News picks (new posts)

U.S. Supreme Court to hear i4i patent case against Microsoft: Re: U.S. Supreme Court to hear i4i patent case against Microsoft

Tue, 30 Nov 2010 08:27:44 +0000

More on the case and the possible consequences:
http://paidcontent.org/article/419-microsofts-supreme-court-case-may-have-huge-benefits-for-patent-defenda/
http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2010/11/supreme-court-to-decide-microsoft-patent-case-that-could-make-it-easier-to-invalidate-patents.html

All the Court documents:
http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/microsoft-v-i4i-limited-partnership/

U.S. Supreme Court to hear i4i patent case against Microsoft: U.S. Supreme Court to hear i4i patent case against Microsoft

Tue, 30 Nov 2010 08:22:46 +0000

"The U.S. top court has agreed to review a patent infringement case filed against Microsoft by Toronto-based i4i Ltd. – a case that Microsoft lost both initially in court and subsequently on appeal. […] Microsoft’s appeal to the top court essentially asks the court to consider setting a less-stringent standard for invalidating a patent. Currently, companies in Microsoft’s position are required to show “clear and convincing” evidence to invalidate a U.S. patent.
Microsoft argues that the current system disproportionately favours patent holders in some cases."

Source: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/technology/microsoft-appeal-on-i4i-patent-headed-to-us-supreme-court/article1817427/

NZ-OSS: Debating Software Patents with Brett Roberts: Re: NZ-OSS: Debating Software Patents with Brett Roberts

Mon, 25 Oct 2010 03:51:42 +0000

Patent law may, indeed, sometimes serve to stifle competition. However, that is not necessarily the same thing as stifling innovation. In fact, it's possible that the existence of patents may in some cases encourage innovation, as innovators must think creatively to "invent around" patents and come up with something new.
http://smallbusiness.aol.com/2010/05/10/how-to-file-a-patent/

NZ-OSS: Debating Software Patents with Brett Roberts: NZ-OSS: Debating Software Patents with Brett Roberts

Wed, 20 Oct 2010 17:55:37 +0000

"[Summary (and YouTube links) of a debate on software patents in New Zealand]: "I argued that software patents stifle innovation. When ideas are copied, extended, built upon - we all benefit. Patents stop this and thus stifle innovation. He argued that patents not necessary to protect industries based on ideas e.g. publishing because copyright does a good job. He pointed to the negative impacts of software patents such as the Android litigation which is stifling competition."

Source: http://nzoss.org.nz/news/2010/debating-software-patents-brett-roberts

EurActiv: EU to push patent-free eGovernment: EurActiv: EU to push patent-free eGovernment

Wed, 13 Oct 2010 06:07:02 +0000

"The European Union is on the cusp of writing public procurement rules which favour patent- and royalty-free technologies, according to software giants who argue that the rules echo Chinese public procurement laws. [The BSA is] worried that the pending European Interoperability Framework (EIF) will give technologies that have open specifications an advantage in public sector bids."

Source: http://www.euractiv.com/en/infosociety/eu-push-patent-free-egovernment-news-498694

Wikileaks publishes documents on plan to curb free software in the European Union: Wikileaks publishes documents on plan to curb free software in the European Union

Fri, 08 Oct 2010 17:25:00 +0000

"[The leaked] file shows that Jonathan Zuck, president of Association for Competitive Technology (ACT) –an organization with close ties to Microsoft–, and founder of Americans for Technology Leadership, had influenced the change of working documents of the European Union.
What makes this document fascinating is that it contains both the original and modified text (…), which means that we can see what exactly an organisation sympathetic to Microsoft –and partly funded by them– is worried about, and how it is trying to head off the threat."

