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

08.06.18

Playing With Words and Buzzwords in a Landscape of Software Patents Rejections

Posted in America, Patents at 2:57 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Colour letters

Summary: The efforts to get patents on software granted nowadays increasingly rely on synonyms and vague/nebulous buzzwords, such as “AI”; examiners ought to be aware of this because PTAB and courts would almost definitely reject all of these patents

THE limitations in terms of patent scope sometimes seem farcical because both the EPO and USPTO promote loopholes/ways around these limitations. Courts don’t.

“There have been lots of EPO tweets in favour of software patents (disguised by buzzwords like “AI”) since Campinos took over.”Commercials disguised as articles are again being pushed by a site that recently wrote about António Campinos, who says he will continue to pursue patent maximalism, not patent quality. The term "AI" is nowadays being used by the EPO to promote software patents in Europe (without explicitly mentioning the term “software patents”). There have been lots of EPO tweets in favour of software patents (disguised by buzzwords like “AI”) since Campinos took over. Not a good sign at all. The new commercial disguised as an article says:

Dr Susan Keston of HGF tells IPPro about her new promotion, the landscape of software and computer-implementation, and AI patent applications

Well, “AI patent applications” are just software patent applications and “computer-implementation” (with a dash) makes no sense at all unless they’re alluding to “computer-implemented inventions”, a misleading EPO term for “software patents”. Either way, this is part of a trend that we’ve been writing about for over a year. Applicable to Europe and the US alike (with slight variations in the terms used), what we have here is a game of words. Below we focus on the US; we’d rather set aside EPO coverage.

“Why getting patents is smart for domain name companies” was the headline of this article from last week. It’s very bad advice in the post-Alice world because software patents are very weak now. So who’s behind such advice? As usual, it’s the shameless self promoters. To quote: “As a bit of background, I once worked in the intellectual property group of a Fortune 500 company. My job was to license non-patented software technology for commercialization, but I also saw the inner-workings of patent programs.”

“Applicable to Europe and the US alike (with slight variations in the terms used), what we have here is a game of words.”So what we have here is a site about domain names promoting abstract patents in this domain; but the person who wrote the article is no domain expert, just a patent profiteer, as usual.

Also on the subject of domain names, here we have another commercial disguised as an article (same site as above) about someone who “counsels companies in domain name disputes and software litigation.”

This is not necessarily about patents (more likely trademarks), but it mentions PTAB as follows: “He represents clients in false advertising, breach of contract, and defamation cases and has previously been involved in cases before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, and the US Patent and Trademark Office.”

They make a hiring an actual ‘news’ item; this is part of a problem we used to speak of. Sites that claim to provide news about patents are actually stuffed by the world’s law firms (litigation industry) and their PR. This problem extends to the USPTO itself. It now actively promotes the Blockchain hype, leading to articles such as this, which says: “U.S. retail giant Walmart has applied for another patent, which describes the management of smart appliances using blockchain technology, according to an application published by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office August 2.”

“As we’ve already noted above, more and more companies just call their software “AI”, knowing patents on such software would likely be worthless in courts (but enough to fool examiners).”Well, these are software patents disguised using buzz/hype. “The USPTO has published blockchain-related patent applications coming from six major technological companies,” said another article from last week. Just like in China. Published days ago was a page titled “The 2018 White Paper on China’s Blockchain Industry and the Question of How to Protect Intellectual Property Rights for China’s Game-Changing Technology” (overlap in hype).

As we’ve already noted above, more and more companies just call their software “AI”, knowing patents on such software would likely be worthless in courts (but enough to fool examiners). See last week’s article “Despite Pledging Openness, Companies Rush to Patent AI Tech” and also mind these statistics (“Machine Learning” being a branch of “AI”): “I identified 21 PTAB Decisions Directed to Machine Learning Patent Applications Since 4/1/2018. The PTAB Affirmed Examiners’ 101 Rejections in 16 Cases and Reversed in Only 1 Case. 5 Cases Had No 101 Rejections.”

So the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) is wise enough to know — in the context of inter partes reviews (IPRs) — that such patents are abstract and thus bunk. The Federal Circuit would likely agree.

It is quite frankly tiring to see all these buzzwords flooding the media, perhaps in an effort to pass off old ideas as more innovative than they really are. Forbes, we might add/stress again, has become quite a patent propaganda site. Their so-called ‘bloggers’ and writers are patent extremists and some are patent trolls (literally). As a new example of that, see an article titled “Before You Begin The Patenting Process, Read This” (blocked behind a spywall, as usual).

