08.11.10

Open Invention Network (OIN) and Linux Foundation Still Legitimise Software Patents

Posted in Apple, GNU/Linux, OIN, Patents at 2:31 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: The companies which make up the Linux Foundation are still predominantly supporters of software patents, so they continue to create a pool of such controversial patents rather than abolish them

LinuxCon Boston is making some big announcements this week. First of all, there is the license compliance program, which was covered by many journalists like Sean Michael Kerner and friends of the Linux Foundation (further discussion in LWN). There is even mainstream press coverage, not just coverage in GNU/Linux-oriented circles [1, 2, 3].

The Linux Foundation, the nonprofit organization dedicated to accelerating the growth of Linux, announced today the launch of the Open Compliance Program, a comprehensive initiative that includes tools, training, a standard format to report software licensing information, consulting and a self-assessment checklist that will help companies comply with open source licenses, increasing adoption of open source and decreasing legal FUD present in the marketplace.

Here is some good coverage from Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols and from Groklaw:

The Linux Foundation has announced a new compliance program to help companies that wish to use Linux and other Open Source software responsibly know how to comply with licenses. The Software Freedom Law Center is backing it, along with gpl-violations.org, the Open Invention Network, and OSI, as is pretty much every major electronics company, including Adobe, AMD, ARM Limited, Cisco Systems, Google, HP, IBM, Intel, Motorola, NEC, Nokia, Novell, Palamida, Samsung, Sony Electronics, and more than 20 other companies and organizations — even the Codeplex Foundation supports it. Here’s the complete list.

The SFLC is a backer, which is a good sign. The Microsoft booster calls it “license vaccination”.

At the same time we learn that OIN (connected to the Linux Foundation) expands its membership with ForgeRock with Qualcomm [1, 2].

From the press release about ForgeRock:

Open Invention Network (OIN) today extended the Linux ecosystem with the signing of ForgeRock as a licensee. By becoming a licensee, ForgeRock, the official stewards of the ForgeRock I3 Open Platform project, has joined the growing list of organizations that recognize the importance of participating in a substantial community of Linux supporters and leveraging the Open Invention Network to further spur open source innovation.

Here is the press release about Qualcomm:

The Linux Foundation, the nonprofit organization dedicated to accelerating the growth of Linux, today announced that the Qualcomm Innovation Center Inc. (QuIC) is joining the organization as a Platinum member. It joins a short list of existing Platinum members that includes Fujitsu, Hitachi, IBM, Intel, NEC and Oracle.

Qualcomm is a far bigger company than ForgeRock. Qualcomm is a software patents proponent, so there is already heckling from Florian Müller, the Microsoft sympthiser (Müller still takes attention off Microsoft). “Qualcomm is working mostly on Android & Chrome OS,” Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols explained.

Techrights opines that OIN is the wrong solution to a real problem. The OIN legitimises software patents, which leads to companies like Samsung paying Microsoft for Linux and patenting software like no other company (Samsung is a huge patentor these days, almost challenging IBM’s numbers). Narendra Sisodiy says, “You sucks Samsung ! Samsung patents tablet with front+rear touch input” (said in reference to this news).

Samsung has filed for a US patent for a tablet that has a traditional touchscreen on the front but adds a touch panel on the rear of the device as well, in the same fashion as the Motorola Backflip. The idea is to let users control the device without touching the screen, and perhaps allow them to perform multi-touch inputs from the screen side and the rear side at the same time.

Come on, this cannot be a patent. Any kid could come up with the idea, which is a metaphor for what people do all the time with paper (and have done with centuries). Here are some new rants about Apple’s bad patents which were mentioned here some days ago:

Apple has apparently lifted the look-and-feel of an iPhone app from German developer FutureTap and used it in a software patent application, putting that developer in a sticky situation.

“I can’t really judge whether the inclusion of a 1:1 copy of our start screen in someone else’s patent is legal,” wrote FutureTap founder Ortwin Gentz in a posting on his company blog. “I just have to say, it doesn’t feel right.”

Does anyone still think that software patents are beneficial? █

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.

