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

04.26.16

Microsoft’s ‘Full Assault’ on Android, Java, and GNU/Linux, Using Classic E.E.E. Tactics Again

Posted in Antitrust, Deception, GNU/Linux, Google, Java, Microsoft at 7:13 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Embrace and Extend
Credit: unknown (Twitter)

Summary: Another reminder of the fact that Microsoft is very active on the E.E.E. front, not just against GNU/Linux but also Android and Java

IT IS no secret that Microsoft is trying to derail Android development or take over it, not just tax it using software patents or exerting influence/control using software patents. Then there’s the antitrust aspect; it was Microsoft and its proxies/front groups that pushed European politicians to go after Google’s Linux endeavours (we have covered this in dozens of posts going half a decade back).

“Then there’s the antitrust aspect; it was Microsoft and its proxies/front groups that pushed European politicians to go after Google’s Linux endeavours (we have covered this in dozens of posts going half a decade back).”Right now we find Microsoft’s Jason Perlow [1, 2, 3, 4, 5] (a Microsoft employee who habitually attacks Microsoft’s rivals) doing the anti-Java and anti-Android spiel at ZDNet, which foolishly employs Microsoft staff as journalists. Perlow’s latest piece has a bait headline, “Android’s existential crisis: Why Java needs to die on mobile devices” (attack on both Android and Java; two birds, one stone).

All we can say is, how typical. Agenda as ‘news’. That’s the modus operandi and the business model of CBS, which owns ZDNet.

To better understand why Perlow would wish to trash-talk/badmouth both Java and Android, consider the case of RoboVM, which Microsoft has just killed using its classic E.E.E. method. James Darvell’s good new article about Microsoft’s assassination of RoboVM (and by extension harm to Android and to Linux) goes as follows:

Microsoft recently made a big noise about its love and support of the Open Source community (especially Linux), but while it’s making concrete steps toward improving its support for FOSS projects, its motives may not be entirely altruistic. Microsoft continues to fund legal attacks against open-source projects on multiple fronts, and it has crushed open-source projects when it suits the company.

Such is the case with RoboVM, a Java-to-mobile compiler that supported cross-platform mobile development.

RoboVM originally was an open-source project, although that changed after the parent company was acquired by Xamarin in October 2015. Xamarin had several similar products that support cross-platform development using different programming languages. Naturally, Xamarin saw RoboVM as a suitable addition to its stable.

Shortly after the acquisition, an announcement was made to the effect that the open-source development model “wasn’t working out” for the RoboVM team. The project was closed, and licensing fees were increased to match the other tools in Xamarin’s lineup.

Earlier this year, Microsoft acquired Xamarin, and while it’s proudly touting the majority of Xamarin’s suite of tools, it seems there’s no place for RoboVM in Microsoft’s cross-platform development plans. Last week, the RoboVM team announced that the project would be shut down.

Actually, RoboVM didn’t say this after the buyout but shortly before it, probably when negotiation with Microsoft’s outpost still took place [1, 2, 3]. Darvell of Linux Journal continues:

But, there are some who will say that Microsoft just doesn’t like Java. Microsoft did get its fingers burned back in 1997 when Sun sued Microsoft over its attempt to appropriate Java. Back then, Java was set to become the “language of the Internet”, and bringing Java applet support to Internet Explorer was an important goal. In true Microsoft fashion, the Windows Java VM only partially supported the published Java standard—what’s more, it added features that were not a part of the official standard.

The goal was to create a situation where code that ran on a Microsoft VM would not run on any other platform. By hijacking the Java standard, Microsoft planned to capture Sun’s user base and dictate the future of Java. Of course, that plan resulted in an expensive debacle, which explains the company’s lukewarm attitude to Java ever since.

We worry that next on Microsoft's E.E.E. queue there might be Canonical. Then there’s concern about the Linux Foundation, which just like Canonical currently has Microsoft money on its table. Speaking of which, Microsoft propaganda is being amplified by the Linux Foundation even twice in one day (yesterday), raising questions such as, who are they working for these days? After letting former Microsoft staff in, and having received money from Microsoft, the power of money threatens them too.

“Don’t underestimate Microsoft’s malice. It’s still run by virtually the same people.”Microsoft has a history of using the corrupting influence of money to demolish competitors, e.g. by poaching employees, paying for non-compete clauses, taking over only to dismantle and so on. Don’t underestimate Microsoft’s malice. It’s still run by virtually the same people.

“Linux infestations are being uncovered in many of our large accounts as part of the escalation engagements.”

Microsoft Confidential

04.24.16

The EPO’s Departure From Truth and Entrance Into the Realms of Chinese Industrial-Grade Propaganda

Posted in America, Asia, Deception, Europe, Patents at 8:20 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

China patents

Summary: The entrapping delusion of patent maximalism, wherein artificially or superficially increasing the number of granted patents is assumed to be a desirable outcome

On December 13th a year and a half ago, The Economist, occasionally a critic of patent myths and Nemesis of patent lawyers’ propagandistic/self-serving views, published the above figure, from the article “Patent fiction”. It was one among several such articles which challenged the idea that patents and innovation are proxies/surrogates (we refuted this just a couple of days ago in relation to the US, where a new kind of patent was approved, heralding massive growth) and that China is suddenly super-innovative. We don’t wish to write again what was written in 2014 (and beforehand) but only to highlight that it’s widely recognised and well known that China’s newfound love of patents oughtn’t be mistaken for innovation. As The Economist put it (in relation to the figures/chart above): “The report highlights the astonishing increase in patents filed in the country. In 2010 Chinese firms filed roughly the same number of applications for “invention” patents (the most rigorous sort) as their counterparts in Japan and America. By 2013 the Chinese figure had nearly doubled even as the rates in the other two countries held steady (see chart).” The same thing happened in the US over the past decade, in spite of the economic meltdown; it doesn’t say anything other than lust for patents growing or examination becoming a lot more lenient.