“Greedy patent offices exploit that to simply disregard the law, including precedents from the US Supreme Court and a directive from the European Parliament.”Over the past week we’ve caught up with numerous other patents, e.g. [1, 2, 3, 4], which appear to be software patents. It’s hard to tell without looking at the underlying patent texts. We also continue to see companies that brag about new patents. INNOVENTIONS (“Established in 1984,” according to its press release) has nothing to show except a pile of new patents; it wants people to pay for these patents. Here is another example which speaks of “350 granted and pending patents across 15 countries, demonstrating ClearMotion’s IP leadership position across the globe.”

Patents per se are OK, depending on the domain. Software patents, however, are bogus patents (so says the US Supreme Court) and sadly we see the media not only promoting these patents but also mislabeling them, e.g. “AI”. Greedy patent offices exploit that to simply disregard the law, including precedents from the US Supreme Court and a directive from the European Parliament.

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. From the Eastern District of Texas (US) to Australia Patent Quality Remains a Problem

    Patents on anything from thoughts to nature/life (in the US and in Australia, respectively) demonstrate the wildly wide range (or spectrum) of patents nowadays granted irrespective of their impact on innovation



  2. Alice/35 U.S.C. § 101 and PTAB Are Here to Stay and Even Their Critics (Patent Maximalists) Have Come to Accept That

    Taking stock of the latest PTAB news and rants; the latter has become scarce because efforts to undermine PTAB have all failed



  3. Patent Trolls Roundup: Conversant Wireless Licensing (Formerly Core Wireless) and Blackbird 'Technologies' Still Prey on Real Companies

    A quick recap of recent decisions and motions, which serve to show that patent trolls can be beaten, avoided, and sometimes even 'disarmed'



  4. Links 19/8/2018: Skrooge 2.15.0, Wine 3.14, End of Akademy 2018

    Links for the day



  5. David Ruschke, the PTAB's Chief, is Moving So the Patent Maximalists Push Their Anti-PTAB Agenda

    As the chief judge of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) moves elsewhere at the USPTO there are those who hope that a replacement will undo PTAB inter partes reviews (IPRs), which generally improve the quality of granted patents



  6. If David Chiles Turned the USPTO Into a 'Microsoft Shop' That Might Explain Three Days (or More) of Outages

    The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is having profound technical issues; some already point their fingers at David Chiles, alleged to have been hired/promoted for the wrong reasons



  7. Links 17/8/2018: GNU/Linux From ASUS, Debian at 25, Lubuntu Plans

    Links for the day



  8. Links 16/8/2018: MAAS 2.4.1, Mesa 18.2 RC3

    Links for the day



  9. USPTO Craziness: Changing Rules to Punish PTAB Petitioners and Reward Microsoft for Corruption at ISO

    The US patent office proposes charging/imposing on applicants that are not customers of Microsoft a penalty; there’s also an overtly and blatantly malicious move whose purpose is to discourage petitions against wrongly-granted (by the USPTO) patents



  10. The Demise of US Software Patents Continues at the Federal Circuit

    Software patents are rotting away in the United States; it remains to be seen when the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) will truly/fully honour 35 U.S.C. § 101 and stop granting such patents



  11. Almost Two Months After the ILO Ruling Staff Representative Brumme is Finally Back on the Job at EPO

    Ion Brumme gets his position at the EPO back, owing to the Administrative Tribunal of the International Labour Organization (ILO-AT) ruling back in July; things, however, aren't rosy for the Office as a whole



  12. Links 15/8/2018: Akademy 2018 Wrapups and More Intel Defects

    Links for the day



  13. Antiquated Patenting Trick: Adding Words Like 'Apparatus' to Make Abstract Ideas Look/Sound Like They Pertain to or Contain a 'Device'

    35 U.S.C. § 101 (Section 101) still maintains that abstract ideas are not patent-eligible; so applicants and law firms go out of their way to make their ideas seem as though they're physical



  14. Open Invention Network (OIN) Member Companies Need to Become Unanimous in Opposition to Software Patents

    Opposition to abstract software patents, which even the SCOTUS and the Federal Circuit nowadays reject, would be strategically smart for OIN; but instead it issues a statement in support of a GPL compliance initiative



