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

07.02.18

Buzzwords and Hyped-Up Patent Cases (Like Berkheimer) Are Still Being Exploited to Promote Software Patents

Posted in America, Deception, Microsoft, Patents at 3:03 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Patent maximalists have turned it into a ‘branding’ match

Big branding

Summary: The attempts to overcome Alice and bypass Section 101 are becoming ever more desperate and dishonest; some law firms still bring up Berkheimer v HP and Aatrix Software v Green Shades (old decisions, virtually abandoned by now) and others carry on with “blockchains”, “AI” and so on (new varnish on same old software patents)

THE courts in the US no longer receive as much patent ‘action’ as before. This is fine, but the goal should be to depress if not altogether eliminate patent trolls, not legitimate patent lawsuits. The legitimate patent lawsuits are those in which patents asserted are justified, defensible, and used proportionally against few parties, not in a ‘fishing expedition’ style (trolls sometimes target literally thousands of cash-strapped startups for ‘protection’ money).

A few days ago Docket Navigator published this update on Finjan, Inc. v ESET, LLC. Finjan is Microsoft’s ‘proxy’ patent troll (see the Finjan timeline) and it’s still attacking most of Microsoft’s competitors with dubious software patents. This is the latest:

The court granted in part defendant’s motion to compel the production of billing records from plaintiff’s prosecution counsel because some discovery was relevant to defendant’s prosecution laches and inequitable conduct defenses.

An article by Cara Bayles soon revealed that a Microsoft-connected patent troll (Microsoft paid it a lot of money to settle) is going after Apple and failing. To quote:

A California federal judge on Thursday said he would strike a number of “bogus and conclusory” claims from a Uniloc USA Inc. patent infringement suit against Apple Inc., but also allow Uniloc to amend those allegations, saying he disagreed with Apple’s contention that it could not mount a defense against the allegations it says are too vague.

Why were these software patents granted in the first place? That’s the root of the problem.

“the goal should be to depress if not altogether eliminate patent trolls, not legitimate patent lawsuits.”We’ve spent the past week looking closely at some news (and news about software patents in particular).

The USPTO has just granted software patents again [1, 2] and what’s the excuse this time? When one uses buzzwords like “IIoT” to get software patents or even “Cryptocurrency”, can examiners still say no? Can they see past the hype? These are all bogus software patents, but China is perhaps the only large nation in the world which permits these abominations (in courts, too). Mind this new article, “Blockchain Promises to Revolutionize Creative and Intellectual Property Rights,” and remember that it’s just lots of hype and propaganda terms like “Intellectual Property Rights” (IPR, but not inter partes review). Remember that it’s also a loophole/trick for software patents.

“Why were these software patents granted in the first place? That’s the root of the problem.”Here comes Watchtroll with Berkheimer+Blockchain spin. Blockchain patents are just software and are thus bunk, they won’t be usable in courts. But Watchtroll simply uses sound bites; it ‘pulls a Berkheimer‘. So did the anonymous (and without disclosure) “Inventors Digest” a few days ago. Here is what it argued: “Sadly, until recently, nearly 80 percent of all patents challenged under the “abstract idea” argument have fallen prey to the courts’ decisions, generally by way of summary motion at the beginning of a case. This means that most plaintiffs filing suit against infringers were simply told to pack their bags very early in the process, denying their right to a day in court. As a result, with the prevalence of this new doctrine, there is little incentive for an operating company approached by a patent owner to negotiate a license in good faith; the odds of killing the patent(s) at stake are so high and the costs to do so are still very low compared to a full trial on the merits.”

Those who are still boosting Berkheimer and Aatrix in a coordinated effort to give an illusion of a software patents resurgence are lawyers and liars. There’s no such resurgence. These are just ‘sales’ tactics.

“Blockchain patents are just software and are thus bunk, they won’t be usable in courts.”Here comes the so-called “Berkheimer Effect” (like magic stardust): “Two decisions from the court in Berkheimer v. HP and in Aatrix Software v. Green Shades Software stated that deciding whether a patent may simply embody an “abstract idea” may also be a question of facts, not just one of law.”

No, these barely changed a thing. At all! They don’t even get brought up anymore (or very rarely). Going back to blockchains, here’s a new article hyping up “Blockchain-Related Patents” by name-dropping large and famous brand names like Walmart, MasterCard, IBM, and JPMorgan. To quote:

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), the US agency that issues patents to companies and investors, awarded several blockchain-related patents on Thursday. Some of the companies that saw their applications approved are IBM, JPMorgan, Walmart, Intel, and MasterCard among others.

What a waste of money; but these companies are likely to cross-license rather than sue, so these patents are unlikely to ever be questioned… bar an inter partes review (IPR) at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).

