Category: IP

One Orc in New Zealand Kills Amazon’s 1-Click Patent

No Comments

Peter Calveley of Auckland, New Zealand, after receiving poor service from Amazon, took it upon himself to document the prior art on Amazon’s one click patent. The USPTO review his research, and invalidated 21 of 26 of the claims in the patent.

Mr Calveley, whose previous claim to fame is having “worked as a motion capture performer and appeared as part of the evil armies in Peter Jackson’s Lord of the Rings”.

It’s amazing what disgruntled customer, his blog, and a few thousand customers can do.

What is even more amazing is that the USPTO didn’t punt this whole thing.

Bogus Patent Suit Instigated by Microsoft Against Linux Vendors

No Comments

A company by the name of IP Innovation LLC, a subsidiary of subsidiary of a company called Acacia (a well known patent troll) has filed suit against Linux vendors Red Hat and Novell.

The patent is for a “User interface with multiple workspaces for sharing display system objects”, something that existed in prior art and is obvious.

FWIW, Acacia also holds a patent on the “desktop”, no kidding, they just got Apple to pay money.

The recent supreme court cases which restricted patent remedies should make this interesting. Because Acacia is a patent troll, there is no damage that cannot be made right, and so there is no cause for an injunction, and here is a big surprise:

And Acacia has taken on a couple of former Microsoft employees in recent months, including Brad Brunell, who was general manager of intellectual property licensing at Microsoft until he joined IP Innovation on 1 October — just eight days before the suit was filed

So much like SCO, Microsoft’s FUD hands are all over this.

Supreme Court to Consider Patent Exhaustion

No Comments

My guess would be that they will once again reverse the Federal circuit court that does patents, as they have done so repeatedly in the past few months. If they were not likely to overrule, I would think that they would not have elected to review this.

The case is straightforward, LG has patents on chip designs, which it licensed to Intel. Intel has sold these chips to a number of Taiwanese manufacturers, and then LG sued these computer manufacturers for patent infringement.

The Federal Circuit Court allowed the suit to proceed, and the Taiwanese manufacturers claim that:

Lawyers for the Taiwanese companies, meanwhile, responded in court filings that once Intel sold the chips, LG’s patent had run its course under the legal doctrine of “patent exhaustion.” As a result, LG cannot enforce the patent against downstream purchasers, Quanta and the others said.

My view: The patent court went overboard again.

Patent exhaustion has been the law of the land, and for that matter the world, for years, and the consequence of its reversal would be catastrophic.

Our IP system is well and truly broken.

Pirate Bay Files Criminal Complaint Against Media Companies

No Comments

The leaked emails from MediaDefender, the Frank Nitti to the RIAA and MPAA’s Capone, have revealed a systematic program of hacking and computer vandalism, and Pirate Bay has filed criminal complaints against Swedish subsidiaries of music and movie studios.

For all their talk of law and order, the media distributors have demonstrated a fairly clear “the law for thee and not for me” attitude.

How Long Before This is Hacked?

No Comments

I dunno, 15-20 minutes?

NBC unveils self-destructing, ad-addled anti-iTunes service
Published Thursday 20th September 2007 19:29 GMT“
By Cade Metz in San Francisco
Published Thursday 20th September 2007 19:29 GMT

Less than a month after its very public breakup with Apple iTunes (http://www.theregister.com/2007/08/31/apple_and_nbc_go_at_it/), NBC Universal has announced its own rights-restricting video download service.

With the new NBC Direct, due for beta testing sometime in October, you’ll have the power to download shows like “The Office” and “Heroes” immediately after they’re broadcast on national television – without paying a penny. But don’t get too excited. You can’t view these videos on more than one Windows PC. They’re riddled with commercials you can’t skip. And they self-destruct after seven days.

….

You got a love it. Take all the worst features of bloody mindedly stupid DRM, and wrap it all up in one tight package.

Congress Passes Improved Patent Law

No Comments

It’s better, but Bush is implying a veto over the reduced damages.

