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
Q: Are there patent issues with Mono? A: Just like any other software, Mono certainly infringes on thousands of stupid software patents. However the Debian policy with patents is to put them in a trash and pee on them, unless they are actively enforced with reasonable chances to win. The situation of Mono is much more comfortable than (for example) that of MP3 decoders, for which patents are actively enforced; it’s just that they are so lame that we choose to ignore them.
by: zoobabzoobab
06 Jul 2009 14:39
1  
Today's debate over patent law generally pits pharmaceutical and traditional manufacturers against high-tech companies. Makers of long-lived products want strong patent protection to ward off copycats. They and such tech powerhouses as IBM (IBM) and Microsoft (MSFT) are backing a Senate bill even though it would reduce penalties that patent infringers might be ordered to pay. But others in the faster-paced tech sector have turned against the measure because it doesn't cap damage awards enough. Without a concerted push by business, the Senate may once again shelve action to deal with more pressing matters. [...] Last spring, in a case known as Bilski, the Federal Circuit hand-picked Duffy to argue for broadly patenting business methods. The court rejected his argument in an October ruling that significantly pared back what can be patented. Now that the case is headed to the Supreme Court, Duffy says he expects to make another amicus—or friend of the court— filing.
by: zoobabzoobab
06 Jul 2009 13:46
1  
Two chapters were written by EPO experts: Nigel Clarke wrote about searching patent information, and Colin Stratford clarified the often misunderstood and misreported practice of the EPO with regard to computer-implemented inventions. Jeremy Philpott leads the Innovation Support activities of the European Patent Academy, where he organises training programmes for business audiences across Europe on topics such as patent strategies and innovation management.
by: zoobabzoobab
06 Jul 2009 12:44
1  
A majority of IT stakeholders on the other hand, especially in the software industry and among its users, are of the opinion that a more satisfactory level of interoperability can be achieved using IPR policies which could be perceived to differ from a (F)RAND approach. Several fora and consortia covering software standardisation have therefore adopted different approaches to IPR. Some, for example, require IPR in standards to be the subject of royaltyfree licensing. Finally, many SME stakeholders as well as consumer organisations support a royalty-free approach, often described as RF on (F)RAND, especially for standards which are to be referenced in legislation and policies. While it is clear that many aspects of the treatment of IPR are covered by other policy areas, there are certain aspects of ICT standardisation with its focus on functional standards and interoperability, which make the treatment of IPR especially important and delicate in this field. Flexibility should remain how
by: zoobabzoobab
06 Jul 2009 10:39
1  
By reading the Amicus Brief of IBM to the CAFC, it is pretty clear that the machine tranformation test which allows software patents and ban business method patents was invented by IBM lawyers.
by: zoobabzoobab
03 Jul 2009 17:36
1  
We wish to protect the democratic right of all people to express themselves freely. For software developers writing software is a form of creative expression. In the Open Source domain it is also a public service, providing value to the entire community. In order to better understand the impact of software patents on software developers let us consider the possibility of a similar situation that book authors would have if writing styles or plots could be patented.
by: zoobabzoobab
03 Jul 2009 16:54
1  
The Linux Foundation continues to maintain that Microsoft's VFAT patents are not valid. And of course the United States is one of only a small handful of countries that even recognise software patents. However, according to CNet, the Linux community has recently been taking steps to work around the entire VFAT patent issue. But what is the nature of the VFAT patents, and how can Linux bypass them?
by: zoobabzoobab
03 Jul 2009 09:57
1  
By reading the Amicus Brief of IBM to the CAFC, it is pretty clear that the machine tranformation test which allows software patents and ban business method patents was invented by IBM lawyers.
by: zoobabzoobab
03 Jul 2009 09:10
1  
I have long since lost hope that those who are truly anti-patent and anti-software zealots will ever come to accept that software should be patentable. For reasons that are beyond me they will not even admit that software can be patented. Talking to such a lunatic fringe is hardly worth the time it takes, or the adjida it causes, and seems to approximate a real life Monty Python sketch where the people who claim to have the far superior intellect have such narrow minds that even in the face of overwhelming proof they cling to the irrational and simply incorrect view that software is in fact math and everyone knows math isn’t patentable. Yes, the lunacy is high, very high indeed. So high that the only reason worth continuing to write articles like this is to hopefully prevent the overall anti-patent and anti-invention hysteria that seems to be gaining steam. But the real goal is to try and make sure that any policy makers, decision makers and even those who wear black robes and work at
by: zoobabzoobab
02 Jul 2009 16:16
1  
According to Remnant, the Ubuntu Project takes patent issues seriously and, should a rights holder claim a patent infringement, the board would commit to a review of the claim. Currently, the board as received no claims of infringement against the Mono stack and is unaware of any claims being received by any other similar project. As patents are generally registered to protect against litigation, rather than as an intent to litigate, the board feel that as there is currently no claim of infringement, the patent itself is not a "sufficient reason to warrant exclusion from the Ubuntu Project".
