Mistral Patents Sandboxed Code for Tool Calls
Mistral Patent for "Code implemented tool calls"
Mistral AI has been granted a patent for a method that uses a large language model to generate code blocks encapsulating tool calls, which are then executed in a sandbox. When a pending tool call is reached, execution pauses, the call is sent to a client, and the result is substituted before resuming. The final result is returned to the LLM, enabling more reliable and secure tool use.
US 12,670,045 B1 — Code implemented tool calls — Gabriel Vergnaud, Paris (FR) — Assigned to Mistral AI, Paris (FR)
- linuxhansl
Having my name on a bunch of software patents - and, yes, I tried to get my name off them, but was not allowed - I can fairly confidently say: There is not A single worthy software patent out there. You know, one that is "not obvious to someone skilled in the art" and that actually protects a monetary investment.
Software patent are a scourge of the software industry. Patents are designed to protect costly research; simply having an idea is not costly (but it makes in medical research for example). All that software patents do is creating a minefield that hinders competition.
For software Copyright is a far better instrument. Let the one with best implementation win... That's where the cost is: Implementing, testing, shipping, maintaining. Protect that.
Sorry for the rant.
Edit: Spelling
- Roark66
It is quite funny an EU company patenting a software feature that is basically unpatentable in EU in the US.
Clearly this is an attempt to prevent similar patents from being weaponised against them in the US.
No one cares about such stuff in Europe.
- dummydummy1234
So anyone have prior art we can point to? Because no way is a rpc call novel.
- Dotnaught
What are the chances Mistral used AI for its patented technology, thereby potentially invaliding the claim?
- kwertyoowiyop
Is “by an LLM” the new “on a computer” for lame patents?
- mkovach
Setting aside the tech, which looks like an asynchronous await across a network, the interesting question is why Mistral would patent this in the US.
Simple, because the patent is less about protecting an invention than doing business in the US.
The US is more hospitable to software patents than Europe. A US patent also gives Mistral something useful when dealing with companies that already hold large patent portfolios: defensive leverage, cross-licensing, and one more asset on the books to make it attractive to investors.
There's a certain absurdity to it, and the French have a history with absurd. A French open-weights company crosses the Atlantic to put a patent around a loop, not because the code is remarkable, but because the American market makes the loop a valuable asset, business-wise.
- nrabulinski
Patent for the most basic pattern seen in literally all of software engineering
- Ekaros
Do software patents only exist for rich players to build a moat against poorer players? At this point with patents of this quality only reason for them to exist seems to be to cross-license them for extra revenue and to possibly block anyone too poor to fight for themselves...