“It often seems like any algorithm just needs to be labeled “AI” in order for it to be celebrated as innovative and supposedly patent-eligible. That’s just what’s ‘fashionable’ nowadays.”If blockchains weren’t bad enough a loophole (they actually refer to something real; they’re not a mere buzzword, just hyped), here comes an article by Jeffrey H. Albright (Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP) about the buzzword “AI” and then Dr. Derek Lowe with “AI Will Not Threaten Pharma Patents – Not This Way” (this is about ‘AI’ in relation to examination, application and management). Everywhere one turns in the media these days it’s “AI this” and “AI that” (they just call everything “AI”, just as they did “cloud” and “smart”). And not in relation to patents but in patent maximalism sites we have “House Subcommittees Hold Hearing on Artificial Intelligence Challenges and Opportunities” and “How ARM Is Using Artificial Intelligence To Supercharge Its Patents” (the typical patent propaganda from Forbes).

It often seems like any algorithm just needs to be labeled “AI” in order for it to be celebrated as innovative and supposedly patent-eligible. That’s just what’s ‘fashionable’ 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. The EPO (European Patent Office) Under António Campinos is Just Another Battistelli EPO; Still UPC and Software Patents Lobbying

    Campinos has done pretty much nothing but a single blog post since taking Office; it makes one wonder what he's doing all day and whether he ever intends to tackle all the abuses that compelled the Council to replace Battistelli



  2. Cisco v Arista Networks is a Stain on the Reputation of the US International Trade Commission (ITC) and It's Beginning to Recognise This

    Cisco is leveraging software patents which PTAB deemed to be invalid against a much smaller firm (revenue ~30 times smaller), demanding an embargo and bypassing the ordinary routes of justice by turning to the ITC



  3. Openet Has Been Intimidated by Amdocs Using Another Patent Infringement Lawsuit

    Amdocs is still engaging in legal intimidation and litigious bullying against its much smaller rivals/competitors; Openet is the latest reminder of it, having paid an undisclosed amount of money to end the dispute



  4. Federal Circuit Judges Moore, Dyk and Reyna Tell Allergan That It is Not Above the Law

    Allergan and a Native American tribe have lost their ridiculous case; after swapping tens of millions of dollars in pursuit of immunity for patents they've lost again (in what's likely their last resort/appeal); expect the patent microcosm to attempt to distract from it (like they did Oil States)



  5. Links 20/7/2018: MusicBrainz is Back, Microsoft Pushing .NET Through Canonical

    Links for the day



  6. Some US Patents' Quality is So Low That There's a Garden Clearance/Fire Sale

    Rather than shoot worthless patents into orbit where they belong the Allied Security Trust (AST), collector of dubious patents, will try to sell them to gullible opportunists and patent trolls (even if the said patents would likely perish in courts)



  7. When Amplifying the Message of 'Global Innovation Index 2018' IP Watch Sounds Like WIPO and IP Watchdog (Watchtroll)

    In addition to senatorial efforts and misleading debates about patents, we now contend with something called “Global Innovation Index 2018," whose purpose appears to be similar to the debunked Chamber of Commerce's rankings (quantifying everything in terms of patents)



  8. Erosion of Patent Justice in Europe With Kangaroo Courts and Low-Quality European Patents

    The problematic combination of plaintiff-friendly courts (favouring the accuser, just like in Eastern Texas) and low-quality patents that should never have been granted



  9. Mafia Tactics in Team UPC and Battistelli's Circle

    Mafia-like behaviour at the EPO and the team responsible for the Unified Patent Court (UPC); appointments of loyal friends and family members have become common (nepotism and exchange of favours), as have threats made towards critics, authorities, and the press



  10. Australia Says No to Software Patents

    Rokt is now fighting the Australian patent office over its decision to reject software patents; Shelston IP, an Australian patent law firm (originally from Melbourne), already meddles a great deal in such policies/decisions, hoping to overturn them



  11. Links 19/7/2018: Krita 4.1.1, Qt Creator 4.7.0, and Microsoft-Led Lobby Against Android in EU

    Links for the day



  12. IAM is Pushing SEPs/FRAND Agenda for Patent Trolls and Monopolists That Fund IAM

    The front group of patent trolls, IAM, sets up an echo chamber-type event, preceded by all the usual pro-FRAND propaganda



  13. “Trade Secrets” Litigation Rising in the Wake of TC Heartland, Alice, Oil States and Other Patent-Minimising Decisions

    Litigation strategies are evolving in the wake of top-level decisions that rule out software patents, restrict venue shifting, and facilitate invalidation of patents even outside the courtroom



  14. The EPO -- Like the Unified Patent Court (UPC) and Unitary Patent System -- is an Untenable Mess

    The António Campinos-led EPO, nearly three weeks under his leadership, still fails to commit to justice (court rulings not obeyed), undo union-busting efforts and assure independence of judges; this, among other factors, is why the Office/Organisation and the UPC it wants to manage appear more or less doomed