by: zoobabzoobab
02 Jul 2009 15:55
1  
However, opponents of a unified patent system say just the opposite. "With the financial crisis and climate change as looming priorities, the Swedish presidency is going to be hard-pressed to move forward an agenda that has been mired in deep political fights for the last thirty years," said Benjamin Henrion, president of the Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure (FFII). The FFII argues that a Community Patent will make it easier to pass software patents in Europe, and it says a single patent litigation area is merely a way to circumvent the legal authority of the European Court of Justice, which it trusts could safeguard the E.U. from software patents. "While large US software firms keep up their hopes for cheap enforceable software patents in Europe, the facts on the ground suggest that this debate will crawl, not run," Henrion said.
by: zoobabzoobab
02 Jul 2009 15:47
1  
A Linux developer has published a new kernel patch that provides a workaround to avoid Microsoft's patents on the FAT filesystem. The patch, which has undergone extensive legal review by patent lawyers, could make it possible to use FAT on Linux without having to pay licensing fees to Microsoft.
by: zoobabzoobab
02 Jul 2009 14:13
1  
As the Federal Circuit and Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences continue to decide cases on patentable subject matter by applying the Bilski test, practitioners find it more difficult to draft reliable method claims to software and business procedures. Still to be explored by the court are the limits of the exception they drew in the Bilski decision for methods that transform data directly representative of physical objects or substances. The example discussed by the court in Bilski is the transformation of x-ray attenuation data, produced by a computed tomography scanner, into a particular visual depiction of a physical object.
by: zoobabzoobab
02 Jul 2009 13:43
1  
But worst of all, the article presents Spangenberg as always being right and always having big companies settle (or that he wins his cases). You would think that any profile on Spangenberg would include little facts like that he was caught shuffling patents around in order to sue companies multiple times over the same patent -- despite a settlement promising not to. Doing so eventually cost Spangenberg $4 million. Robin Hood? Or how about his attempts to stretch what highly questionable patents cover? For example, patent 5,493,490, which covers a system for making electronic proposals to buy cars (which, yes, you would think seems obvious enough, but what do you know?), which Spangenberg is asserting against dozens of companies who don't sell cars, but do sell other stuff online.
by: zoobabzoobab
02 Jul 2009 12:37
2 by ciaranorciaranor
02 Jul 2009 13:42 Jump!
If rumour is correct and President Obama’s administration manages to install Sotomayor to the Supreme Court by October in time for the Court’s next term, she may be presiding over the much-anticipated judgment in Bilski. The AmeriKat’s brief investigation into Sotomayor’s intellectual property decisions seems to show her leaning in favor of larger corporations and rights holders. However, this limited evidence and Sotomayor’s few judgments concerning patent cases have not given the AmeriKat any definitive guidance on how to predict Sotomayor’s approach to Bilski. If it is anything like her ex-husband’s stance, however, Sotomayor’s judgment will not be forming part of any ground-breaking judgment that many are hoping. Where the AmeriKat has failed to predict Sotomayor’s attitude towards patent claims, she is eager to hear your views. To help you along your way, the AmeriKat suggests you look Sotomayor’s responses to the required Senate Committee of the Judiciary questionnaire.
by: zoobabzoobab
02 Jul 2009 10:52
1  
“We must moreover continue to attempt to harmonise the practise of granting patents for computer-implemented inventions at the European level. This is to be attempted by a common European patent court system (EPLA) in which the member states can voluntarily participate. Thereby a unified procedure and legal certainty are achieved.” --German Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology
by: zoobabzoobab
02 Jul 2009 10:49
1  
8. Central Caselaw “Baumann added that the new court was not intended to "codify software patents", but it was hoped it would provide better intellectual property protection for inventions with embedded software, such as mobile phones and satellite navigation systems.”--James Murray, IT Week [...] 10. Saint Graal „2009 must be the year for the negotiations in Brussels a breakthrough in the creation of the Community patent and a European patent court“ --Brigitte Zypries, German Ministry of Justice [...] 11. UPLS = United Patent Litigation System International treaty Treaty where EU could join Patent injunctions from Turkey No counter legislator Hand picked judges
by: zoobabzoobab
02 Jul 2009 09:33
1  
But the main argument for continuing the discussions is the need for it, Josefsson said: "The urgency of making the patent system in Europe less costly and more accessible to particular small and medium-sized enterprises is there." The software industry supports the Swedish efforts. Jonathan Zuck, president of the Association for Competitive Technology, said: “The Swedish presidency’s commitment to move the EU Community Patent forward is a breath of fresh air. We wish the new presidency all the success in their negotiations to achieve the agreement that SMEs have been waiting for so long."
by: zoobabzoobab
02 Jul 2009 08:59
3 by zoobabzoobab
02 Jul 2009 09:14 Jump!
NZ government is about to pass a new Patents Act. In the 8-year review, they seemingly forgot to consider the impacts of patents on computer software! Submissions on the bill are being accepted till 2 July, so we need to move fast. Make a submission now!
by: zoobabzoobab
25 Jun 2009 14:26
1  
The problem here is that SAP likes software patents. In another obscure filing, this time to the European Patent Office, it spends pages arguing that the current, already-porous regime for granting patents on software in Europe should be loosened even further. Other ideas that SAP objects to in the European report include “Promote OSS initiatives targeted to commoditize software products of interest to European industries,” and the creation of the “European OSS forge” and “The European OSS test bed.”
by: zoobabzoobab
24 Jun 2009 10:19
1