“Nowadays, much to our regret, what the EPO has to offer is under-qualified management (friends of Battistelli and their family members), a yellow union that’s being ‘sold’ to the media, and bunk numbers which wrongly suggest that a rise in the number of patents means something (probably says the same as in China or the US).”This brings us back to the EPO because Battistelli, the clueless chief who quickly turned the once-respected Office into a laughing stock, seems to be blinded by numbers rather than quality. Classic ENA mentality. The Battistelli-leaning mini union (or minion [EN | ES]) has also become a laughing stock. As this comment put it as the weekend approached: “FFPE-EPO, the signatory of the MoU, has just elected a new committee. 5 candidates for 5 posts. And the winner, and new chairman, got 9 (nine) votes in total. And Battistelli seriously considers them a partner?? Laughable. 30 votes were cast. And yet BB insists that other unions must have 40% of ca. 7000 staff voting in strike ballots?? FFPE can barely muster a morning coffee round let alone a credible claim to representativeness.”

“Maybe some female candidates could help or have they learned something from SUEPO,” one person responded. “I WANT MY REPRESENTATIVES BACK!!!”

Nowadays, much to our regret, what the EPO has to offer is under-qualified management (friends of Battistelli and their family members), a yellow union that’s being ‘sold’ to the media, and bunk numbers [1, 2, 3] which wrongly suggest that a rise in the number of patents means something (probably says the same as in China or the US). Some say there is not even a translation for Chinese patents (Mandarin) at the EPO, yet patent lawyers’ sites say stuff like “China’s Filings of European Patent Applications in 2015 increases 22.2%”, echoing propaganda from China like this new article whose headline is “Invention patent applications rose 18.7% in 2015″ (“invention patent” is a misleading term which conflates invention with filing). According to this new article from the British press (The Guardian), “Atieva worked quietly to perfect batteries and drivetrains, filing more than 100 patents and building battery packs for electric buses in China” (building and patenting are different things).

“One needs to decide if the importance of patenting outweighs the importance of life and the public interest.”Not only the EPO is falling into this trap of patent maximalism (measuring the wrong thing, based on false premises). Here in the UK, lives of people seem to matter less than corporate profits, so the UK BioIndustry Association (BIA) gets involved in high-profile US cases, complaining about Sequenom v. Ariosa because an invalidation jeopardises high prices/monopoly. This decision is good for life saving, but it is not so good for billionaires who want to make billions annually, claiming to develop “life-saving medicines” while only offering such medicines to the rich. Medicine would be developed without lots of patents as well; a lot of such development is already subsidised by taxpayers anyway.

One needs to decide if the importance of patenting outweighs the importance of life and the public interest. If the patent ‘industry’ gets its way, there will be more patents, for the same reasons that the prison/penal industry (infamously in the US) wants more people behind bars, private healthcare wants more illness (i.e. more patients), and arms manufacturers want to create and deepen armed conflicts.

04.19.16

Munich State Attorney is Pursuing Criminal Charges Against the European Patent Office

Posted in Deception, Europe, Law, Patents at 6:57 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Weapons of mass distraction

EPO cricket club

Summary: The European Patent Office (EPO) keeps rotting under Battistelli’s leadership and the campaign of defamation against truth-tellers (shooting the messengers) within the Office/Organisation is made more apparent

THREE days ago we became aware of lawsuits against the EPO. We actually knew about this for longer than that, but it took a while to get a translation of an article which covered it (with quotes directly from those involved). It actually turned out to be bigger than we had imagined.

SUEPO has translated [PDF] this recent article from the German media and also highlighted this new article in French. This is about “France’s patent&™ office complaining about EPO’s delays,” Hugo Roy from the FSFE told me. There have been complaints from British stakeholders as well, regarding not just delays but also miscommunication and unprofessional handling of applications. Brain drain [1, 2, 3, 4] taking its toll? We wrote about this last week in the context of Patent Administration staff.

Anyway, the latest interesting article says it all really, and we have highlighted the important bits below.

Handelsblatt

Criminal charges at the Patent Office Uprising in Paradise getting worse

By: Jan Keuchel
Date: 06.04.2016 10:57

Still no ceasefire: The European Patent Office won’t calm down. Management and staff are sniping at each other, and the Munich State Attorney is pursuing criminal charges – a lot of them.

Battistelli in AFP
Benoît Battistelli
Dispute with the staff getting even worse.
(Photo: AFP)

Düsseldorf. The European Patent Office (EPO), one of the most important starting points for the protection of inventions, has been tearing itself apart for months in a bitter dispute between the President and sections of the staff. At issue are new promotional and sick leave arrangements, union rights, internal investigations, and sackings.

On 15 March, one day before an important meeting of his Administrative Council, President Benoît Battistelli suddenly started sending out peace signals. According to the Frenchman, 2016 will see a “general review of social rules and regulations”.

In the light of rumours that the Council might dismiss him from office due to the conflict, his overseers may have forced Battistelli’s hand. But only under certain conditions: The squabblers would have to get together and “conscientiously and honestly work towards finding a solution”.