Source: http://blog.javier-carrete.com/2010/10/wikileaks-publishes-documents-on-plan.html

The leaked file is here: http://www.scribd.com/doc/38773615/Towards-a-European-Software-Strategy

MultichannelNews: U.S. Patent Office Affirms TiVo 'Time Warp' Patent Is Valid: MultichannelNews: U.S. Patent Office Affirms TiVo 'Time Warp' Patent Is Valid

Thu, 07 Oct 2010 06:53:04 +0000

"The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office on Wednesday affirmed the validity of TiVo's so-called Time Warp DVR patent, reversing the agency's ruling this summer — after a second re-examination requested by EchoStar and Dish Network — that the patent was invalid because some of the claims were covered in two prior patents."

Source: http://www.multichannel.com/article/458133-U_S_Patent_Office_Affirms_TiVo_Time_Warp_Patent_Is_Valid.php?

Ars: Motorola asks ITC, two federal courts to throw book at Apple: Ars: Motorola asks ITC, two federal courts to throw book at Apple

Thu, 07 Oct 2010 06:51:00 +0000

"Motorola has launched the next offensive in an increasingly confusing legal war over mobile patents. The company, through its Motorola Mobility subsidiary, has filed patent infringement complaints against Apple in both Northern Illinois and Southern Florida federal district courts. It has also asked the International Trade Commission to block Apple from importing, marketing, or selling iPhones, iPad, iPod touches, and "some Mac products."
Motorola's four complaints involve a total of 18 patents, which the company says covers everything from 3G, GPRS, and 802.11 technologies, antenna design, proximity sensing, device synchronization, and more. Motorola also says that everything from the hardware on up to iOS, MobileMe, and the App Store infringes upon its patented innovations."

Source: http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2010/10/motorola-asks-itc-two-federal-courts-to-throw-book-at-apple.ars

Ars: Cover Flow may cost Apple $208.5 million in damages: Apple challenges verdict

Mon, 04 Oct 2010 19:28:49 +0000

Bloomberg: Apple Challenges $625.5 Million Mirror Worlds Verdict

"Apple Inc. is challenging a jury verdict in which the computer maker was ordered to pay as much as $625.5 million to Mirror Worlds LLC for infringing patents related to how documents are displayed digitally.
Apple asked U.S. District Judge Leonard Davis for an emergency stay of the Oct. 1 verdict, saying there are outstanding issues on two of the three patents. Apple said patent owner Mirror Worlds would also be “triple dipping” if it were able to collect $208.5 million on each of the patents."

Source: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-10-04/apple-challenges-625-5-million-mirror-worlds-patent-verdict.html

Ars: Cover Flow may cost Apple $208.5 million in damages: Ars: Cover Flow may cost Apple $208.5 million in damages

Mon, 04 Oct 2010 17:26:47 +0000

"Apple has been ordered to pay more than $200 million to Mirror Worlds, LLC after having lost a patent infringement case brought by the company. Apple was found to be in violation of Mirror Worlds' "document streaming" patents, which Apple allegedly used in its implementation of Cover Flow and Time Machine."

Source: http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2010/10/apple-loses-patent-infringement-suit-over-cover-flow-display.ars

TechDirt: Why Must Patent Supporters Rewrite History In Attempt To Have The Feds Subsidize Patents: TechDirt: Why Must Patent Supporters Rewrite History In Attempt To Have The Feds Subsidize Patents

Sun, 03 Oct 2010 21:05:37 +0000

"Hank Northhaft is the CEO of a patent licensing firm. […] He's got a book coming out next year that's all about making it even easier and cheaper to get patents, which he insists will create hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of new jobs, and has been making the rounds writing opinion pieces for various publications pitching this plan. Unfortunately, each of his opinion pieces seems to rewrite history or misinterpret studies to make his argument.
Mike Masnick points out the fallacies and omissions in Northhaft's arguments."