It’s a little bit better, but the problem with IP abuse continues, and will continue until congress treats Patent and copyright as the public interest law*, we won’t have a good law.

It’s still got to pass the Senate, though.

*The section of the constitution that allows congress to create patent and copyright for a “limited time” has as its justification, “to promote the useful arts and sciences”, and until the law gets back to this, as opposed being an attempt for entrenched players to use the power of the state to coerce excessive profits out of people, we won’t see a good law.

Victory for Free Speech and IP Common Sense

No Comments

The 10th circuit court of appeals overruled the dismissal of the case Golan v. Gonzalez in the context of works previously in the public domain.

The background is as follows, following the Sonny Bono copyright extension act, the Supreme court ruled that it’s pretty much the exclusive purview of Congress what a “limited time” is under that clause of the Constitution.

However, it also ruled that there could be a 1st amendment challenge if there were an action taken that “altered the traditional contours of copyright protection.”

The Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA) brought US intellectual property law in line with that of other countries. In so doing, it removed a number of works from the public domain, and placed them back under copyright, where people who had previously used them found that they had to pay (frequently exorbitant) license fees.

Lawrence Lessig Lessig argued that putting public domain works back under copyright was unprecedented in US law, and hence it significantly altered the “traditional contours of copyright protection”, and overruled the dismissal, remanding the case to the lower court.

This, along with Kahle v. Gonzalez, which argues that the change from opt-in copyright to opt out-copyright alters the “traditional contours of copyright protection”.

My guess is that the current Supreme Court will rule for the rich pigs, but there are a number of people who have reevaluated the role of IP in our society following the Crackberry case.

Google, Yahoo! and Amazon sued over email patent | The Register

No Comments

In yet another case of IP gone stupid, patent troll Polaris has sued for infringing their patent on rules based mail filtering.

To quote Ars Technica:

The patent, titled “Automatic message interpretation and routing system,” is unsurprisingly general. It was filed in 1998 and awarded to a company called Brightware, Inc. in 2002, and it basically describes an autoresponder. “The method for automatically interpreting an electronic message may also include the step of retrieving one or more predetermined responses corresponding to the interpretation of the electronic message from a repository for automatic delivery to the source,” reads the patent.

The company, Polaris IP, has no products. It’s an IP troll.

Note that Procmail, a rather powerful rules based email delivery agent, was released in 1990, and that auto-responders date to before 1980.

Hopefully, this will get thrown out, but if not, one hopes that the court will obey the recent Supreme court precedent, and not grant an injunction.

Our patent system needs to be fixed.

Abusive Patent Practices

No Comments

Well, it looks like everyone’s favorite patent troll, Rambus is about to get spanked by the EU.

The European Commission has confirmed formal “patent ambush” charges against US memory chip designer Rambus.

…..

It said that “Rambus engaged in intentional deceptive conduct in the context of the standard-setting process, for example by not disclosing the existence of the patents which it later claimed were relevant to the adopted standard.”

…..

The FTC found that Rambus had through subterfuge, illegally gained a monopoly in four key memory technologies.

The gist of all this is that Rambus had an idea, a patentable idea, about how to improve memory performance.

It wasn’t a bad idea, but it wasn’t better than any of the other ideas out there either.

However, when the JEDEC was drawing up standards for the next generation of memory, Rambus, which participated in this board, deliberately, and deceptively kept the information that they had this IP, and that people who signed off on this standard would have to pay them royalties in order to use it.

Had Rambus revealed the status of their IP during the development of this standard, as required by law, the standard would have been drawn up in a way so as not to require their technology.

Personally, I think that people should go RICO on their butts, definately to the extent of putting them out of business, and hopefully to the extent of bankrupting principals in this scheme and sending them to jail.

Gambling Dispute With a Tiny Country Puts U.S. in a Bind – New York Times

No Comments

The US-Antigua dispute over Net gambling is escalating, and it’s hit the NY Times, which means that it’s really hit the mainstream, but before I get into that, I have to acknowledge Dean Bakers incisive analaysis, and the magnificent snark therein, where he says “Antigua Threatens the United States with Free Trade“, which is absolutely true. IP restrictions are restrictions on trade through exclusive licensing.

