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

08.31.17

IBM Helps a Microsoft-Connected Patent Troll Create Another Trolling Branch, Known as Finjan Blue

Posted in IBM, Microsoft, Patents at 5:23 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Ginni Rometty

Photo source (modified slightly): The 10 Most Powerful Women in Technology Today

Summary: The parasite known as Finjan spends money buying some more patents in order to expand the breadth of its patent shakedown campaign — a ruinous campaign which drains hundreds of millions of dollars out of the economy

IBM is doing a great disservice to Free software and to GNU/Linux. In fact, it’s doing a disservice to all software developers (everywhere in the world). As we have been showing many times this year, with its patent policies and (software) patent lobbying — not to mention patent lawsuits — IBM made it clear that it’s a pariah company hellbent/determined to extract money from rivals at any cost (even immeasurable cost to its image).

“So, while Microsoft tells us that it “loves Linux” expect this troll which it once funded to sue everyone who has some security products (or extract settlement money without ever announcing it).”Earlier this month we wrote at least three articles about Finjan Holdings’ connections to Microsoft and accelerating campaign of patent lawsuits against Microsoft’s rivals. Well, days ago it announced “Finjan Blue, Inc., a Delaware corporation and wholly owned subsidiary of Finjan Holdings” (Delaware is where many patent lawsuits get filed).

What’s it all about? Well, IBM has just been feeding a notorious patent troll that is connected to Microsoft, in order to help the troll go preying on a lot of companies, using patents that aren’t even legitimate (if properly assessed). Finjan isn’t just suing; it’s also blackmailing and extorting an unknown number of companies out there. We have been writing about this for over half a decade. Here is how IAM put it earlier today:

It may be a depressed market for patent assets generally, but Finjan’s recent deal with IBM seemingly bucks that trend. Big Blue has agreed to hand over 25 grants and 16 applications to the cyber security business and in return will receive $2 million upfront and a further $6.5 million over a five-year period – that’s an overall price per patent of more than $200,000, which is a decent return by any standard.

In terms of size, though, the transaction pales in comparison with the 4,000 former Kodak patents that Dominion Harbor picked up from Intellectual Ventures or the stockpile of 6,000 Nokia assets (and before that Alcatel Lucent) that is currently being hawked in the market.

So, while Microsoft tells us that it “loves Linux” expect this troll which it once funded to sue everyone who has some security products (or extract settlement money without ever announcing it). A lot of security products are based on BSD or GNU/Linux.

Why does IBM help this? Is IBM really that desperate? This is more of the pattern we have been seeing from IBM. It’s like there is no moral compass left at that company.

08.01.17

The Section 101 USPTO ‘Debate’ (for a ‘Report’) is a Bunch of Lawyers Debating Among Themselves, No Engineers/Scientists Involved

Posted in America, Deception, IBM, Patents at 5:34 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: A review of the contents of the USPTO’s report which deals with software patents, based on various people who looked into it and paid attention to the parties involved

THE USPTO can’t help organising all these PR charades, which are echo chamber-like events and reports (forums, roundtables etc.) that we have been writing a lot about since last year (we also wrote about it in 2013). What good are these? They only help reinforce the views of the patent microcosm and elements of it that prey on large companies.

Will Hill, an occasional Techrights contributor, wrote the following summary in Diaspora* (in response to what we had written):

They go to some pains to say that comments came from practitioners and inventors, but the written comments seem to all come from lawyers. The report has a “computer-related technologies” section which has a show of debate, perhaps like the recent “fake news” debate

/******
In contrast to the life sciences field, those in the computer industry were more sharply divided in their views of recent Supreme Court precedent. Some members of the public welcomed the Court’s intervention in the law of patent eligibility. Far from sounding the “death knell” for software innovation,335 several members of the public argued that Alice instead addresses the very real problem of abusive patent litigation driven by overly broad patents.336 According to these commentators, the decision has made patent litigation more efficient and has provided companies with an important tool to defend against spurious lawsuits.337 Likewise, others characterized Alice as striking an appropriate balance between innovators and downstream users of computer-implemented inventions. 338 One participant doubted that the Supreme Court, directly confronted with the issue, would actually hold “that software is not patentable.”339 Another argued that Alice doesn’t go far enough, and that patents are “an imposition” on people that write software and “slow down their ability to create.” 340
***********/

The numbers are cites to the transcript and written reports by Google, IBM, Mozilla, Microsoft, etc. Yes, the participants all seem to be lawyers.

