News picks
Articles from other sources; copy title, first paragraph, and put URL in body of post.
| Thread name | Started | Posts | Recent post |
|
The Intellectual Property Office had previously recognized inventions that either solve technical problems external to a computer or solve "a technical problem within the computer" as potentially patentable inventions. The sea change of Symbian is that "improving the operation of a computer by solving a problem arising from the way the computer was programmed - for example, a tendency to crash due to conflicting library program calls - can also be regarded as solving "a technical problem within the computer" if it leads to a more reliable computer. Thus, a program that results in a computer running faster or more reliably may be considered to provide a technical contribution even if the invention solely addresses a problem in the programming."
|
by: 12 Jan 2009 17:48 |
1 | |
|
Microsoft, Symantec, and 20 other companies have been sued by a small Texas firm for patent infringement. The firm was granted patents in the mid-'90s over systems for governing application and data permissions, as well as ensuring application integrity, and is now seeking to bar the companies from making use of the patents. And some monetary damages would be nice, too. The firm, Information Protection and Authentication of Texas (IPAT), owns two patents cited in its complaint, the latest of which is US patent 5,412,717, which was filed in May 1992 and granted on May 2, 1995. This is a continuation of a previous patent, US number 5,311,591, granted in May, 1994. Titled "Computer system security method and apparatus having program authorization information data structures," the former patent essentially describes a system of authorization and permissions when executing applications and processing user data.
|
by: 12 Jan 2009 09:03 |
1 | |
|
According to the article on Ars Technica, Microsoft, Symantec and 20 other companies are being sued over patents covering 'systems for governing application and data permissions, as well as ensuring application integrity.' The patents were granted in the 90's to the Information Protection and Authentication of Texas (IPAT). From the article: 'A response from any of the defendants is still forthcoming, and it is unclear whether the authentication and permissions systems that IPAT's patent describes are precluded by prior art. Even if IPAT has a leg to stand on in court, however, it certainly didn't take the easy route to recovering any damages by suing 22 companies.
|
by: 12 Jan 2009 09:02 |
1 | |
|
I'm not particularly knowledgable but I always understood "patent eligible" subject matter to be equivalent to the UK concept of "statutorily patentable" subject matter, i.e. encompassing stuff not excluded by way of policy as business method, computer program, etc; public policy or morality, or the methods of treatment provisions. So I guess in the context of decisions it basically means subject matter that would not be excluded as such :-) by 35 USC 101 etc. I don't read it as being equivalent to "patentable" in the sense of having novelty, inventive step and so on.
|
by: 09 Jan 2009 19:28 |
1 | |
|
This year's programme has 10 individual speakers, a Celebrity Panel discussion and ends with a sponsored cocktail reception. Although it would be invidious to single out any of the speakers for special mention, this programme has some novelties this time around: [...] * Ian Karet (Linklaters) will be laying bare some of the mysteries of patent infringement in the light of recent case law, also touching on the ongoing battle for the heart of software patents;
|
by: 09 Jan 2009 19:23 |
1 | |
|
This trend toward selling ideas is one symptom of an attitude that I've noticed more and more among programmers over the past few years-an attitude of which software patents are the most obvious manifestation-a desire to think something up without breaking a sweat, then let someone else's hard work make you money. Its an attitude that says, "I'm so smart that my ideas alone set me apart." Sorry, it doesn't work that way in the real world. Ideas are a dime a dozen in programming, too; I have a lifetime's worth of article and software ideas written neatly in a notebook, and I know several truly original thinkers who have far more yet. Folks, it's not the ideas; it's design, implementation, and especially hard work that make the difference.
|
by: 09 Jan 2009 19:16 |
1 | |
|
We've covered how and why many patent infringement lawsuits are filed in East Texas, but in March of last year, courts were given more leeway in transferring those cases out of East Texas to somewhere more convenient. Of course, that hasn't stopped the massive filings in East Texas, sometimes in absurd situations, such as the one where some Silicon Valley lawyers whose offices are on the same street just a few blocks away from software giant Adobe filed a patent infringement lawsuit against the company in East Texas.