Permalink Mail Send this to a friend

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

What Else is New

Koch Brothers and Big Oil Could Not Buy the Decisions in Oil States, SAS

In Oil States Energy Services v Greene’s Energy Group, a case which Koch-funded think tanks meddled in (including those whose panel guests send me threatening legal letters), ends up with dissent from a Koch-connected Justice citing or quoting those very same Koch-funded think tanks
The European Patent Office (EPO) Wastes a Lot of Money on External PR Agencies for Battistelli's 'Heist'

The EPO's management is once again scattering/throwing EPO budget at PR agencies and media companies (publishers/broadcasters) to disseminate a bunch of puff pieces and virtually ignore the very obvious conflict of interest, which should be a scandal on par with that of FIFA (resulting in the arrest of its boss, Mr. Blatter)
Today's EPO is Not Compatible With the Law and It's Grossly Incompatible With Truth and Justice

Today, once again, the EPO openly advocates software patents while media promotes loopholes (notably hype waves)
Quick Mention: As Expected, the US Supreme Court Cements PTAB's Role With Trump-Appointed Gorsuch Dissenting

Oil States has been decided and it's very good news for the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB); even Conservatives-leaning Justices support PTAB
Links 24/4/2018: Preview of Crostini, Introducing Heptio Gimbal, OPNsense 18.1.6

Links for the day
Patent Maximalists Step Things Up With Director Andrei Iancu and It's Time for Scientists to Fight Back

Science and technology don't seem to matter as much as the whims of the patent (litigation) 'industry', at least judging by recent actions taken by Andrei Iancu (following a hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee)
Mythology About Patents in the East

Misconceptions (or deliberate propaganda) about patent policy in the east poison the debate and derail a serious, facts-based discussion about it
Patent Trolls Watch: Red River Innovations, Bradium Technologies/General Patent, and Wordlogic

A quick look at some patent trolls that made the news this Monday; we are still seeing a powerful response to such trolls, whose momentum is slipping owing to the good work of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)
Holding Benoît Battistelli Accountable After the EPO

The many abuses and offenses committed by Mr. Battistelli whilst he enjoyed diplomatic immunity can and should be brought up as that immunity expires in two months; a good start would be contacting his colleagues, who might not be aware of the full spectrum of his abuses
Links 23/4/2018: Second RC of Linux 4.17 and First RC of Mesa 18.1

Links for the day
The Good Work of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and the Latest Attempts to Undermine It

A week's roundup of news about PTAB, which is eliminating many bad (wrongly-granted) patents and is therefore becoming "enemy number one" to those who got accustomed to blackmailing real (productive) firms with their questionable patents
District Courts' Patent Cases, Including the Eastern District of Texas (EDTX/TXED), in a Nutshell

A roundup of patent cases in 'low courts' of the United States, where patents are being reasoned about or objected to while patent law firms make a lot of money
The Federal Circuit's (CAFC) Decisions Are Being Twisted by Patent Propaganda Sites Which Merely Cherry-Pick Cases With Outcomes That Suit Them

The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) continues to reject the vast majority of software patents, citing Section 101 in many such cases, but the likes of Managing IP, Patently-O, IAM and Watchtroll only selectively cover such cases (instead they’re ‘pulling a Berkheimer’ or some similar name-dropping)
Patents Roundup: Metaswitch, GENBAND, Susman, Cisco, Konami, High 5 Games, HTC, and Nintendo

A look at existing legal actions, the application of 35 U.S.C. § 101, and questionable patents that are being pursued on software (algorithms or "software infrastructure")
In Maxon v Funai the High 'Patent Court' (CAFC) Reaffirms Disdain for Software Patents, Which Are Nowadays Harder to Get and Then Defend

With the wealth of decisions from the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) wherein software patents get discarded (Funai being the latest example), the public needs to ask itself whether patent law firms are honest when they make claims about resurgence of software patents by 'pulling a Berkheimer' or coming up with terms like “Berkheimer Effect”
Today's European Patent Office Works for Patent Extremists and for Team UPC Rather Than for Europe or for Innovation