But now things start to become clearer: The much heralded peace turns out to be nothing more than a ceasefire. According to information available to Handelsblatt, the conflict at the EPO has actually involved the Munich I State Attorney’s office since as far back as 2013, and there are still a good number of unresolved criminal cases being pursued.

[Photo]
EPO boss Benoît Battistelli
“Bullying and defamation causing massive disruption”

Benoît Battistelli is the boss of a public authority that is actually one of the most important for the entire European economy: The Patent Office. Critics call him the “Sun King” or “Stalin”. In an interview he speaks for the first time about the accusations made against him. More …

The first of the charges was laid by Battistelli’s Vice-President, and was aimed at a person or persons unknown. The main issue was an accusation of slander and defamation, as Munich I State Attorney’s office confirmed when asked. The charge evidently related to the issues surrounding an Irish patent judge, whom Battistelli had suspended.

At the end of 2015 the Irishman himself then laid charges against Battistelli, on the grounds that his honour has been besmirched. There have been more criminal accusations made against unknown persons, among them by the sacked union executive Elizabeth Hardon. All those involved deny the accusations.

The EPO has been conducting internal investigations against the judge and Hardon since 2013. The Office suspected both of them of having waged a campaign against the President and his deputy.

According to an internal report, among other things, the judge was found to have defamatory letters in his possession. The EPO investigators also found in his office a number of clubs and suspected Nazi material, such as brochure bearing a swastika and entitled “Ich kämpfe”.

Since then, the man concerned has stayed at home. Battistelli later also dismissed Hardon, the chief executive of the staff union Suepo, which he does not recognize. The accusation against her was of threatening non-union members.

Innovation-friendly Europe Development of patent applications

165 000 160 022
152 500
140 000
2011 2015

Applications received in 2015 by sectors

Medical technology 12 474
Digital communications 10 762
Computer technology 10 549
Electrical engineering/mechanical engineering/energy: 10 198
Transport 7802

Handelsblatt Source: EPO

The attorney acting for both of them, Munich-based labour lawyer Senay Okyay, disputes the accusations, contending, among other things, that the clubs which the Irishman had were for gymnastic exercises. The grounds for the criminal charges laid by her client were the wrongful and defamatory accusations that he was a Nazi.

As well as all this, an application for criminal charges has also been made against persons unknown due to the EPO investigation report having allegedly been leaked to various media. “The group of persons entitled to receive this strictly confidential report is restricted to my client, the Administrative Council, and the President of the Office”, says Okyay. Hardon has also sought to lay criminal charges against unknown persons due to her private E-mail account having allegedly been searched in the course of the investigations.

The EPO is unwilling to comment on the charges brought by the Vice-President. With regard to the judge, the word is that they became aware of this after Easter. The State Attorney’s office will know how to deal with such things.

The State Attorney’s office is emphasising that at present all the accusations are being looked into, and no further information can be forthcoming.

[Photo]
Squabbles at the European Patent Office
Uprising in Paradise

Allegations of death threats, a judge with clubs in his office: The European Patent Office is being crippled by internal brawls. The Office is already overdue with thousands of cases, and that is something the economy simply cannot afford. More…

Whatever the outcome, the criminal charges have been stirring things up even more with regard to the issues of social peace at the Office. One particular issue is what the Administrative Council knew about these events when it accepted Battistelli’s peace offering on 16 March.

At the EPO the word is that the Administrative Council has been kept “regularly informed of all relevant events”. The Chair of the Council, Jesper Kongstad, has no comment to make. Perhaps he’s saving his voice. The next Council meeting is in June.

The above contains plenty of new information. It also serves to reinforce the claim that Battistelli (which is referred to above as “Stalin”) has been witch-hunting staff, including (in particular) those who said the truth about Željko Topić (staff calls him “Putin”), about whom we have an ongoing series of articles this week.

As a side note, we no longer make local copies of SUEPO PDFs, but when the EPO management actively censored SUEPO’s Web site (using legal threats) the management basically encouraged us to do so, which meant that things management found embarrassing ended up spreading further and wider. It’s the Streisand Effect. The harder the EPO tries to silence the truth, the worse things will get.

EPO Integrity on the Line: The Story of Željko Topić’s Controversial Diploma – Part II

Posted in Deception, Europe at 6:07 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: Croatian media coverage about some of the scandals as they were seen 4 years ago (around the time Battistelli snatched Topić out of Croatia to become his right-hand man)

IN part one of this series we looked at how EPO Vice-President Željko Topić got accused of forgery. We are not suggesting that it was indeed forgery; we are just presenting what is/was known and who says/said what.

“We are not suggesting that it was indeed forgery; we are just presenting what is/was known and who says/said what.”“These matters were reported in the Croatian press at the time,” told us a person who is responsible for translating some reports, or for putting together some translations. “See for example the article dated 26 April 2012 which was written by the journalist Ilko Ćimić and published in Index.hr.”

Original Croatian text can be found here and below is the English translation with highlights in yellow:

Index reveals – Jovanović investigates the SIPO: Where did the million kuna go? Who was driving the (overly) expensive cars?

Željko Jovanović
Željko Jovanović, Minister of Science

Author: I. Ćimić
Date: 26 April 2012

Index is in a position to reveal that Željko Jovanović, the Minister of Science, Education and Sports, recently sent a request to the Ministry of Finance for a budgetary audit of the State Intellectual Property Office (SIPO), for the period from 1 March 2008 to 22 December 2012 in order to look into a series of allegations about the actions of the controversial SIPO Director, Mr. Željko Topić. The Ministry of Science also found a number of irregularities during their investigation of SIPO’s operations and has requested the assistance of the State Inspectorate and the Labour Inspection! While the Ministry was in the process of investigating the actions of the controversial Director against whom criminal proceedings are pending before the Zagreb County Court, SIPO officially announced that he was stepping down from the position of SIPO Director to take up the position of Vice-President at the European Patent Office based in Munich!