You can find lists of participants, all in crappy Word to PDF documents with minimally functioning links at,

https://www.uspto.gov/patent/initiatives/patent-subject-matter-eligibility-roundtable-2

to get the transcript and written reports.
https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/RT2 Transcript FINAL.pdf

https://www.uspto.gov/patent/initiatives/comments-patent-subject-matter-eligibility-roundtable-2

The report tries to make itself look like a collaborative effort,
/*******
There were over 250 participants from across the country representing abroad cross-section of the patent community, including industry, private practice, academia, associations,inventors, and small businesses.
***********/

I suppose legal council is a form of representation, but it’s one only a few people can afford much less the time and travel expenses of participation, and the claim that “small business” were represented rings hollow.

Professor Dennis Crouch misleads this week. Most parties, based on the above (those whose employers actually make stuff) favoured Alice. Misleading framing from Crouch: “The USPTO’s new Section 101 Report [101-Report] is fairly bland, and primarily reports that most of the public input favored a legislative change that would expand patent eligibility to include many of the life-science and software innovations excluded under Mayo/Alice.”

CCIA’s Josh Landau also wrote something yesterday. He explained why large technology companies now oppose software patents (except, notably, IBM, which is just utterly evil on that front).

To quote the relevant section:

Computer-Related Industries Favor Alice

The Patent Office report correctly notes that the two industries that have seen the most impact from recent Supreme Court decisions on § 101 are life sciences (Myriad and Mayo) and computer-related industries (Alice). Summarizing the viewpoints expressed by the public, it states that the life sciences are united in favor of changing § 101, while computer-related industries are divided.

This is half right. The life sciences industry is essentially united. But so are computer-related industries. They’re united in favor of § 101 and Alice.

Intel? Google? Oracle? Amazon? Microsoft? Groups representing startups (Engine), the software industry (SIIA), high-tech and Internet companies (CCIA and IA), and the video game industry (ESA)? The PTO notes that they all supported the current state of § 101 and provided a long list of reasons why. Alice has helped startups and small businesses defend themselves from spurious patent lawsuits. It has provided a tool to reduce the cost of patent litigation. And it’s provided a sensible tool to weed out poor quality and overbroad patents that try to claim ideas, rather than solutions.

There is one major exception—IBM. IBM is most likely the single largest patent-holder in the U.S., but it’s seen 5 straight years of declining revenue and growth. (A fact which, in and of itself, should make you question whether the number of patents granted is actually indicative of innovation.) About the only place where IBM is growing is in the yearly “number of patents granted” figure; given that, IBM’s desire to prevent invalidation of the patent portfolio that’s become its crown jewels makes sense.

Watchtroll, as expected, is tugging in the other direction, pushing IBM’s agenda as recently as yesterday. They just want legal chaos.

07.31.17

The War on CAFC, on Alice and on Patent Reform is Getting Ugly

Posted in America, Deception, IBM, Patents at 11:13 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Gene Quinn

Summary: Gene Quinn’s attack site, Watchtroll, continues its long tradition of attacking people who actually create things, in order for patent parasites like himself (and patent trolls/bullies) to gain at the expense of those who create things

THE USPTO has begrudgingly evolved after Alice, but as we showed on numerous occasions earlier this month, the patent microcosm is lobbying the USPTO and even hiring (i.e. bribing) former USPTO officials to help the lobbying. It’s truly nefarious and politicians need to be made aware of it.

“IBM, we must add, should be utterly shamed of itself for associating with this site — a supposedly ‘informed’ site that has called techies “idiots”, even in the headlines.”Watchtroll is one of the worst culprits in all this; it is making the patent microcosm look like a bunch of bullies. “Bullies of any kind don’t want their victims to speak out,” one person explained to us last night — a fact that we know having covered these matters for over a decade. It has gotten so bad that Microsoft extortion or blackmail with patents seeks to gag/silence/bribe the victim. As part of the settlement, for example, the victim is obliged to put on a happy face and issue a press release to that effect. We have seen that since the 2006 Microsoft/Novell deal. We saw that in 2016 with Xiaomi (patent settlement over Android and maybe Chrome OS too).