The International Association for the Protection of Intellectual Property (AIPPI) and other patent maximalists who have nothing to do with Europe, helped by a malicious and rather clueless politician called Benoît Battistelli, are turning the EPO into a patent-printing machine rather than an examination office as envisioned by the EPC (founders) and member states
The EPO is Dying and Those Who Have Killed It Are Becoming Very Rich in the Process

Following the footsteps of Ron Hovsepian at Novell, Battistelli at the EPO (along with Team Battistelli) may mean the end of the EPO as we know it (or the end altogether); one manager and a cabal of confidants make themselves obscenely rich by basically sacrificing the very organisation they were entrusted to serve
Short: Just Keep Repeating the Lie (“Quality”) Until People Might Believe It

Battistelli’s patent-printing bureau (EPO without quality control) keeps lying about the quality of patents by repeating the word “quality” a lot of times, including no less than twice in the summary alone
Shelston IP Keeps Pressuring IP Australia to Allow Software Patents and Harm Software Development

Shelston IP wants exactly the opposite of what's good for Australia; it just wants what's good for itself, yet it habitually pretends to speak for a productive industry (nothing could be further from the truth)
Is Andy Ramer's Departure the End of Cantor Fitzgerald's Patent Trolls-Feeding Operations and Ambitions?

The managing director of the 'IP' group at Cantor Fitzgerald is leaving, but it does not yet mean that patent trolls will be starved/deprived access to patents
EPO Hoards Billions of Euros (Taken From the Public), Decreases Quality to Get More Money, Reduces Payments to Staff

The EPO continues to collect money from everyone, distributes bogus/dubious patents that usher patent trolls into Europe (to cost European businesses billions in the long run), and staff of the EPO faces more cuts while EPO management swims in cash and perks
Short: Calling Battistelli's Town (Where He Works) “Force for Innovation” to Justify the Funneling of EPO Funds to It

How the EPO‘s management ‘explained’ (or sought to rationalise) to staff its opaque decision to send a multi-million, one-day ceremony to Battistelli’s own theatre only weeks before he leaves
Short: EPO Bribes the Media and Then Brags About the Paid-for Outcome to Staff

The EPO‘s systematic corruption of the media at the expense of EPO stakeholders — not to mention hiring of lawyers to bully media which exposes EPO corruption — in the EPO’s own words (amended by us)
Short: EPO's “Working Party for Quality” is to Quality What the “Democratic People's Republic of Korea” is to Democracy

To maintain the perception (illusion) that the EPO still cares about patent quality — and in order to disseminate this lie to EPO staff — a puff piece with the above heading/photograph was distributed to thousands of examiners in glossy paper form
Short: This Spring's Message From the EPO's President (Corrected)

A corrected preface from the Liar in Chief, the EPO's notoriously crooked and dishonest President
Short: Highly Misleading and Unscientific Graphics From the EPO for an Illusion of Growth

A look at the brainwash that EPO management is distributing to staff and what's wrong with it
Short: EPO Explains to Examiners Why They Should and Apparently Can Grant Software Patents (in Spite of EPC)

Whether it calls it "CII" or "ICT" or "Industry 4.0" or "4IR", the EPO's management continues to grant software patents and attempts to justify this to itself (and to staff)
Links 21/4/2018: Linux 4.9.95, FFmpeg 4.0, OpenBSD Foundation 2018 Fundraising Campaign

Links for the day
As USPTO Director, Andrei Iancu Gives Three Months for Public Comments on 35 U.S.C. § 101 (Software Patenting Impacted)

Weeks after starting his job as head of the US patent office, to our regret but not to our surprise, Iancu asks whether to limit examiners' ability to reject abstract patent applications citing 35 U.S.C. § 101 (relates to Alice and Mayo)
In Keith Raniere v Microsoft Both Sides Are Evil But for Different Reasons

Billing for patent lawyers reveals an abusive strategy from Microsoft, which responded to abusive patent litigation (something which Microsoft too has done for well over a decade)