EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

01.04.18

Software Patents Are Still Being Rejected in the United States (New Examples), But the Anti-Alice Lobby Goes on

Posted in America, Patents at 3:40 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Ears wide shut

Ears shut

Summary: The situation in the US is becoming unbearable for those who put all their eggs in the software patents basket; in the meantime, however, more attempts are being made to change the law

THE US patent office gradually moves away from software patents. It makes it harder to get any. That does not mean that applicants can’t find ways around Section 101. Earlier this week we found this article about a new patent. “Face-tracking sensors and sophisticated software would manage the display so that you saw a realistic blended picture from any angle,” it said. Another article said: “Amazon acquired Body Labs last year, an AI-software and computer vision company that once touted its ability to create 3D models of human bodies in motion and then dress them in virtual outfits…”

Here we go again with buzzwords like “AI” and “VR”. These help opportunists get past the restrictions and receive software patents. Amazon has had truly notorious software patents, some of which we covered here before.

What’s noteworthy is that courts, unlike the patent office, aren’t tolerating software patents. Lawyers know that. We regularly see anti-Section 101 rants from law firms that profited from software patents. Here’s a new rant from Jeremy Anapol and Maria Anderson. What they’re basically doing, with polite language, is constant complaining about Section 101/Alice. We have become accustomed to that.

Charles Bieneman has just written about yet another software patent which bites the dust, owing to Alice. To quote:

Implementing a process in a highly technical environment will not necessarily save patent claims challenged under the Alice abstract idea test, as illustrated in Ancora Technologies, Inc. v. HTC America, Inc., No. C16-1919 RAJ (W.D. Wash. Dec. 14, 2017). In this case, the court dismissed, under FRCP 12(b)(6), a complaint of infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,411,941, directed to a “method of restricting software operation within a license limitation,” even though the claimed method was implemented in the sophisticated technical environment of a computer BIOS system.

[...]

The plaintiff argued that, as in Enfish, LLC v. Microsoft Corp., the claims here were directed to improving operation of a computer. But, considering the claims under the first prong of the Alice abstract idea test, the court thought these patent claims were more like those at issue in Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Erie Indemnity Corp., where the Federal Circuit held that claims directed to storage of electronic files were patent-ineligible.

[...]

Turning to the second prong of the Alice test, the plaintiff, citing BASCOM Global Internet Services, Inc. v. ATT Mobility LLC., argued that claim 1 recited in unconventional arrangement of admittedly known parts by reciting “using an agent to software licensing verification structure in the BIOS, and then actually verifying a program using that verification structure.” But the court disagreed that this was an inventive concept overcoming the claimed abstract idea. The claim simply recited storing data in a pre-existing memory.

It must be pretty stressful to depend on software patents. They’re very weak; they’re not worth the risk.

Here we have the patent troll Dominion Harbor calling a “cheat sheet” something it plans to bypass Alice with.

Last year, as we noted quite recently, the Federal Circuit smashed software patents using Alice. There was just about no decision truly antagonising Alice. None! Here’s the so-called ‘cheat sheet’ [1, 2] which lists all important decisions (those which can be cited in the future):

THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT’S 2017 PRECEDENTIAL SECTION 101 CASES:
1. Cleveland Clinic Foundation v. True Health Diagnostics LLC., 859 F.3d 1352 (Fed. Cir. 2017)
2. Credit Acceptance Corp. v. Westlake Services, 859 F.3d 1044 (Fed. Cir. 2017)
3. Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Capital One Financial Corp., 850 F.3d 1332 (Fed. Cir. 2017)
4. Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Erie Indemnity Co., 850 F.3d 1315 (Fed. Cir. 2017)
5. Mentor Graphics Corp. v. EVE-USA, Inc., 851 F.3d 1275 (Fed. Cir. 2017), panel rehearing and rehearing en banc denied, 870 F.3d 1298 (Fed. Cir. 2017)
6. RecogniCorp, LLC v. Nintendo Co., 855 F.3d 1322 (Fed. Cir. 2017)
7. Return Mail, Inc. v. United States Postal Service, 868 F.3d 1350 (Fed. Cir. 2017)
8. Secured Mail Solutions LLC v. Universal Wilde, Inc., 873 F.3d 905 (Fed. Cir. 2017)
9. Smart Systems Innovations, LLC v. Chicago Transit Authority, 873 F.3d 1364 (Fed. Cir. 2017)
10. Thales Visionix Inc. v. United States, 850 F.3d 1315 (Fed. Cir. 2017)
11. Two-Way Media Ltd. v. Comcast Cable Communications., LLC, 874 F.3d 1329 (Fed. Cir. 2017)
12. Visual Memory LLC v. NVIDIA Corp., 867 F.3d 1253 (Fed. Cir. 2017)

We have covered most of the above. These were frustrating to the patent microcosm.