SIPO was responsible for the oversight of ZAMP

For the moment, the question seems to be how much the European institutions really know about Mr. Topić’s track-record as SIPO Director and whether or not they were informed of the charges pending against him. It would also be interesting to know to what extent the credit for his appointment can be attributed to Croatian diplomatic lobbying conducted by the Pantovčak [i.e. the Office of the Croatian President].

We wish to remind our readers that the SIPO is the official institution responsible for the oversight of the Croatian Composers’ Society and its professional service ZAMP. However, it was recently established during the handover to the new government that for years nobody has properly supervised the operations of the SIPO itself. The role of the Director Topić is of key importance here because it was he who responded to a query from the Ministry of Finance as to whether the business operations of ZAMP were actually carried out by a private company Emporion. At the time, Topić claimed that everything was done in accordance with the law.

The Ministry will specifically check the diploma of Director Topić

According to a document in the possession of Index – which can be seen in the picture gallery – Jovanovic’s Ministry carried out its own investigation into the work of SIPO to follow up on some of the allegations against the controversial Director.

The document itself does not contain any spectacular revelations, but it raises a number of questions about Topić’s management of the SIPO as it shows how assistance is being sought from other government agencies such as the State Inspectorate to shed light on Željko Topić’s controversial reign as SIPO Director.

Amongst other things, Mr. Jovanović’s Ministry questioned whether Topić had the educational qualifications needed to lead the SIPO. It was established that the Office which deals with the protection of industrial property and copyright and related rights is managed by an economist who claims to have graduated from the Faculty of Economics in Banja Luka with a master’s degree. Topić sent to the Ministry only a copy of his master’s diploma without the date of issue, and such evidence was considered insufficient so the Ministry requested the Faculty in Banja Luka to kindly send “relevant documents and a statement regarding the academic qualifications of Master of Science, Mr. Željko Topić”.

Disputed payments of around HRK 1m for “unnecessary” work

The Ministry also investigated allegations concerning the expenditure of around one million kuna, which the SIPO paid for intellectual and personal services. It was discovered that some of the money was paid as compensation for participation in organizing professional examinations for authorized representatives in the field of industrial property rights. The problem is that the candidates only paid 4,000 kuna in fees for these professional examinations whereas the total gross compensation paid to the chairman, deputy secretaries and members of the examination committee exceeded the amount that was paid by the candidates.

Another part of the disputed expenditure was on payments for service and copyright contracts which appear not to have been in accordance with the regulations. According to the opinion of Jovanović’s Ministry, the amounts paid for translations are also controversial given that this work should have been performed by SIPO employees [as part of their regular duties].

Sanader approved the purchase of the cars

The Ministry has also found a series of errors in service contracts and has requested special supervision by the State Inspectorate and Inspectors from the Ministry of Labour.
Concerning the controversial purchase of vehicles, including an Audi A6 TDI Quattro Tiptronic B worth 80,000 EUR and a Mercedes E 280 CDI worth 70,000 EUR, which was also subject to investigation by the Ministry, it was established that Topić had the permission of the Government, headed by Prime Minister Ivo Sanader, for the disputed purchase of these vehicles.

Ivo Sanader is now in prison and the local press habitually calls Topić "Sanader's protégé", which helps Topić’s case not at all.

“The reporting in the Croatian press seems to have annoyed Mr. Topić,” we got told, “who had in the meantime been appointed as a Vice-President at the EPO and had moved to Munich.”

In future parts we are going to step deeper into this affair and also cover Topić’s and the EPO’s response.

04.15.16

Escuchando a los Abogados de Patentes Quienes Nunca Escribieron Una Línea de Codigo Decidir en Patentes de Software

Posted in America, Australia, Deception, Europe, Law, Patents at 7:19 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

English/Original

Article as ODF

Publicado en America, Patentes at 6:30 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Shelston IPSumario: Los medios de comunicación continúan siendo dominados por los abogados de patentes en vez de desarrolladores de software quienes hablan acerca (y promueven en el caso de los abogados) patentes de software
Los abogados de patentes quienes carecen de experiéncia práctica con el software parecen no entender los fundamentos de la ciencias de computación. Lo mismo va por los jueces de patentes. ¿Así que porqué perpetuamente tratán de venir con políticas de patentes de software, e.g. in India? Vean lo que IAM acaba de hacer. Esta semana todavía encontramos abogados de patentes dando “Esperanza” por las patentes de sofware en Australia (Jack Redfern and Matthew Ward from Shelston IP Pty Ltd). Estos artículos están compuestas y publicadas por abogados de patentes, a diferencia de los desarrolladores de software – los que realmente están afectados por este tipo de patentes. ¿Quiénes está tomando las decisiones aquí? A los desarrolladores australianos ya se les preguntó acerca de esto hace unos años y que votaron abrumadoramente contra las patentes de software (lo que es el mismo que en otros países).

Estos artículos están escritos y compuestos por abogados de patentes, a diferencia de desarrolladores de softwareaquellos que son afectados por tales patentes.