Focusing on Watchtroll for a moment, never forget its many attacks on Michelle Lee — attacks which were largely based on ‘conspiracy theories’ they had come up with and all sorts of ‘fake news’ intended to make her look bad. She eventually resigned. The USPTO is without a leader now.

“What has the patent microcosm succumbed to?”IBM, we must add, should be utterly shamed of itself for associating with this site — a supposedly ‘informed’ site that has called techies “idiots”, even in the headlines. Malicious firms like IBM (GNU/Linux-hostile now) would resort to supporting Watchtroll because all they have left now is patents (and lawsuits).

Yesterday, Watchtroll outdid itself (having already attacked judges); it now goes on the attack against PRACTICING firms and techies who dare warn about software patents, trolls etc.

It’s almost purely ad hominem, e.g.:

Tom Lee, a software engineer at geodata firm Mapbox, took time during his testimony to voice his concerns on “bad patents” and “patent trolls,” adding that it was “particularly galling to see efforts to weaken the inter partes review (IPR) system.”

Why does Mapbox’s viewpoint on patent litigation echo in the halls of Congress given the fact that it doesn’t appear that it has faced abusive patent litigation? In fact, it almost looks like there is no merit to Lee’s statement that “Mapbox has had multiple experiences with patent trolls: non-practicing entities who file meritless lawsuits that are cheaper to settle than to defend.” Mapbox certainly hasn’t had multiple experiences with lawsuits; going back to January 1st, 2000, Mapbox has been sued just once in a patent case according to data collected from Lex Machina’s legal data analytics service.

The comments are even ruder. They are linking to previous attacks from Watchtroll, e.g. attacks on Mark Cuban (calling him an “idiot” right there in the headline).

What has the patent microcosm succumbed to?

They only alienate themselves and make themselves new enemies (except IBM, which seems perfectly alright with such behaviour).

07.23.17

IBM and Watchtroll, Together With Microsoft, Among the Driving Forces for Resurgence of Software Patents

Posted in America, IBM, Law, Microsoft at 5:28 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Bill Lumbergh: If you could grant me a software patent, That Would Be Great!

Summary: A look at who keeps lobbying against Alice and where/how; also our assessment of why such lobbying won’t be getting them anywhere any time soon

AS PROMISED in our previous long post, here are some details about the lobby against Alice (i.e. for software patenting). The USPTO continues granting such patents, but in our previous post we showed that almost none of these can “survive” the courts. In other words, there’s a great disparity between granting and assertion in this domain. Certainty is extremely low for software patents.

“So he basically frames the rejection of software patents as “discrimination”. Amazing.”IBM and Watchtroll are probably the worst culprits when it comes to the lobbying; even more so than Microsoft. Here is IBM’s Manny Schecter‏ citing Watchtroll/Gene Quinn (quite frequent an occurrence and Schecter‏ also habitually writes for Watchtroll). “The patent system should not discriminate against certain technologies,” he wrote.

So he basically frames the rejection of software patents as “discrimination”. Amazing.

Watchtroll said: “Alice Who? Over Half the U.S. Utility Patents Issued Annually are Software Related!”

“Software is everywhere. But that does not mean that everywhere technology is used it boils down to software.”Terms like “software related” are nonsensical. Benjamin Henrion already responded to them with , “you mean it does not fit some technologies?”

Software is everywhere. But that does not mean that everywhere technology is used it boils down to software. Yet that’s the kind of ‘logic’ software patents proponents are attempting to leverage. The underlying article IBM links to is from a patent attorney, i.e. part of the patent microcosm.

“Microsoft too is among those trying to change the law in the US, in order to allow software patents chaos to resume (Microsoft’s blackmail relies on that).”“It is time to define the term ‘Abstract Idea’,” Watchtroll added. It couldn’t get any more obvious; they want Alice struck down under the guise of “clarity” that IBM pays David Kappos to play with.

It’s despicable. Microsoft too is among those trying to change the law in the US, in order to allow software patents chaos to resume (Microsoft’s blackmail relies on that). As this recent report put it: “The issue’s importance to biopharmaceutical companies was illustrated March 15 by an unlikely source—an executive from the software industry–which often has been at odds with the biopharma sector on Section 101. Speaking on the topic, Microsoft Corp.’s David Jones said, “The people having the hardest time, as much as we complain about software, are the ones with gene patents.””