  15. Links 18/7/2018: System76's Manufacturing Facility, Microsoft-Led Lobby for Antitrust Against Android

    Links for the day



  16. What Patent Lawyers Aren't Saying: Most Patent Litigation Has Become Too Risky to be Worth It

    The lawyers' key to the castle is lost or misplaced; they can't quite find/obtain leverage in courts, but they don't want their clients to know that



  17. Software Patents Royalty (Tax) Campaign by IBM, a Serial Patent Bully, and the EPO's Participation in All This

    The agenda of US-based patent maximalists, including patent trolls and notorious bullies from the United States, is still being served by the 'European' Patent Office, which has already outsourced some of its work (e.g. translations, PR, surveillance) to the US



  18. The European Council Needs to Check Battistelli's Back Room Deals/Back Door/Backchannel With Respect to Christian Archambeau

    Worries persist that Archambeau is about to become an unworthy beneficiary (nepotism) after a Battistelli setup that put Campinos in power, supported by the Belgian delegation which is connected to Archambeau, a national/citizen of Belgium



  19. PTAB and § 101 (Section 101) Have Locked the Patent Parasites Out of the Patent System

    Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) inter partes reviews (IPRs) have contributed a great deal to patent quality and have reduced the number of frivolous patent lawsuits; this means that firms which profit from patent applications and litigation hate it with a passion and still lobby to weaken if not scuttle PTAB



  20. Patents on Computer Software and Plants in the United States Indicative of Systemic Error

    The never-ending expansion of patent scope has meant that patent law firms generally got their way at the patent office; can the courts react fast enough (before confidence in patents and/or public support for patents is altogether shattered)?



  21. Yesterday's Misleading News From Team UPC and Its Aspiring Management of the Unified Patent Court (UPC)

    The Unified Patent Court (UPC) enthusiasts — i.e. those looking to financially gain from it — continue to wrestle with logic, manipulate words and misrepresent the law; yesterday we saw many law firms trying to make it sound as though the UPC is coming to the UK even though this isn’t possible and UPC as a whole is likely already dead



  22. Time for the European Commission to Investigate EPO Corruption Because It May be Partly or Indirectly Connected to EU-IPO, an EU Agency

    The passage of the top role at the EU-IPO from António Campinos to Christian Archambeau would damage confidence in the moral integrity of the European Council; back room deals are alleged to have occurred, implicating corrupt Battistelli



  23. Links 17/7/2018: Catfish 1.4.6 Released, ReactOS 0.4.9, Red Hat's GPL Compliance Group Grows

    Links for the day



  24. Links 16/7/2018: Linux 4.18 RC5, Latte Dock v0.8, Windows Back Doors Resurface

    Links for the day



  25. Alliance for US Startups and Inventors for Jobs (USIJ) Misleads the US Government, Pretending to Speak for Startups While Spreading Lies for the Patent Microcosm

    In the United States, which nowadays strives to raise the patent bar, the House Small Business Committee heard from technology firms but it also heard from some questionable front groups which claim to support "startups" and "jobs" (but in reality support just patents on the face of it)



  26. 'Blockchain', 'Cloud' and Whatever Else Gets Exploited to Work Around 35 U.S.C. § 101 (or the EPC) and Patent Algorithms/Software

    Looking for a quick buck or some low-quality patents (which courts would almost certainly reject), opportunists carry on with their gold rush, aided by buzzwords and hype over pretty meaningless things



  27. PTAB Defended by the EFF, the R Street Institute and CCIA as the Number of Petitions (IPRs) Continues to Grow

    Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) inter partes reviews (IPRs) come to the rescue when patently-bogus patents are used, covering totally abstract concepts (like software patents do); IPRs continue to increase in number and opponents of PTAB, who conveniently cherry-pick Supreme Court (SCOTUS) decisions, can't quite stop that



  28. IAM/Joff Wild May Have Become a de Facto Media Partner of the Patent Troll iPEL

    Invitation to trolls in China, courtesy of the patent trolls' lobby called "IAM"; this shows no signs of stopping and has become rather blatant



  29. Cautionary Tale: ILO Administrative Tribunal Cases (Appeals) 'Intercepted' Under António Campinos

    The ILO Administrative Tribunal (ILO-AT) is advertised by the EPO's management as access to justice, but it's still being undermined quite severely to the detriment of aggrieved staff



  30. Asking the USPTO to Comply With 35 U.S.C. § 101 is Like Asking Pentagon Officials to Pursue Real, Persistent Peace

    Some profit from selling weapons, whereas others profit from patent grants and litigation; what's really needed right now is patent sanity and adherence to the public interest as well as the law itself, e.g. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) decisions


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