Anoche encontramos nueva propaganda de patentes de sofware proveniente de Marks & Clerk (ellos son algunos de los peóres) y de Steve Lundberg (Schwegman Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.), a quien mencionamos aquí hace unos dias a causa de su última intervención. Él es un propagandista de patentes (por muchos años) y se apoya en IBM ahora para su cabildeo (que tiene un sitio dedicado a la promoción de patentes de software).

¿Cuándo va a la USPTO rendirá cuentas por ello y cuando los desarrolladores de software se levantarán para hacer frente a los abogados de patentes sobre sus actividades en materia de patentes de software?
¿Qué pasa con los abogados de patentes ejerciéndo presión por las patentes de software, a diferencia de los desarrolladores de software, son sanguijuelas que sólo imponen impuestos sobre el software. Lundberg usa (o usa mal) palabras como “regalar” a pesar del hecho de que nunca dió nada y ni siquiera es un desarrollador de software en absoluto. Si él realmente hubiera solicitado su opinión a los desarrolladores de software, sabría que trabaja en contra de sus intereses.

Las Cortes han (una vez más) rechazado las patentes de softwareen las cuales los examinadores de la USPTOotorgaron erróneamente. Nadie gana aquí excepto los abogados de patentes, como es usual. Ambos lados perdiéron (casuálidades financieras significan empleados despedidos) y los equivalente a traficantes de armas, los abogados de patentes, hicierón un montón de dinero en todo un año de litigación. ¿Cuándo va a la USPTO rendirá cuentas por ello y cuando los desarrolladores de software se levantarán para hacer frente a los abogados de patentes sobre sus actividades en materia de patentes de software?Miren lo queel cabildero David Kapposestáhaciéndo ahora mismo en los Estados Unidos. Es despreciáble. Recuérden quienes pagan por todo esto.

Si los desarrolladores de software no hacen uso de su libertad de expresión y su derecho a ponerse en contacto con sus políticos electos, las patentes de software en Europa seguirán siendo un problema creciente.

No es un problema sólo en los EE.UU., pero cada vez más en Europa (donde Marks & Clerk, por ejemplo, provienen, al igual que IAM). Un lector de Finlandia nos ha dicho hoy. “Uno de los ministros del Estado fue en la radio ayer habló acerca de las patentes y la” innovación “. No soy capaz de encontrar una transcripción en cualquier idioma. Si usted tiene otros contactos en Finlandia, que podría ser capaz de proporcionar alguna información más. A partir de los comunicados de prensa, supongo que supuestamente van a decir que están promoviendo las pequeñas empresas y que va a tener algo que ver con las patentes, pero me preocupa que la intención es difundir las patentes de software. Pero, de nuevo, les digo no tengo ninguna transcripción “.

Probablemente tales ministros son también abogados y están siendo cabildeados/presiónados por los abogados de patentes y sus grandes clientes (grandes multinacionales como Nokia o Microsoft). Si los desarrolladores de software no hacen uso de su libertad de expresión y su derecho a ponerse en contacto con sus políticos electos, las patentes de software en Europa seguirán siendo un problema creciente.

04.14.16

Alice (§ 101​) So Big a Concern to Patent Lawyers and Software Monopolists That Lobbying Campaigns and ‘Conferences’ Emerge to Crush or at Least Marginalise/Limit the Courts

Posted in Courtroom, Deception, Law, Microsoft, Patents at 10:21 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Changing the law with think tanks and lobbyists

Fordham IP Conference
Featuring Microsoft-sponsored ‘speaker’ (lobbyist), David Kappos for software patents and against § 101

Summary: Right now there is growing uncertainty over software patents and even US courts, including the highest such court (the Supreme Court), are such a threat to patent aggressors which utilise software patents to startle or bankrupt their competitors that a propaganda campaign becomes widespread

THE USPTO does not wish to comply with courts’ will. The US patent system is so greedy that it continues to grant a lot of software patents, even when most of them, once properly challenged in a court using Alice, get invalidated. There are still the occasional patent cases where in spite of Alice the software patents survive. One such case has just been covered here and it says: “The court denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment that the asserted claims of plaintiff’s network security patents encompassed unpatentable subject matter and found that the claims were not directed toward an abstract idea.”

“The US patent system is so greedy that it continues to grant a lot of software patents, even when most of them, once properly challenged in a court using Alice, get invalidated.”Meanwhile, patent maximalists are bemoaning the new post-Alice reality, quoting lots of other patent maximalists or lawyers. “It’s getting harder to patent software,” says the headline of this new article. Well, this sounds like excellent news. Software algorithms should never have been patentable in the first place. The author says: “Software patents have been under increased scrutiny for several years due to their malicious use by non-practicing entities, or patent trolls – persons or companies that do not necessarily invent or manufacture anything, but that purchase patents, often from bankrupt countries, and subsequently sue others for infringement.”

Composed by Charles Bieneman, another new article asks, “How Do Biotech Patent-Eligibility Cases Speak to Computer Patent-Eligibility Cases?”​

“They’re trying to put an end to invalidations under 35 U.S.C. § 101 and they’re funded by large corporations to do so. Their clients (including Microsoft) pay them to mislead politicians and to lie to the public.”To quote the opening paragraph: “The Federal Circuit recently held that a claim of U.S. Patent No. 5,612,179, reciting “methods of detecting genetic variations” was directed to unpatentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101. Genetic Technologies Ltd. V. Merial, LLC, Nos. 2015-1202, 2015-1203 (Fed. Cir. April 8, 2016). Anytime the Federal Circuit weighs in on Section 101 patent-eligibility, those of us in the patent bar scramble to comprehend the potential impact to pending patent applications and issued patents alike. For those of us who practice in the computer area, the question arises: how are we informed, or are we informed, by a holding concerning patent claims directed to genetic analysis?”