So what is the patent microcosm going to do? It will play dirty, as usual, and attempt to change the law. As the FFII’s President put it yesterday: “The great return of Software Patents in US, yet another bill written by the patent industry.”

“Such bills would not pass,” I assured him, “but those behind such bills want us to believe otherwise…”

Section 101 is becoming the norm as it is; it has not been changed for a long time. One new message said: “The Chisum Patent Academy will dig into these 2017 Sec 101 #patent eligibility cases (and other notable topics) at our upcoming March seminars in #Houston and #Cincinnati. To register, visit https://chisum-patent-academy.com/ https://twitter.com/ChisumOnPatents/status/948198698919571456 …”

Yeah, sure, they will try to undermine Section 101, but that doesn’t mean they will succeed. So will Watchtroll, who just can’t help obsessing over years-old decisions. Watchtroll wrote this week: “I again continue to wish for patent eligibility reform in Congress that would overrule Mayo, Myriad and Alice.”

Keep on wishing. It’s another one of those “Patent Wishes for 2018″; Check out “New Year’s Resolutions For The U.S. Patent System” by Courtenay C. Brinckerhoff of Foley & Lardner LLP (greedy law firm). The author tries to interject lobbying agenda into the USPTO’s alleged “resolutions” and it’s just the tired old anti-Alice and anti-Mayo. To quote: “It’s been nearly six years since the Supreme Court called the patent eligibility of diagnostic methods into question in Mayo v. Prometheus, and two and a half years since the Federal Circuit twisted the knife with its decision in Ariosa v. Sequenom. The USPTO issued guidelines to help stakeholders navigate the newly treacherous § 101 terrain, but when even the Patent Trial and Appeal Board doesn’t let applicants follow those narrow paths, it’s no surprise that individual examiners find roadblocks where none used to be.”

That the USPTO actually improved patent quality isn’t a bad thing. Unless one is in the litigation ‘business’ (like Foley & Lardner LLP)…

Jeff Lindsay on Twitter, citing Watchtroll, wrote this: “When USPTO employees start claiming to be “judges” or even “chief judges” as they strike down 90% of granted patents, we have a serious arrogance issue that is harming innovation & property rights in the US. See “Nightmares” in this @IPwatchdog article: https://lnkd.in/fhw9mmg”

No, USPTO workers claim no such thing. Their job is inherently judging applications. Lindsay set up a straw man (argument) here. We assume he’s alluding to PTAB. The ‘professional’ PTAB bashers, cowboys such as Paul Morinville, are again (over at Watchtroll) attacking the Supreme Court. Their desperation is quite revealing. They just don’t want to obey the law and they attempt to change it by shaming judges, courts etc.

Banner & Witcoff’s Ernest V. Linek and Brian Emfinger have meanwhile written about Alice and it seems like they too aren’t honest. If patent law firms were honest (they’re not), they’d say software patents are de facto dead and not worth pursuing in courts anymore. This is what they said:

As non-traditional venues see more patent litigation in the aftermath of TC Heartland and Cray, time will tell if further distinctions emerge between district courts’ treatment of challenges to subject-matter eligibility and the various motions for disposing of patent infringement claims on that basis.

The venue doesn’t matter that much, especially once cases are brought before the Federal Circuit. The Federal Circuit no longer tolerates software patents.