|
by: 07 Jan 2009 19:45 |
1 | |
|
Harrison County (Texas) - On December 30, an entity calling itself "Information Protection and Authentication of Texas, LLC" (IPAT) filed a complaint in federal district court alleging that 25 security companies have infringed on two of its patents - specifically numbers 5,311,591 and 5,412,717. Both patents are entitled, "Computer System Security Method and Apparatus for Creating and Using Program Authorization Information Data Structures," and relate specifically to the technology and manner of use employed by the technology for security software.
|
by: 07 Jan 2009 15:24 |
1 | |
|
Christoph Schoeller. Along with top German patent litigator Bernard Frohwitter and the US-based hedge fund Fortress, Schoeller is a part-owner of IP-Com, an NPE currently seeking $12 billion from Nokia in a patent dispute being heard in Germany. Although IP-Com denies it is a troll, it does not practise the patents in question, which it acquired from Bosch back in 2007. Whatever the semantics of the words involved, Schoeller and IP-Com have shown that the US does not have to be the only part of the world in which NPEs/trolls can thrive. Although the model may not be exactly the same because punitive damages do not exist, there are opportunities for NPEs in Germany, where the permanent injunction is still widely available to a winning plaintiff in a patent dispute. After all, an injunction covering Europe’s most populous and prosperous country is a very powerful negotiating weapon, is it not? If IP-Com is successful against Nokia, expect more of the same from other market entrants.
|
by: 07 Jan 2009 10:44 |
1 | |
|
Light at the end of the tunnel: Will tough times bring on boom times for patent acquirers? That’s what Joff Wild concludes in another article on this subject. Here’s the equation: Recession equals (patent-owning) companies going out of business equals auctioning off of these assets as companies try to raise cash to pay creditors equals more opportunities to acquire patents (both from bankruptcies and solvent companies that want to raise cash). While this may be a patent troll/NPE’s (Non-Practicing Entity) modus operandi for building up a portfolio, any company that develops and sells products, seeks new technologies, and is willing to spend cash can do the same. According to Wild, it’s a great way to save R&D time and money.
|
by: 07 Jan 2009 03:47 |
1 | |
|
Joe Mullin is back to let us know about the latest patent insanity, starting with a post about a whole bunch of patent infringement lawsuits based on patents held by Scott Harris. You may recall Harris because he was a lawyer for a big law firm, but was quietly filing patents on the side, and then apparently working out deals whereby other companies licensed those patents to be used in infringement lawsuits against big companies -- including companies represented by the very same firm Harris worked for. [...] my critics will be the first to point out that I'm no patent attorney, but reading over the patent, it certainly appears to be a patent on displaying a book online. How is that possibly patentable material?
|
by: 07 Jan 2009 00:56 |
1 | |
|
I got this idea from looking at some of the early articles' comments and because of the article on software patents and math. I was, frankly, so proud of the wonderful comments you provided, with links to substantive materials to support your points. I'd like to make it quick for people who don't have time to read each and every comment on each and every article to find the cream of the comments. If you would help me do that, I'd be thrilled.
|
by: 06 Jan 2009 21:30 |
1 | |
|
Companies also can use their patent portfolios to disrupt competitors and gain revenue from companies that want to use their patented technologies. Microsoft, for example, has made claims that it holds patents for technologies in Linux, which open-source proponents viewed as a tactic to discourage people from using open-source software. Microsoft and other companies also have cross-licensing patent agreements in which companies pay to use technologies other companies have patented.
|
by: 06 Jan 2009 13:27 |
1 | |
|
The last two years have seen plenty of patent litigation among storage companies, including a battle between Sun Microsystems and NetApp Inc. that is still ongoing. However, other patent lawsuits that have made a splash in the storage industry, such as Quantum’s suit against Riverbed, have been settled out of court or otherwise fizzled like this one. In the Sun case, at least one of the patents cited by NetApp in suing Sun has been taken off the table by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office due to similar enforcement issues. So far the lawsuits are looking like key talking points for those who argue the patent system in general badly needs reform.
