Hosting free websites in the late 1990s posed a surprising legal challenge: some users uploaded copyrighted, illegal, or otherwise inappropriate material. Faced with frequent calls from law enforcement, inventor Gary Shuster—then acting as both a corporate lawyer and a tech innovator—set out to create a technological solution that would clean up the network’s files automatically. The result was CleaNet, an innovative system designed to fingerprint and track problematic uploads.
When Legal Problems Demand a Tech Fix
I worked at a startup that offered free web hosting, a popular service at the time. Unfortunately, that accessibility also attracted misuse. Traditional legal responses—like filing lawsuits against persistent offenders—proved ineffective for various reasons, including the difficulty of serving a summons on anonymous internet users and the fact that a user in a distant jurisdiction wouldn’t care about being sued. Users could also create multiple accounts by accessing through VPNs (or “proxy servers”, which were a thing back then), re-uploading the content in a new account as soon as the previous account was deleted.
Key Pain Points:
- Copyright Infringement: Users uploaded unauthorized music and software.
- Inappropriate Content: Adult or graphic imagery sometimes made it onto the service, damaging the platform’s advertising relationships.
- Whack-a-Mole: Removing forbidden files only to have them reappear under new accounts.
- Illegal Content: The true villain in all of this was child sexual abuse material (“CSAM”). I was running the legal department, would get a call from U.S. Customs asking us to preserve evidence on a specific site, and would promise cooperation (because of course). At first we would get an actual subpoena, but I changed the terms of service to allow us to cooperate in CSAM investigations without waiting for a subpoena, so that’s why we would get calls. I’d then ask a customer service agent to put together the evidence for law enforcement — only to have the customer service agent quit. It was nearly impossible to hire employees back at the height of the dot-com boom, and they could easily quit in favor of a job that didn’t require them to look at horrible things. I couldn’t blame them — but we needed a way to automate as much of the process as possible to minimize the exposure of our own employees to CSAM while still providing 100% cooperation with law enforcement.
The Invention: CleaNet’s Fingerprint Approach
To combat this endless cycle, Shuster developed a file-fingerprinting system:
- Unique File Identification
- The software computed distinctive “fingerprints” of each file.
- If a file reappeared—even under a different user account—CleaNet could detect the match and remove it automatically.
- Adaptive Scoring
- For files with uncertain content, the system scored them by association. If a questionable file consistently appeared alongside known infringing material, it would become flagged.
- Automated Action
- The system could alert authorities (like U.S. Customs) about illegal files securely upload evidence to them (later to the NCMEC’s servers) and remove them from our servers without human intervention.
This technology significantly lightened the legal and customer support workload. I eventually had the automation to the point where I’d check first thing each morning to find that CleaNet had already detected and handled a number of offending sites—all while I slept. We were no longer reliant on people reporting bad materials, we could proactively and automatically discover them.
Filing for a Patent—and Learning a Tough Lesson
Although my invention clearly solved a real-world problem, protecting the underlying technology under U.S. patent law proved more complicated than expected:
- Overly Narrow Patent Claims
- In the first patent issued (multiple patents issued in the family), some claims were limited to a very specific process (e.g., only reading the first 1,024 bytes of a file for the fingerprint — see for example claim 57).
- This narrow scope of those claims made it easy for competitors to evade infringement simply by scanning more—or different—portions of a file, although other claims (and continuation claims) solved that problem.
- This underscores how important it is that your patent lawyer understands why you want a patent. If it was to literally prevent somebody from stealing our code and using it (i.e. having a patent claim in addition to a copyright claim), narrow claims would have been fine. If the idea was to protect the invention even if run on different code and implemented with different fingerprinting methods, broader claims were required.
- The Importance of Proper Drafting
- Patent claims define the exact “boundaries” of an invention, akin to a property deed.
- I learned that every detail in the specification and claims matters if you hope to commercialize the invention.
- The Importance of a Continuation Application
- Luckily, before the patent issued, a continuation application was filed. This is a patent application that says, in essence, “there are more inventions here than the earlier patent’s claims covered”. It allow the inventor to seek additional coverage.
Despite the challenges, CleaNet remains a prime example of how an inventor-lawyer can spot a problem that legal strategies alone can’t solve, then create a technical fix that both streamlines operations and addresses bigger-picture legal risks.
Key Takeaways for Innovators
- Identify the Core Problem
- In this case, legal battles weren’t working—so I pivoted to technology.
- Engineer a Complete Solution
- CleaNet not only removed problematic files, but also reported them to law enforcement automatically.
- Draft Patent Claims Wisely
- Pay attention to the scope. Narrow claims might sail through patent examination but limit real-world protection. As a silly example, a method claim for implementing this invention done only while standing on my head and singing the word “start” to initiate the analysis would have almost certainly been allowed without any hassle — and would have had no value at all.
- Integrate Legal and Technical Expertise
- Combining legal insight with inventive thinking can lead to breakthroughs that purely legal or purely technical approaches can’t achieve alone.
Watch the Video for the Full Story
Curious to hear Gary Shuster’s personal account of how CleaNet came to life? Be sure to watch the accompanying Innovation Café video. You’ll discover more about the early days of free web hosting, why conventional legal tactics weren’t enough, and how a well-crafted invention can transform a complex problem into a manageable solution.
Final Thoughts
CleaNet began as a creative workaround for a persistent problem—unwanted, often illegal file uploads. It’s a vivid reminder that some of the best inventions arise from real-world frustrations. However, a great idea alone doesn’t guarantee strong intellectual property protection. For inventors, balancing technical development and sound patent strategy is crucial for long-term success.
Oh, the Irony!
This group of patents ushered in the era of automated content analysis, essentially the ancestors to the content moderation automation that erroneously took down the YouTube channel that used to host Innovation Cafe (here’s hoping the website version with added text and context works for you!).
Pingback: Innovation in Tech During the Dotcom Crash