News picks
Forum » Resources / News picks
Number of threads: 2543
Number of posts: 2604
rss icon RSS: New threads | New posts
Articles from other sources; copy title, first paragraph, and put URL in body of post.
Order by:
Last post date
Thread starting date
Create a new thread
Thread name Started Posts Recent post
Fresh off agreeing to pay Sprint Nextel $80 million earlier this month, Vonage has now agreed to compensate Verizon at least $80 million to settle their patent dispute, and the total could hit $117 million depending on the outcome of appeals Vonage has pending. 'If Vonage wins rehearing on either the '574 or '711 patent or if the injunction is vacated as to the '574 or '711 patent, Vonage will pay Verizon $80 million. If Vonage does not win rehearing on either the '574 or '711 patent, or if the stay is lifted reinstating the injunction, Vonage will pay Verizon $117.5 million.' And, of course, don't forget AT&T just recently opened charges against the company as well.
by: zoobabzoobab
26 Oct 2007 15:34
1  
Advocates of software patents probably won’t be ready to give up their guns easily. It could be argued that although software consists of algorithms that produce predictable results, the outcomes of their interactions may not be obvious until they actually do solve a problem or prove useful. Admitting this line of reasoning could bring this down to a matter of examining each claimed software patent, instead of a total abolition of software patents — which is what is really needed. Ultimately, the argument may have to transcend the doctrinal tests for patentability and touch on the purposes of patents and their effects. What should we make of the legal morass created by the current situation when it becomes almost impossible to avoid some kind of infringement because of the proliferation of obscure and even frivolous patents? If software patents stifle competition and innovation — which they do — then do they ultimately do more harm than good?
by: zoobabzoobab
26 Oct 2007 15:19
1  
GM: Typically, patent trolls don't have any products, so they are unlikely to be infringing on any of your patents. Isn't that a problem for the OIN approach? JR: Very clearly there's not much we can do with regard to patent trolls. On the other hand, it's my belief that patent trolls go where the money is. They're after the big dollars. That's probably why they haven't, and not for a long time will, go after the open-source movement - that's not where the money is. Could it become a problem in the future? The answer is, sure it could.
by: zoobabzoobab
26 Oct 2007 14:57
1  
In light of the current lawsuit with Technology Licensing Corporation and IP Innovation and Ballmer saying that Red Hat uses IP owned by Microsoft, how can Red Hat ensure corporate customers that patent issues will not affect their business? [...] The protection of our clients is a top priority, and Red Hat provides the most comprehensive intellectual property coverage for open source software that is available. The Red Hat Open Source Assurance program protects our clients in two ways. One is in business continuity - Red Hat offers assurances of uninterrupted use of its technology solutions. We also offer indemnification against claims by ANY holder of software patents.
by: zoobabzoobab
26 Oct 2007 14:44
1  
On Wednesday Sun Microsystems announced a counter suit against Network Appliance, wherein they will draw on their "defensive portfolio" which is "one of the largest patent arsenals on the internet". They are going to be requesting a permanent injunction to remove all of NetApp's filer products from the marketplace, and also seeking monetary damages (half of which they've pledged to donate to the Software Freedom Law Center and Peer to Patent Project). Last month, NetApp sued Sun for patent infringements in ZFS. Earlier this month in Texas, the first ever patent infringement lawsuit against Linux distributors was filed.
by: zoobabzoobab
26 Oct 2007 14:25
1  
In terms of proving a link between Microsoft and Acacia this is smoke, just as the move of two Microsoft executives to Acacia unit IP Innovation is smoke. Microsoft CTO Nathan Myhrvold’s founding of his own patent firm last year? Smoke, coincidence. And if you take a satellite picture of southern California today that’s all you’ll see — smoke. But there’s fire below the California smoke. Is all this smoke just coincidence? It may well be. But the smoke gets thicker by the day.
by: zoobabzoobab
26 Oct 2007 14:17
1  
Acacia Research Corporation announced today that its Financial Systems Innovation LLC subsidiary has entered into a settlement agreement covering a patent that applies to credit card fraud protection technology with Shell Oil Company. [...] The patented technology generally relates to a computerized system for protecting retailers and consumers engaged in credit card, check card, and debit transactions. The system includes an electronic card reader, and the generation and use of a transaction number, which specifically identifies each transaction processed within the system.
by: zoobabzoobab
26 Oct 2007 14:15
1  
Acacia Research Corp, a technology license company, said its unit entered into a settlement agreement with Shell Oil Co, covering a patent that applies to credit card fraud protection technology. The patented technology generally relates to a computerized system for protecting retailers and consumers engaged in credit card, check card, and debit transactions, it said.[...] The patented technology generally relates to a computerized system for protecting retailers and consumers engaged in credit card, check card, and debit transactions, it said.