|
by: 06 Jan 2009 13:13 |
1 | |
|
According to Chief Patent Counsel Bart Eppenauer, who oversees Microsoft’s patent portfolio, the company’s evolving worldwide IP strategy is the result of a global innovation philosophy combined with a strong commitment to Microsoft’s business and technological priorities within local markets and economies. “As the company expands its R&D facilities and efforts around the world, we have stepped up our efforts to expand Microsoft’s patent portfolio by increasing filings with the world’s major patent offices,” Eppenauer said. “We are continuously improving our ability to better identify and capture the innovation taking place at Microsoft and the related IP in alignment with Microsoft’s business goals of investing in innovation to improve people’s lives and provide economic benefit to regions around the world,” he added.
|
by: 06 Jan 2009 13:10 |
1 | |
|
Companies also can use their patent portfolios to disrupt competitors and gain revenue from companies that want to use their patented technologies. Microsoft, for example, has made claims that it holds patents for technologies in Linux, which open-source proponents viewed as a tactic to discourage people from using open-source software. Microsoft and other companies also have cross-licensing patent agreements in which companies pay to use technologies other companies have patented.
|
by: 06 Jan 2009 13:05 |
1 | |
|
Oracle, Apple Inc., Yahoo, Intel Corp. and several others are throwing their weight behind Microsoft Corp. as it tries to persuade the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to overturn a $500 million jury verdict for infringing on a Lucent patent. That case was decided in 2007 in a Southern District of California federal court before Judge Rudi Brewster. [...] Microsoft got hit with $500 million in damages because the act of creating a new appointment in the calendar function of the company's e-mail product, Outlook, infringed on a Lucent patent. The damages were calculated by taking a percentage of Outlook sales, and to a lesser degree, the sales of other Microsoft products with similar functions.
|
by: 06 Jan 2009 13:01 |
1 | |
|
HDTV company Vizio is petitioning the Federal Communications Commission to lower patent fees for digital TVs, claiming they are excessive, unregulated and costing consumers more than $1 billion and counting. “This is the great untold story of the transition to digital television,” said Amos Snead, spokesman for the Coalition to Terminate Financial Abuses of the Television Transmission, or CUT FATT, which Vizio is backing. “Since 2007, American consumers have been paying more than 20 to 30 times what consumers in Europe and Japan pay in royalties for basically the same technologies.
|
by: 06 Jan 2009 12:44 |
1 | |
|
VIZIO, America's HDTV Company, announced its support of the Coalition to Terminate Financial Abuses of the Television Transmission. VIZIO is petitioning and urging the FCC to take action and protect American consumers from excessive patent charges for DTV that have already exceeded $1 Billion. The coalition, also known as CUT FATT, was formed to protect American consumers purchasing televisions from the excessive unregulated patent fees, charged by companies claiming to own the patents needed to comply with FCC standards for digital televisions (DTV). "At VIZIO we support the American consumer, it is our duty to offer them more for their money, therefore we support the efforts of the CUT FATT coalition," said Laynie Newsome, VIZIO VP, Sales & Marketing Communications and Co-Founder. Formed in mid-2008, CUT FATT's mission is to raise awareness among Members of Congress and the FCC about the uncontrolled price gouging of these patent holders.
|
by: 06 Jan 2009 12:43 |
1 | |
|
Coupled together, these statements could be argued to exclude entire fields of computer science that focus on the design of algorithms independent of their application to specific data, such as cryptography, computer languages, compression, and database design, just to name a few. Finally, the exclusion of "public and private legal obligations" seems particularly shortsighted. All financial transactions and their constituent elements -- price, asset value, bid, offer, exercise price, etc. -- rest upon a framework that makes the transactions enforceable legal obligations. The court's statement here unnecessarily jeopardizes protection of legitimate innovation in fields such as ecommerce, financial engineering, and computational finance.
|
by: 06 Jan 2009 11:14 |
1 |