A brief recap on the whole Internet gambling business, the US implemented an internet casino gambling ban. It still allows for other internet gambling, “including the online purchase of lottery tickets*, participation in Web-based pro sports fantasy leagues and off-track wagering on horse racing.”

Online casinos are a big part of the Antiguan economy. It’s the 2nd largest employer on the Island.

So Antigua takes it to the WTO, Antigua wins. Big whoop. Really….Who cares. If they are allowed to place tarrifs on US cars, or toothpaste, what difference does it make? Their population is around 70,000, so it’s a negligible impact, right?

Wrong

What the Antigua asked for, and received as a sanction was the right to ignore US IP restrictions, and to distribute US IP protected products without restriction.

While the drug manufacturers have nothing to fear, it’s not like they are going to become a Viagra® manufacturing powerhouse, the makers of non-tangible items, like movies, music, software, etc. are in the process of freaking out, which looks something like this: , because the island is well wired (from the online Casinos), and can set up an operation that would make AllofMP3.com look like a Sunday social.

Truth be told, the consequences will not be as dire as IP companies will make out. I expect that very few people who would otherwise pay for these products will download them, and my guess is that these companies know that.

The reason that they are concerned is that if I am right, and the consequences will be minor, then you will see another argument against draconian IP restrictions, because the sky did not fall.

This may be of particular interest to the Chinese too, as this ruling could be extended to the “Great Firewall of China.

*On the matter of state lottery tickets, I believe that they should be treated differently, being a state run activity and a revenue generator, but when we signed onto the WTO, it specifically forbade this.

Class Action Suit Against the RIAA

No Comments

Well, it looks like the someone gets what the RIAA is, and they’ve filed a class action suit claiming:

  • negligence
  • fraud and misrepresentation
  • racketeering and corruption
  • abuse of the legal process
  • malicious prosecution
  • outrage and intention to inflict emotional distress
  • computer fraud and abuse
  • trespass
  • invasion of privacy
  • libel and slander
  • deceptive business practices
  • misuse of copyright laws
  • civil conspiracy.

I would argue that all of these accusations are to be accurate, and that there is a significant benefit to society if the RIAA, and it’s equally evil twin, the MPAA, are properly labeled as the racketeers that they truly are.

They are protection operations that prey on those too weak to defend themselves, doing things like trying to browbeat a 10 year old (see article), etc.

A monetary judgment would be nice, but I want to see jail time.

allofmp3.com Owner Acquitted

No Comments

Well, the owner of allofmp3.com just got acquitted in Russia. This is not surprising. While the IP laws in Russia are not what the record distributors would want, it has always been fairly clear that Denis Kvasov was operating within those laws.

The question now is whether Putin finds more advantage in joining the WTO, or giving Washington the finger.

One thing that needs to be said though, this dispute does not affect the amount of money that performers get for their recordings by one cent. That number is still zero. I’ve yet to hear of a performer who has actually received royalties, due to corrupt record company accounting.

What the Other Matt Said

No Comments

Matthew Yglesias has a very good comment on the lunacy of fashion copyrights. (I’ve talked about a bit earlier and called Chuck Schumer names).

On a loosely related note, if you’ve been to a bookstore lately at all you’ll notice there’s a remarkable vibrancy in the cookbook section as the popularity of things like the Food Network, Top Chef, etc., seems to be driving more chef-types into the public consciousness. Cookbooks, of course, can be copyrighted. But the actual recipes they contain can’t be. And one suspects that this non-copyrightable nature of the recipes is integral to the cookbook industry’s vibrancy. Without it, the bulk of the market would already be locked-down by older cookbooks, and to publish anything new you’d have to be prepared to lawyer up and fight off a thousand lawsuits alleging that your recipes are too derivative.