Perhaps the most worrying thing here is that people with zero experience in software are advocating software patents. Consider Watchtroll as a prime example of it; it’s like a think tank that’s hiring writers to promote software patents — a subject they neither understand nor affects them professionally. See, in Watchtroll no tech/legal background is needed; “Somewhere near the end of 2011,” Steve Brachmann admitted the other day, ” I responded to an ad that was left on Craigslist. A website called IPWatchdog.com was looking for a writer to contribute content on Apple’s patenting activities…”

Promoting litigation and software patents. That’s the only objective. Taking something which is hot in the news and then spinning that — somehow — as regarding patents. That is a Watchtroll kind of lunacy. Watch what Brachmann wrote the other day; Watchtroll outdoes itself with the patently absurd assertion that we can’t quite go to space without software patents. “Benefits of NASA Space Directive on Mars could be Limited by Uncertain Software, Biotech Patentability,” says the headline. We’re speechless. Such is the intellectually-dishonest nature of Watchtroll nowadays.

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

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


  1. Links 18/9/2018: Qt 5.12 Alpha , MAAS 2.5.0 Beta, PostgreSQL CoC

    Links for the day



  2. Today's European Patent Office (EPO) Works for Large, Foreign Pharmaceutical Companies in Pursuit of Patents on Nature, Life, and Essential/Basic Drugs

    The never-ending insanity which is patents on DNA/genome/genetics and all sorts of basic things that are put together like a recipe in a restaurant; patents are no longer covering actual machinery that accomplishes unique tasks in complicated ways, typically assembled from scratch by humans; some supposed 'inventions' are merely born into existence by the natural splitting of organisms or conception (e.g. pregnancy)



  3. The EPO Has Quit Pretending That It Cares About Patent Quality, All It Cares About is Quantity of Lawsuits

    A new interview with Roberta Romano-Götsch, as well as the EPO's promotion of software patents alongside CIPA (Team UPC), is an indication that the EPO has ceased caring about quality and hardly even pretends to care anymore



  4. Qualcomm's Escalating Patent Wars Have Already Caused Massive Buybacks (Loss of Reserves) and Loss of Massive Clients

    Qualcomm's multi-continental patent battles are an effort to 'shock and awe' everyone into its protection racket; but the unintended effect seems to be a move further and further away from 'Qualcomm territories'



  5. Links 17/9/2018: Torvalds Takes a Break, SQLite 3.25.0 Released

    Links for the day



  6. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Helps Prevent Frivolous Software Patent Lawsuits

    PTAB with its quality-improving inter partes reviews (IPRs) is enraging patent maximalists; but by looking to work around it or weaken it they will simply reduce the confidence associated with US patents



  7. Abstract Patents (Things One Can Do With Pen and Paper, Sometimes an Abacus) Are a Waste of Money as Courts Disregard Them

    A quick roundup of patents and lawsuits at the heart of which there's little or no substance; 35 U.S.C. § 101 renders these moot



  8. “Blockchain” Hype and “FinTech”-Like Buzzwords Usher in Software Patents Everywhere, Even Where Such Patents Are Obviously Bunk

    Not only the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) embraces the "blockchain" hype; business methods and algorithms are being granted patent 'protection' (exclusivity) which would likely be disputed by the courts (if that ever reaches the courts)



  9. Qualcomm's Patent Aggression Threatens Rationality of Patent Scope in Europe and Elsewhere

    Qualcomm's dependence on patent taxes (so-called 'royalties' associated with physical devices which it doesn't even make) highlights the dangers now known; the patent thicket has grown too "thick"



  10. Months After Oil States the Patent Maximalists Are Still Desperate to Crush PTAB in the Courts, Not Just in Congress and the Office

    Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) inter partes reviews (IPRs) improve patent quality and are therefore a threat to those who profit from spurious feuding and litigation; they try anything they can to turn things around



  11. IAM, Watchtroll and the EPO Still Spread the Mentality of Patent Maximalism

    The misguided idea that the objective (overall) should be to grant as many monopolies as possible (to spur a lot of litigation) isn't being challenged in echo chamber 'events', set up and sponsored by think tanks and pressure groups of the litigation 'industry'



  12. Watchtroll and Other Proponents of Patent Trolls Are Trying to Change the Law Outside the Courts in Order to Bypass Patent Justice

    35 U.S.C. § 101 (Section 101) voids almost every software patent — a reality that even the most zealous patent professionals have come to grips with and their way of tackling this ‘problem’ is legislative, albeit nowhere near successful (so far)