  15. President Battistelli 'Killed' the EPO; António Campinos Will 'Finish the Job'

    The EPO is shrinking, but this is being shrewdly disguised using terms like "efficiency" and a low-profile President who keeps himself in the dark



  16. Links 14/8/2018: Virtlyst 1.2.0, Blender 2.8 Planning Update, Zorin OS 12.4, FreeBSD 12.0 Alpha

    Links for the day



  17. Berkheimer Changed Nothing and Invalidation Rates of Abstract Software Patents Remain Very High

    Contrary to repetitive misinformation from firms that 'sell' services around patents, there is no turnaround or comeback for software patents; the latest numbers suggest a marginal difference at best — one that may be negligible considering the correlation between expected outcomes and actions (the nature of risk analysis)



  18. Lockton Insurance Brokers Exploiting Patent Trolls to Sell Insurance to the Gullible

    Demonstrating what some people have dubbed (and popularised) "disaster capitalism", Lockton now looks for opportunities to profit from patent trolls, in the form of "insurance" (the same thing Microsoft does)



  19. Patent Lawyers Writing Patent Law for Their Own Enrichment Rather Than for Innovation

    We have become detached from the original goals and come to the point where patent offices aren't necessarily run by people qualified for the job of advancing science and technology; they, unlike judges, only seem to care about how many patents get granted, irrespective of their quality/merit



  20. Links 13/8/2018: Linux 4.18 and GNU Linux-libre 4.18 Arrive

    Links for the day



  21. PTAB is Loathed by Patent Maximalists Because It Can Potentially Invalidate Thousands of Software Patents (More Than Courts Can Handle)

    The US patent system has become more resistant to software patents; courts, however, are still needed to invalidate such patents (a potentially expensive process) because the USPTO continues to grant these provided some fashionable buzzwords/hype waves are utilised (e.g. "facial recognition", "blockchain", "autonomous vehicles")



  22. Gene Quinn and 'Dallas Innovates' as Couriers of Agenda for Patent Trolls Like iPEL

    Failing to hide their real purpose and malicious agenda, sites whose real purpose is to promote a lot of patent litigation produce puff pieces, even for patently unethical trolls such as iPEL



  23. Software Patents, Secured by 'Smart' and 'Intelligent' Tricks, Help Microsoft and Others Bypass Alice/Section 101

    A look at the use of fashionable trends and buzzwords to acquire and pass around dubious software patents, then attempting to guard these from much-needed post-Alice scrutiny



  24. Keep Boston (and Massachusetts in General) From Becoming an Infestation Zone for Patent Litigation

    Boston, renowned for research and innovation, has become somewhat of a litigation hotbed; this jeopardises the state's attractiveness (except perhaps to lawyers)



  25. Links 12/8/2018: Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, Mesa 18.1.6 Release Notice, New Linux Imminent

    Links for the day



  26. Thomas Massie's “Restoring America’s Leadership in Innovation Act of 2018” (RALIA) Would Put the US Patent System in the Lions' (or Trolls') Mouth Again

    An anti-§ 101 and anti-PTAB bill from Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) strives to remove quality control; but by handing the system back to patent trolls he and his proponents simply strive to create more business of litigation, at the expense of innovation



  27. EPO-Style Problem-Solution: Tackling Backlog by Granting Lots of Low-Quality (Bogus) European Patents, Causing a Surge in Troll/Frivolous Litigation

    The EPO's lack of interest in genuine patent quality (measuring "quality" in terms of speed, not actual quality) may mean nothing but a litigation epidemic; many of these lawsuits would be abusive, baseless; those harmed the most would be small businesses that cannot afford a legal defense and would rather settle with those who exploit questionable patents, notably patent trolls



  28. Links 11/8/2018: PGP Clean Room 1.0, Ring-KDE 3.0.0, Julia 1.0

    Links for the day



  29. Propaganda Sites of Patent Trolls and Litigators Have Quit Trying to Appear Impartial or Having Integrity

    The lobbying groups of patent trolls (which receive money from such trolls) carry on meddling in policy and altering perception that drives policy; we present some new examples



  30. Months After Oil States the Patent Maximalists Still Try to Undermine Inter Partes Reviews (“IPRs”), Refusing to Accept Patent Quality

    The patent maximalists in the United States, seeing that the USPTO is moving away from patent maximalism, is desperate for a turnaround; prominent patent maximalists take it all out on PTAB


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