibited.pn...

They also changed the company type to a "limited liability" company and notified all developers. https://www.dropbox.com/s/ovamzqp5jw7zjgn/2020-09-07_02-36-2...

They notified the developers on Feb 18, 2019 which is one week before my international patent application publication. My WIPO application got published on Feb 27, 2020. https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/4a/55/1b/2188ba0...