It’s always noteworthy when CAFC throws away patents like these because software patents originally came from CAFC. Notice the trend now. The courts which once supported software patents no longer do. It must be a scary time to be a patent lawyer in this particular area/domain.

In his final part (part of a long paper), Robert Sachs (patent lawyer) makes it clearer that he was just pushing for software patents all along. To quote his final words: “The fictional form of the mental steps doctrine represents a significant and unwise departure from the factual form. The fictional form is untethered from the conceptual and technological attributes of computer design, the nature of human cognition, and the practical reality and value in computer-implemented inventions. The courts should return to the doctrine’s factual form, and avoid a further descent into the fact-free analysis that now characterizes patent eligibility.”

“One sure thing is, software developers are absent/left out of this whole debate.”This is becoming similar to the infamous whitepaper from David Kappos and his recent lobbying for software patents. They’re trying to put an end to invalidations under 35 U.S.C. § 101 and they’re funded by large corporations to do so. Their clients (including Microsoft) pay them to mislead politicians and to lie to the public. Watch another new example of lobbying for software patents, again taking the shape of a “conference”, just like those funded by Microsoft nowadays [1, 2]. As Cathy Gellis put it: “At this conference on IP in software there’s not nearly enough discussion on WHY ON EARTH DO WE NEED IT.”

“Judge Dyk acknowledges that patent law is not limitless, and that patentable subject matter should not be completely unbounded,” Patently-O noted the other day.

Who’s going to win? The courts, the USPTO, or lobbyists and their affluent clients? One sure thing is, software developers are absent/left out of this whole debate. It’s quite a travesty really.

04.13.16

Listening to Patent Lawyers Who Never Wrote Any Code to Decide on Software Patents

Posted in America, Australia, Deception, Europe, Law, Patents at 7:12 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Shelston IPSummary: The media continues to be dominated by patent lawyers rather than software developers who speak about (and promote in the case of lawyers) software patents

PATENT lawyers who lack any practical experience with software don't seem to grasp the fundamentals of computer science. The same goes for patent judges. So why is it them who are perpetually trying to come up with policy on software patents, e.g. in India? See what IAM has just done. This week we still find patent lawyers giving “Hope” for software patents in Australia (Jack Redfern and Matthew Ward from Shelston IP Pty Ltd). These articles are composed and published by patent lawyers, unlike software developers — those who are actually affected by such patents. Who’s calling the shots here? Australian developers were already asked about this a few years ago and they overwhelmingly voted against software patents (it’s the same as in other countries).

“These articles are composed and published by patent lawyers, unlike software developers — those who are actually affected by such patents.”Last night we also found new patent propaganda from Marks & Clerk (they're some of the worst) and from Steve Lundberg (Schwegman Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.), whom we mentioned here some days ago because of his latest intervention. He is a patent propagandist (for many years now) and he leans on IBM now for his lobbying (he has a site dedicated to software patents advocacy).

“When will the USPTO be held accountable for it and when will software developers rise up to confront patent lawyers over their lobbying for software patents?”What’s wrong with patent lawyers lobbying on software patents is that they, unlike software developers, are leeches that only ever tax software. Lundberg uses (or misuses) words like “giveaway” despite the fact that he never gave anything and he is not even a software developer at all. If he actually asked developers, he would know that he works against their interests.

Courts have just (once again) shot down software patents which the examiners employed by USPTO granted erroneously. Nobody won here except patent lawyers, as usual. Both sides lost (financial casualties can be laid off staff) and the equivalent of weapons traders, patent lawyers, got a lot of money throughout an entire year of litigation. When will the USPTO be held accountable for it and when will software developers rise up to confront patent lawyers over their lobbying for software patents? Watch what lobbyist David Kappos is doing right now in the United States. It’s despicable. Remember who pays him for this.

“If software developers fail to exercise their freedom of speech and right to contact elected politicians, software patents in Europe will continue to be a growing problem.”It’s not a problem only in the US but increasingly in Europe (where Marks & Clerk, for example, comes from, just like IAM). One reader from Finland told us today. “One of the state’s ministers was on the radio yesterday going on about patents and “innovation”. I’m not able to find a transcript in any language. If you have other contacts in Finland, they might be able to provide some more information. From the press releases, I gather that they are going to say that they are promoting small businesses and that it will have something to do with patents, but I worry that the intent is to spread software patents. But again, I have no transcript.”

It is likely that such ministers are themselves lawyers and are lobbied by patent lawyers and their largest clients (large companies like Nokia or Microsoft). If software developers fail to exercise their freedom of speech and right to contact elected politicians, software patents in Europe will continue to be a growing problem.

04.09.16

Cabilderos por las Patentes de Software en Ropas de ‘Periodismo’ y ‘Reforma’ (con Conecciones a Microsoft)

Posted in Debian, Deception, GNU/Linux, IBM, Law, Microsoft, Patents at 2:50 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

English/Original

Article as ODF

Publicado en Debian, Decepción, GNU/Linux, IBM, Law, Microsoft, Patentes at 6:23 pm por el Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Una familia grande y felizcon montón de dinero en circulación y una agend pro-patentes de software

David Kappos PAI

Sumario: Los últimos ejemplos de inéquivocosempujes por las patentes de software bajo el disfraz de reportajes’ (pobre farsa) o ‘reformade patentes (nada que ver con reforma), courtesía de IAM ‘magazine’ y David Kappos, respectivamente

LA cálidad de patentes en la USPTO bajo el mando de David Kappos ha sido pobre y en decadencia. Esto aparentemente fue su objetivo o (predictivamente) consequencia de la estrategia. Deja a los Estados Unidos en un estado de desórden total, donde un montón de compañías ´start-ups´ tosen ‘dinero por protección’ o se van a la quiebra. No sólo trolles de patentes están causando estos estragos pero también grandes agresores de patentes, como Microsoft y IBM. Imaginen lo que significaría esta clase de caos para la India, donde un montón de software es desarrollado y el presupuesto de las firmas locales es ajustado (contratar abogados en otro país es oneroso).