Further down it refers to the IBM-led IPO initiative by stating: “The IPO proposed three new parts of Section 101. Section 101(a) would read: “Whoever invents or discovers and claims as an invention any useful process, machine, manufacture, composition of matter, or any useful improvement thereto, shall be entitled to a patent for a claimed invention thereof, subject only to the exceptions, conditions and requirements set forth in this Title.””

“Will all that lobbying manage to warp the debate though?”So it is crystal clear that they are still attempting to resurrect abstract patents, including software patents. Having said that, a lot of the above is from May and June (John T. Aquino’s article is from May) and things have been quiet since then. Back in May there were many articles like “IPO, AIPLA and ABA IP Section Propose Legislative Fixes for Section 101″, “AIPLA offers proposals to alter section 101″ and “AIPLA On Board with Statutory Reform of 101″. A month later there was almost nothing about it and in July there was nothing at all. It’s like they vanished. We should not, however, assume that they stopped trying. Arguably, what they worked on at the time (and to a certain degree did accomplish) is this notorious bill, the “STRONGER Patents Act” which is going nowhere (not even patent extremists like IAM believe it will ever materialise).

Will all that lobbying manage to warp the debate though?

“More reports that Examiners in 3600 are being instructed to conduct less stringent Alice analyses,” Patent Buddy wrote. Have they ‘scandalised’ Alice enough to have it de-emphasised? Well, maybe only at the patent office, but not the courts. The USPTO does not decide what patents will be upheld by judges. Back in May, patent attorney Mark Summerfield wrote about the subject and regarding a particular case, J Nicholas Gross (also patent microcosm) said: “In contrast to PTO, Fed judges continue to rely on principle of “no preemption” to deem patents eligible under 101…”

“The patent microcosm is focusing on exceptions to the norm, i.e. cases where software patents are miraculously upheld (even if by a low court).”Well, they actually do their job correctly. Even if examiners continue to grant software patents, judge will throw these away, merely reducing confidence in US patents and damaging the credibility of the US patent office.

The case at hand is Tecsec Inc. v Adobe Inc. and Mercedes Meyer wrote about it that “EDVA [Eastern District of Virginia] DENIES 12(B)(6) ELIGIBILITY MOTION – claims on 4 patents do not preempt and are inventive; Tecsec Inc. v. Adobe Inc. (5/23/17)…”

So it’s yet another one of many cases where software patents are ruled invalid.

Regarding another Tecsec case, Tecsec Inc. v International Business Machines Corporation (IBM), Docket Report wrote this: “The court denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment on the ground that plaintiff’s encryption patents encompassed unpatentable subject matter because the asserted claims were not directed toward an abstract idea.”

As noted in our previous report, this was the sole case (which we are aware of so far this summer) where software patents were tolerated, and these were only tolerated by a low court. The patent microcosm is focusing on exceptions to the norm, i.e. cases where software patents are miraculously upheld (even if by a low court).

“It seems clear that their last remaining hopes are on this piece of legislation that is already being opposed and condemned even by large corporations…”Is there much of a future (or any) to software patents? Well, that “STRONGER Patents Act” (misleading name) is dead in the water and we expect the momentum of the above lobby to have already been lost in the midst of SCOTUS rulings. We oughtn’t, however, lose sight of the lobbyists. The last thing they want is visibility (when they do their dirty deeds). A vocal software patents ‘lobbyist’, Steve Lundberg, is going mental over the demise of “medical”-washed software patents and other vocal ‘lobbyists’ seem equally perturbed. They can’t seem to get their way. Steve Lundberg is starting to sound like Bill Lumbergh with: “If you could grant me a software patent, That Would Be Great!”

Here is what he wrote:

One of the most disturbing stats related to medical software innovation. Inexplicably, it has been targeted as constituting largely only “abstract ideas” not worthy of patenting. This is another strong indication that the U.S. patent system is sorely in need of a legislative solution to the Section 101 problem that is now a runaway train on course to do major damage to the U.S. patent system and U.S. competitiveness in the technical software arts.

A couple of months later the Bill Lumbergh-like Steve Lundberg wrote in favour of stuff like “STRONGER Patents Act” (promoted also by Bastian Best).

It seems clear that their last remaining hopes are on this piece of legislation that is already being opposed and condemned even by large corporations (except the likes of IBM and Microsoft, which like to shake down companies and extort them for ‘protection’ money).