  13. Links 16/9/2018: Windows Plays 'Nice' Again, Elisa Music Player 0.3 Beta and Latte Dock 0.8.1

    Links for the day



  14. Slamming Courts and Judges Won't Help the Patent Maximalists; It Can Only Make Things Worse

    Acorda Therapeutics sees its stock price dropping 25% after finding out that its patent portfolio isn't solid, as affirmed by the Federal Circuitn(CAFC); the only way out of this mess is a pursuit of a vastly improved patent quality, thorough patent examination which then offers legal certainty



  15. Patent Trolls Are Still Active and Microsoft is Closely Connected to Many of Them

    A roundup of patent trolls' actions in the United States; Microsoft is connected to a notably high number of these



  16. Advancements in Automobile Technology Won't be Possible With Patent Maximalism

    Advancements in the development of vehicles are being discouraged by a thicket of patents as dumb (and likely invalid) as claims on algorithms and mere shapes



  17. Battistelli “Has Deeply Hurt the Whole Patent Profession, Examiners as Well as Agents” and Also the Image of France

    A French perspective regarding Battistelli's reign at the EPO, which has not really ended but manifests itself or 'metastasises' through colleagues of Battistelli (whom he chose) and another French President (whom he also chose)



  18. António Campinos Needs to Listen to Doctors Without Borders (MSF) et al to Salvage What's Left of Public Consent for the EPO

    Groups including Doctors Without Borders/Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) and Médecins du Monde (MdM) have attempted to explain to the EPO, with notoriously French-dominated leadership, that it’s a mistake to work for Gilead at the expense of the public; but António Campinos is just another patent maximalist



  19. The Max Planck Institute's Determination on UPC's (Unitary Patent) Demise is Only “Controversial” in the Eyes of Rabid Members of Team UPC

    Bristows keeps lying like Battistelli; that it calls a new paper "controversial" without providing any evidence of a controversy says a lot about Bristows LLP, both as a firm and the individuals who make up the firm (they would not be honest with their clients, either)



  20. Links 15/9/2018: Wine 3.16, Overwatch's GNU/Linux (Wine) 'Ban', New Fedora 28 Build, and Fedora 29 Beta Delay

    Links for the day



  21. Max Planck Institute Pours More Water on the Dying Unitary Patent (UPC)

    The Max Planck Institute gives another sobering reality check for Team UPC to chew on; there's still no sign of any progress whatsoever for the UPC because even Team UPC appears to have given up and moved on



  22. EPO Seals Many Death Sentences With Acceptance of EP 2604620

    Very disappointing news as EP 2604620 withstands scrutiny, assuring that a lot of poor people will not receive much-needed, life-saving treatments



  23. Links 13/9/2018: Compiz Comeback, 'Life is Strange: Before the Storm'

    Links for the day



  24. Now We Have Patents on Rooms. Yes, Rooms!

    The shallow level of what nowadays constitutes "innovation" and merits getting a patent for a couple of decades



  25. EPO Granted a Controversial European Patent (Under Battistelli) Which May Literally Kill a Lot of People

    The EPO (together with CIPA) keeps promoting software patents; patents that are being granted by the EPO literally put lives at risk and have probably already cost a lot of lives



  26. Links 13/9/2018: Parrot 4.2.2, Sailfish OS Nurmonjoki, Eelo Beta

    Links for the day



  27. Patents on Life at the EPO Are a Symptom of Declining Patent Quality

    When even life and natural phenomena are deemed worthy of a private monopoly it seems clear that the sole goal has become patenting rather than advancement of science and technology; media that's controlled by the patent 'industry', however, fails to acknowledge this and plays along with privateers of nature



  28. Defending the World's Most Notorious Patent Trolls in an Effort to Smear the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) is an Utterly Poor Strategy

    The 'case' for patent maximalism is very weak; those who spent years if not decades promoting patent maximalism have resorted to attacks on judges, to defense of trolls like Intellectual Ventures, defense of patent scams, and ridiculous attempts to call victims of patent trolls "trolls"



  29. The Belated Demise of Propaganda Sites of the Litigation 'Industry'

    Sites that promote the interests of Big Litigation (patent trolls, patent law firms etc.) are ebbing away; in the process they still mothball the facts and push propaganda instead



  30. Links 11/9/2018: OpenSSL 1.1.1, Alpine Linux 3.8.1, Copyright Fight in EU

    Links for the day


CoPilotCo

RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

CoPilotCo

Recent Posts