No sólotrolles de patentes están causando estos estragos pero también grandes agresores de patentes, como Microsofty IBM.

Haciéndo balance de la última propaganda del ‘magazine’ IAM, Techrights no puede dejar de regañar y el ridículizar a este llamado ‘magazine’ (parece mas un pamfleto de cabildeo). No es incluso un magazine, es Kool-Aid en forma de papel y un sitio de pago web (para mantener sólo el coro, voces disentivas no son permitidas). Aquí esta el lavado de cerebro de IAM acerca de ‘calidad’ de patentes hoy (el número de patetentes otorgadas creciendo al doble en sólo pocos años es una evidente indicación de su baja cálidad) e incluso peor lavada de cerebro es aquella que engañosamente representa el punto de vista de los Hindues, compuesto por un Anglo-Saxon quien es empleado para escribir tales callos. No Hindú es incluso citado en este artículo, excepto una firma de leyes (!obviamente no parcialidad!).

Incluso después de que Alice, desafíe las patentes de software en su país de origen, IAM sigue pataleándo por las patentes de software. IAM tiene su base en Londres, lo que hace que sea aún más indignante, hasta que uno comprueba que los fondos del IAM en realidad provienen de …

Techrightsno puede dejar de regañar y el ridículizara este llamado ‘magazine’ (parece mas un pamfleto de cabildeo). No es incluso un magazine, es Kool-Aid en forma de papely un sitio de pago web (para mantener sólo el coro, voces disentivas no son permitidas).

Robert R. Sachs del Bilski Blog (ástutamente nombrado como el famoso caso Bilski) esta preparando un reporte (y una serie de artículos derivados de el) acerca del porque las patentes de software son simplemente procesos mentales, por lo tanto abstráctas. En muchos aspectos, las patentes de software son un gran engaño, que explotan la incomprensión de la gente de cómo funciona realmente el software (no es difícil estafar o embaucar a los jueces de patentes que nunca escribierón una sola línea de código).

Temprano hoy confronté al editor en jefe de IAM, quien esta en negación de trolles (todavía pretende que ese problema exista, al igual que las personas que niegan el calentamiento global provocado por el hombre o el cambio climático). Este editor y sus chicos (la única mujer que hay administrativo) no están reportando. Están presionando por las patentes de software en la India hoy en día, con el uso de la distorsión de los hechos y mentiras. La culpa es de IAM por hacer esto. Como dije el día de hoy, en respuesta al editor: “Mientras ustedes hacen lavado de reputación de los trolles de patentes y de las patentes de software, mientras al mismo tiempo ellos son los que les pagan, esas son noticias falsas. PR “.

Ellos están presionando por las patentes de software en la India hoy en día, con el uso de la distorsión de los hechos y mentiras .

Es extremandamente importante sacar a la luz de quien IAM realmente es y quienes lo están financiando (y el porque).

Como dije el día de hoy, IAM “sigue demostrando que no es un verdadero periódico / revista, pero sólo esta cabildeando por dinero mientras pretendoe estar reportando. Asqueroso.”

IAM está lleno de maximálistas de patentes (miren de donde proviene el autor) quien quiere más patentes en más lugars, más dominios, más compañías, y así sucesivamente. IAM es financiado por aquellos intereses. ¿Qué dice esto de IAM? Es como una revista acerca de energía que es financiada por petroleras y compañías de carbon, en orden de suprimir información acerca de formas altenativas de energía. Por lo menos parcialismo por omisión. Este ‘magazine’ IAM conectado con villanos y la EPO ahora se atreve avergonzar a la India por su muy táctica decisión de bloquear las patentes de software, de la misma manera que lo hizo con Alemania por no hacer lo suficiénte (para disgusto del editor) para promover abiértamente a la UPC, la cual incidentalmente pagó a IAM para promover(incluso por la firma PR de la EPO). No se necesita ser un genio para ver lo que aquí sucede, quien paga, y cui bono etc. IAM dedicó su último número al troll de patentes más grande del mundo [EN|ES] — un asunto que fue incluído en este artículo, cuya sóla premisa (y titular) es una gran mentira. El título dice: “La actitud fuerte de la India contra las patentes de software podría obstaculizar los planes de impulsar sus “start-ups” digitales (no jodan!). Lo único y correctamente que la decisión India está obstaculizando es la criminal extorsión y cobro de cupos por supuesta protección de parte de los trolles de patentes y las grandes corporaciónes detrás de ellos, lease la Sagrada Familia: Microsoft, IBM, Apple y otros.

Cada vez es más importante sacar a la luz lo que realmente IAM es y quienes lo están finánciando (y el porque).”