by: zoobabzoobab
26 Oct 2007 14:12
1  
Vonage has finally settled its patent war with telecom giant Verizon. It will be costly: up to $117.5 million. But most important: Vonage won't have to shut down its network or pay Verizon a chunk of its monthly revenue. [...] If Vonage doesn't win a rehearing on either patent, or if the stay is lifted, Vonage will pay Verizon $117.5 million, plus another $2.5 million to "certain charities."
by: zoobabzoobab
26 Oct 2007 10:18
1  
An article in Australia's IT News mentions that under its antitrust agreement with the European Union, 'Microsoft will publish an irrevocable pledge not to assert any patents it may have over the interoperability information against **non-commercial** open source software development projects.' Essentially, in addition to getting them to comply with the anti-trust decision, the EU has forced Microsoft to back off of its saber-rattling when it comes to EU open source projects. That protection in no way extends to US projects, of course.
by: zoobabzoobab
26 Oct 2007 10:12
1  
Sun Microsystems is preparing to file a patent suit against storage vendor Network Appliance (NetApp), chief executive Jonathan Schwartz revealed on his blog. [...] Sun plans to donate half of any damages that it will be awarded to free software charities. The executive named the Software Freedom Law Center and the Peer to Patent initiative. He also suggested setting up a venture fund that promotes free software innovation.
by: zoobabzoobab
25 Oct 2007 13:05
1  
Open-source software company Red Hat has said that it is concerned that Microsoft patent arrangements may not be compatible with open-source licensing models.
by: zoobabzoobab
25 Oct 2007 13:03
1  
Microsoft has now posted the revised licenses for interoperability as a result of the EU antitrust agreement. Microsoft calls them the Microsoft Work Group Server Protocol Program License Agreements for Development and Product Distribution (WSPP Development Agreements). I don't know why they can't come up with better names. Probably for the same reason the Zune is brown.
by: pieterhpieterh
25 Oct 2007 10:19
1  
Linux vendorRed Hat [...] wants to improve the US patent system so that it and other firms can challenge poor quality software patents. The company joined a host of others in the industry in sending an amicus brief to the US Supreme Court. In the brief the firms explain that the burden of proof required to invalidate bogus software patents holds back innovation and needs changing. The Amicus Brief (pdf) was filed in the case Microsoft v. i4i Limited Partnership [...].
by: ggiedkeggiedke
06 Feb 2011 20:01
1  
Microsoft wants Congress to reform the U.S. patent laws by focusing on five issues that intellectual property stakeholders most want, according to the company's legal counsel. The reform concept was floated today in a blog post by Brad Smith, Microsoft's senior vice president and general counsel, and Horatio Gutierrez, Microsoft's corporate vice president and deputy general counsel. [...] Smith and Gutierrez said that IP stakeholders want five patent reforms, including ensuring that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) gets proper funding, establishing a "first inventor to file" patent-claims basis, "weeding out bad patents," "allowing third parties to submit prior art" in patent review cases and ending litigation concerning false patent marking on products.
by: ggiedkeggiedke
06 Feb 2011 19:57
2
The final standoff in the great patent battle between i4i and Microsoft is heading for a Supreme Court hearing this April. Meanwhile a trio of advocacy groups are reiterating their plea for the Supremes to do the right thing in this case and make it easier to invalidate dubious patents.
by: ggiedkeggiedke
06 Feb 2011 19:55
1  
[A] company called VS Technologies is suing Twitter, alleging that it infringes on a patent of theirs, entitled “Method and system for creating an interactive virtual community of famous people”. For real? For real.
by: ggiedkeggiedke
27 Jan 2011 11:36
2
Software patents should be abolished though, and I'm going to show this with an economic analysis. We'll see that even non-obvious and non-trivial software patents should never be granted as they can only cause economic loss.
by: ggiedkeggiedke
23 Jan 2011 20:09
1  
I think there are two major classes of threat to freedom [...]. The first is from intellectual monopolies – copyright and patents – or rather, attempts to preserve their power in a world of digital abundance. [...] The latest incarnation of that is the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) – which, despite its misleading name, is as much about stopping online sharing as tackling traditional counterfeit goods. [...] The other threat has been accelerated by Wikileaks, but was not caused by it: the introduction of online censorship by nations that have traditionally prided themselves on their support for free speech. In some ways this is even more dangerous than ACTA, since the latter is bound to fail. [...] Unless people fight back now against these moves [...] I think that things could get very bad here.
by: ggiedkeggiedke
11 Jan 2011 12:24
2
Open sauce groups are frantically buying up patents to prevent being sued by proprietary companies. KDE and The Document Foundation joined the Open Invention Network (OIN) as a licensee following the doomed Novell flogging of its patents. The fear is that Novell has put open source companies at risk by flogging IPs to a company backed by Microsoft, Oracle and Apple.
by: tenoritenori
27 Dec 2010 18:50
3