This is true, and applies everywhere. IP is public interest law, and it is a restriction on individual freedoms (not having IP does not prevent one from creating) and as such, these laws should be limited in scope.

There should be restrictions placed on IP only to the degree that there is reasonable proof that the public is receiving benefits in excess of the restrictions placed upon.

I would note that under the current US IP Regime, the works of Shakespeare would be lost forever (the folio that was found would still have been under copyright, and would not have been reprinted or preserved), and most of us would never have read Moby Dick (a failure when first published, and it only became recognized as a classic after Melville’s death, when it was reprinted because it had entered the public comain).

What the Content Industry Wants

No Comments

Lovely…Some people bought videos through Google, and nowthey’ve been told that that their videos will be taken away.

This is what the RIAA and MPAA want. They want you to buy stuff, and then they want to keep making you buy it again, and again, and a again, and again.

Patents are already hamstringing innovation in the US, and now it seems that actually buying a video is a thing of the past too.

Hopefully, some lawyer will go medieval on Google’s tuchas.

Another Moronic IP Initiative.

No Comments

So now the blithering idiots who think that copyright is property want to apply copyright to designer fashion.

Let’s get this straight: It’s for the useful arts and sciences. Says so in the constitution.

What’s more, there is plenty of fashion (most of it sucky) being made out there. There is no need to encourage production of more tacky handbags.

IP is about encouraging production of beneficial things, inventions, arts, etc. It’s not about allowing people to print their own money so that they can make bigger campaign donations to you, senator butthead Schumer.

Why Network Neutrality Matters

No Comments

AT&T censored anti-Bush lyrics on a webcast by Pearl Jam. This is why we want to put net neutrality into law.

Note: I am quoting the press release in its entirety, because permission is implied by posting a press release.

LOLLAPALOOZA WEBCAST: SPONSORED/CENSORED BY AT&T?

08.08.07
After concluding our Sunday night show at Lollapalooza, fans informed us that portions of that performance were missing and may have been censored by AT&T during the “Blue Room” Live Lollapalooza Webcast.

When asked about the missing performance, AT&T informed Lollapalooza that portions of the show were in fact missing from the webcast, and that their content monitor had made a mistake in cutting them.

During the performance of “Daughter” the following lyrics were sung to the tune of Pink Floyd’s “Another Brick in the Wall” but were cut from the webcast:

– “George Bush, leave this world alone.” (the second time it was sung); and

– “George Bush find yourself another home.”

This, of course, troubles us as artists but also as citizens concerned with the issue of censorship and the increasingly consolidated control of the media.

AT&T’s actions strike at the heart of the public’s concerns over the power that corporations have when it comes to determining what the public sees and hears through communications media.

Aspects of censorship, consolidation, and preferential treatment of the internet are now being debated under the umbrella of “NetNeutrality.” Check out The Future of Music or Save the Internet for more information on this issue.

Most telecommunications companies oppose “net neutrality” and argue that the public can trust them not to censor..

Even the ex-head of AT&T, CEO Edward Whitacre, whose company sponsored our troubled webcast, stated just last March that fears his company and other big network providers would block traffic on their networks are overblown..

“Any provider that blocks access to content is inviting customers to find another provider.” (Marguerite Reardon, Staff Writer, CNET News.com Published: March 21, 2006, 2:23 PM PST).

But what if there is only one provider from which to choose?

If a company that is controlling a webcast is cutting out bits of our performance -not based on laws, but on their own preferences and interpretations – fans have little choice but to watch the censored version.

What happened to us this weekend was a wake up call, and it’s about something much bigger than the censorship of a rock band.

The complete version of “Daughter” from the Lollapalooza performance will be posted here soon for any of you who missed it. We apologize to our fans who were watching the webcast and got shortchanged. In the future, we will work even harder to ensure that our live broadcasts or webcasts are free from arbitrary edits.

If you have examples of AT&T censoring artist performances around political content, it’s a good thing for everyone to know about. Feel free to post examples on the official Pearl Jam Message Pit.