Source: http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100809/03493510551/why-must-patent-supporters-rewrite-history-in-attempt-to-have-the-feds-subsidize-patents.shtml

Ars: Microsoft sues Motorola, citing Android patent infringement: Ars: Microsoft sues Motorola, citing Android patent infringement

Sat, 02 Oct 2010 12:18:44 +0000

"Microsoft has announced a lawsuit against Motorola, alleging that several of the mobile company's Android devices infringe on nine of its patents. The software giant is suing in US District Court in Washington, and is also bringing a complaint before the International Trade Commission (ITC). The patents are all related to key smartphone experiences that include syncing e-mails, calendars, and contacts, scheduling meetings, and notifying applications about changes in signal strength and battery power. Microsoft specifically names two Motorola devices, the Droid 2 and the Charm, but says these are just examples and not a comprehensive list. "

Source: http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2010/10/microsoft-sues-motorola-citing-android-patent-infringement.ars

Florian Mueller: Red Hat's financials are an argument for software patents: Florian Mueller: Red Hat's financials are an argument for software patents

Mon, 27 Sep 2010 22:05:40 +0000

"[Mueller feels he] can't help but admit that Red Hat's financials can serve as a fairly strong argument for software patents.''
He states that "Red Hat's business model does more harm than good" due to the large cost-savings it offers compared to proprietary vendors. (Mueller cites a "destruction ratio" of 1:10, meaning that 1$ revenue of RedHat replaces 10$ of proprietary revenue.) From current levels of R&D-spending-as-a-fraction-of-revenue, Mueller concludes that "the net balance would be a loss of $6.5 to $7.0 billion in R&D, and of all of the high-quality jobs this relates to.''
He waves away the argument that the money such saved by the customers of Red hat might be allocated in more promising ways by claiming that these billions would simply mean "less innovation" and consequently Red Hat's customers "wouldn't be able to become as productive" as if they would keep funding the monopoly profits of Microsoft, Oracle, SAP & Co. Calling Red Hat's business model "parasitic" and "the antithesis of economically sustainable innovation" completes the argumentflame bait.

Source: http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2010/09/red-hats-financials-are-argument-for.html

Groklaw: An Open Response to the USPTO — Physical Aspects of Mathematics: Groklaw: An Open Response to the USPTO — Physical Aspects of Mathematics

Mon, 27 Sep 2010 20:12:17 +0000

"The USPTO has issued a request for comments on their new interim guidance […]. They ask in effect how to tell an abstract idea from an application of the idea. This article suggests answers to that question from the perspective of a computer professional. "

Source: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2010092621054289

Nature: Patent fixes for Europe: Nature: Patent fixes for Europe

Fri, 24 Sep 2010 08:21:10 +0000

"The current two-layer European patent system hinders the growth of creative institutions and ventures by being costly, inefficient and unpredictable. Patents granted by one layer, the European Patent Office (EPO), must actually be ratified in the second layer — the national level in one or several of the 27 EU countries. This makes a European patent five to twenty times more expensive than a US one […]
Parallel litigation regularly leads to conflicting outcomes in different countries, a degree of complexity and uncertainty that constitutes a serious barrier to start-up companies.
[…] the EU patent proposals could result in a worse system than the current one. To really fuel innovation, the European ministers for economic affairs, industry and science who are preparing to meet at the EU Competitiveness Council later this year must fix the following issues, which are far more important than what gets translated into what.
First, the current European patent should be phased-out by 2015 and be replaced by a true EU patent, recognized in all 27 countries at granting. […]
Second, there should be a grace period of at least six months in which scientific or technical publications would not preclude patentability of an invention. […]
Third, there should be a 50% discount on EPO entry fees for young innovative companies, as in the United States and Japan. […]
Fourth, there needs to be a radical shake-up of the governance of the European patent system. The number of NPO representatives on the EPO board should be reduced […]. Representatives of the key directorates of the EC should sit on the EPO board […]."