En realidad, lo opuesto es cierto, ya que las patentes de software obstaculizarían las ´start-ups´ de la India. Pregúntelo a estas nuevas empresas y ellas se lo dirán. Solicitar a Microsoft o IBM (o sus abogados de patentes en la India) y ellos hablarán ‘a favor’ de nuevas empresas sólo un montón de mentiras. Pregunte a los grupos de presión de las grandes empresas y sus abogados de patentes (como los que pagan IAM) y ellos también le dirá un montón de mentiras. Es el mismo escenario que vimos en New Zealand y en Europe, donde Microsoft paga cabilderos para supuestametne representar PYMEs y actualmente dice lo opuesto a o que las PYMEs Europeas piensan creen y necesitan. IAM ahora demuestra que no es mejor que esos cabilderos. La diferencia es la manera en que se carácterizan a sí mismos.

Indian startups necesitan código no patentes, las que están fuera de su alcanze de todas maneras, no importa el costo del litigio. IAM escribió: “Me parece que esto podría causar grandes problemas para las empresas de nueva creación digitales que el gobierno tiene tanto interés en apoyar. Muchos de ellos tendrán las innovaciones relacionadas con la informática en el corazón de sus modelos de negocio; si llega a ser mucho más difícil para ellos obtener protección de patentes sobre estos, entonces las razones para que consideren su reubicación fuera de la India podría llegar a ser aún más convincente.”

Indian startups necesitan código no patentes, las que están fuera de su alcanze de todas maneras, no importa el costo del litigio.

Esto son tonterías. ¿Dónde esta la evidencia que sin patentes de software aquellas start-ups se mudarían de la India y dado que el mercado de software es internacional (definivamente no local), ¿Qué diferencia la relocación tendría? Podría hacer una diferencia para corporaciones multinacionales como IBM or Microsoft, no duda acerca de eso…

Hablando de Microsoft, anoche descubrimos (no sorprendente) que Microsoft está poniéndo dinero en la mesa de Debian (conferencia). Se convierte en — gasp — un financista. Si, es E.E.E., pero ¿Entiénde Debian eso? Como notamos hace unos dias y el último fin de semana, Microsoft todavía financia conferencias de maximálistas de patetnes (con Microsoft financiados cablideros quienes promueven las patentes de software), donde pueda poner más adentro de la EPO su influencia (su socio criminal) y políticos Europeos. ¿Puede Microsoft ser confíado cuando continúa extorsiónando y chantajeando a fabricantes de aparatos basados en Debian usando patentes de software? Eso es una pregunta retórica.

¿Puede Microsoft ser confíado cuando continúa extorsiónando y chantajeando a fabricantes de aparatos basados en Debian usando patentes de software?

Incidentalmente habiéndo mencionado a David Kappos temprano, él también está actuando más como un grupo de presión (oficial convertido en cabildero de una manera clásica de convertir influencia en dinero), financiado por Microsoft y otras empresas con el fin de promover las patentes de software. Recuérden que Horacio Gutierrez y sus compañeros de Microsoft una vez (o más de una vez) pagarón a Florian Müller para hacer lo mismo. Aquí esta un artículo reciénte que un lector nos envió anoche.Se deja de mencionar el papel especial de Kappos allí. Sólo dice que “Apple está tomando un papel más importante en el impulso a la reforma de patentes en los Estados Unidos asociándose con IBM, Microsoft y otras empresas como parte de la Asociación Americana para la Innovación. El objetivo de la organización es para presionar al gobierno federal a adoptar los cambios que quiere mejorar sistema de patentes del país.

No, sólo quiere promover las patentes de software. Cuando Microsoft dice “reforma” de patentes significa cabildeo por las patentes de software (al igual que Apple e IBM). Ellos secuestran la palabra reforma y el jefe de su principal grupo de presión en el PAI es el mismo David Kappos.”

¿Microsoft está ahora en el mismo grupo liderado por Kappos que promueve las patentes de software.

“Por cierto,” nos dijo un lector, “nos hemos estado preguntando aquí acerca de por qué Microsoft es tá tan tranquilo y no ataca las legislaciones de implementación dee software libre. Nos dimos cuenta de que deben estar trabajando en algo con lo que se deshacerán de ambos. Escarbándo un poco, pueda ser que ellos esten confidentes que la TTIP, TISA, y CETA prohibirán FOSS. No hay cubrimiénto de ello en la prensa. Así mismo, Veo que me he subestimado la importancia de Wikileaks, así como los motivos de Microsoft y sus peones del gobierno de aplastarla. Por lo que yo sé, TISA o TTIP también está impulsando las patentes de software, pero he leído casi nada todavía y estoy a punto de comenzar.”

Microsoft esta en le grupo liderado por Kappos que promueve las patentes de software. Como nuestro lector lo pone, “reforma resulta ser otra de sus palabras comadreja

Lo mismo va por “amando” a Linux. Cuidado, Debian. Ya estás quebrado y fragmenta do debido a systemd. ¿Ahora dejas que un matón de patentes entre a tus conferencias? ¿Distribuiras botones que digan “Microsoft ama a Linux” a los asistentes, como es usual? Perfectamente va con el último perfil E.E.E..

“He matado al menos dos conferencias de Mac. [...] Mediante la inyección de contenido de Microsoft en la conferencia, la conferencia cerró. El tipo que lo dirigió, dijo, ¿por qué estoy haciendo esto? “

Jefe Evangelista de Microsoft

« Previous Page« Previous entries « Previous Page · Next Page » Next entries »Next Page »

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 Channels: Come and chat with us in real time

New to This Site? Here Are Some Introductory Resources

No

Mono

ODF

Samba logo






We support

End software patents

GPLv3

GNU project

BLAG

EFF bloggers

Comcast is Blocktastic? SavetheInternet.com



Recent Posts