Source: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v467/n7314/full/467395a.html

EFF: Patent Office Agrees With EFF’s Arguments on C2 VoIP Patent: EFF: Patent Office Agrees With EFF’s Arguments on C2 VoIP Patent

Thu, 23 Sep 2010 18:48:31 +0000

"Continued good news in the fight to bust bad software patents: the Patent Office has issued an encouraging office action in the reexamination of the C2 patent, one of EFF's "Most Wanted" patents. The C2 patent claims to cover a “Method and Apparatus for Implementing a Computer Network/Internet Telephone System,” broad enough to essentially wholesale claim using the Internet to call someone’s phone.
The Patent Office has agreed with many of the arguments EFF put forth in its petition for reexamination, and preliminarily found the C2 patent invalid as obvious. "

Source: http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/09/patent-office-agrees-eff-s-arguments-c2-voip

271 Patent Blog: Bombshell Study: Heavily Litigated NPE Patents Overwhelmingly Lose at Trial: 271 Patent Blog: Bombshell Study: Heavily Litigated NPE Patents Overwhelmingly Lose at Trial

Thu, 23 Sep 2010 18:47:24 +0000

"To date, litigated patents were viewed as "strong" patents - the types that defendants were supposed to avoid taking to trial. Moreover, litigated patents were seen as more valuable […]
John Allison, Mark Lemley and Joshua Walker recently took on the task of identifying every patent that was litigated eight or more times between 2000 and February 2009, including cases still pending, and compared the outcomes of the cases against patents that were litigated only once. In the course of their analysis, they found 106 such patents, which have been litigated in a total of 2,987 different patent assertions in 478 different cases, often against multiple defendants.
What did they find? Serial patent litigants, and particularly NPE's (aka "trolls"), for a lack of a better phrase, "get creamed" when they go to trial: […] 'No matter which test we use, the differences are highly statistically significant – the most-litigated patentees were more likely to lose'."

Source: http://271patent.blogspot.com/2010/09/bombshell-study-heavily-litigated-npe.html

Transcript: Andrew Tridgell on Patent Defence: Transcript: Andrew Tridgell on Patent Defence

Wed, 25 Aug 2010 20:49:53 +0000

"The following is a transcript of a talk given in New Zealand, 2010. Andrew Tridgell discusses why reading patents is usually a good idea, how to read a patent, and how to work through it with a lawyer to build a solid defence. For the free software community, Tridgell also suggests how cooperation could help scare off patent holders. "

Source: http://news.swpat.org/2010/03/transcript-tridgell-patents/

PriorArt: What's so bad about "business method" patents? A case study: PriorArt: What's so bad about "business method" patents? A case study

Tue, 03 Aug 2010 07:06:48 +0000

"In Marshall, Texas, a patent that seems to cover the act of distributing a press release online (No. 6,370,535) was used to sue six companies that are in that business; […] The business proposition of eReleases, one of the defendants, is simple: For a one-time fee […] eReleases distributes press releases […] [f]or an additional fee, [it] will write a release. […] the [patent] application wasn't even filed until 1999—a year after he started his business. After a few hours’ online research, Kennedy found no less than 20 companies involved in the press release business before the filing date of the patent. Unfortunately, presenting that evidence in court would require him to pay those six-figure legal bills."

Source: http://thepriorart.typepad.com/the_prior_art/2010/07/gooseberry-natural-resources-patents-press-releases.html

Law.com: Patent Litigation Weekly: Data Shows That Troll Problem Persists: Law.com: Patent Litigation Weekly: Data Shows That Troll Problem Persists

Tue, 03 Aug 2010 06:52:12 +0000

"Let's start with what everyone knows—NPE patent litigation isn't going away. Since 2007, more than 1,500 companies per year are hit with lawsuits brought by the more than 300 NPEs that PatentFreedom track (using its fairly conservative definition of what constitutes an NPE). NPE litigation has grown from where it accounted for between 2 to 3 percent of all patent suits a decade ago to the point that it now accounts for 17 percent . For some operating companies, NPE litigation makes up more than 90 percent of their patent litigation docket."

Source: http://www.law.com/jsp/cc/PubArticleCC.jsp?id=1202464087434&Patent_Litigation_Weekly_Data_Shows_That_Troll_Problem_Persists