07.02.17

India Continues to Reject Software Patents in Spite of Pressure From Foreign Companies Like IBM

Posted in America, Asia, IBM, Patents at 10:32 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Gate in India

Summary: The Indian patent office reaffirms its commitment to banning software patents in spite of growing pressure from companies that are not even Indian (and their law firms)

THE situation in India matters a great deal because India is probably the world’s largest software maker (depending on how it’s measured). Software patents are not allowed in India, which is absolutely commendable and is the correct approach. Just ask any software developer (anywhere)…

According to several articles in English-speaking media from India, the India Patent Office had “software patent rules reissued” or “reissued norms for software patenting” (a lot of articles about this are identical but were published across several English-speaking networks).

“So despite of all that pressure and in spite of the loopholes, Indian examiners do their job.”Manny Schecter‏, who has been pushing for software patents on behalf of IBM, took note of it and wrote: “India has released new guidelines for examining computer-related inventions for patentability http://www.ipindia.nic.in/newsdetail.htm?”

But don’t expect much to have changed. As this recent article put it: “The Patent Office raised objections stating that the method is a mere software application…”

“Just a buzzword like “innovation” is meaningless and considering IBM’s use of software patents against FOSS we should watch quite closely what Schecter‏ et al do in India.”So despite of all that pressure and in spite of the loopholes, Indian examiners do their job. They cull out the garbage.

“The #patent system should promote #innovation for all technologies without discrimination,” Schecter‏ wrote not too long ago, alluding to software patents in India, but it didn’t take long for FFII’s President to respond with, “what if it does not? Plus there are no metrics for innovation.”

“Later this month we will show that Schecter‏ and his highly controversial friends (like Watchtroll) do immense damage to the US patent system as well.”“Innovation” in IBM’s terminopoly just means “IBM making a profit.” Just a buzzword like “innovation” is meaningless and considering IBM's use of software patents against FOSS we should watch quite closely what Schecter‏ et al do in India. Later this month we will show that Schecter‏ and his highly controversial friends (like Watchtroll) do immense damage to the US patent system as well. They still promote software patents in India and in the US, as we noted in a post last Sunday. Will they ever succeed? Not if the population stands up to them…

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) is Under Attack From the Patent Microcosm, Which Wants It Not to Exist Anymore

Posted in America, IBM, Microsoft, Patents at 10:02 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Proponents of software patents are, as expected, wishing nothing but harm to patent reform

PTAB

Summary: Attempts to revert back to a system full of lawsuits, trolls and blackmail are publicly seen in the form of “STRONGER Patents Act” — a supposed ‘improvement’ that strives to roll back PTAB

THERE are many patent myths abound. They are being spread by those who profit from patents, not from products. In fact, they rarely make anything at all (except destructive lawsuits). Among the myths is the concept that an economy with a lot of patents (even too many) will thrive. But it’s based on a lie. Number of patents, for instance, is not indicative of progress or invention but investment (money and effort) in patent applications. In some countries patents are simply granted on just about anything; see what happens in China at the moment. See this new article celebrating “high number of patents” as if it’s a meaningful yardstick (it usually just says something about where large companies are based).

“Put in simple terms, there are court cases that now make trivial the invalidation of abstract patents such as software patents; but enforcing the rules against such patents, especially old patents, can be difficult without PTAB.”We have approximately two dozen articles on the way about patents, but we lack the time to publish them all. Some of these (to be published some time in summer) will expose the lobbying effort for a patent system that serves the patent ‘industry’ (law firms, patent trolls, and patent bullies) at the expense of science and technology. We are very eager to write about it, having researched the subject for months, but we publish based on priority (timing, urgency, relevance to current events). Today we wish to focus on PTAB, which is basically under attack again. PTAB has been responsible for eliminating more software patents than any other branch (even all courts combined), so it needs to be defended. According to this new post, “Analog Devices filed for the inter partes review against Knowles’ U.S. Patent No. 8,018,049 covering a Silicon Condenser Microphone Package. The PTAB agreed with the challenge and found a substantial number of the claims unpatentable.”

In another domain, the domain of pharmaceutical patents, someone is profiting by crushing so-called ‘Big Pharma’ (which use their patents for drug inflation or artificial price hikes). As PTAB expert Michael Loney put it the other day: “This month saw the PTAB issue the final decision on a Kyle Bass inter partes review.”

Kyle Bass won. We wrote about his petitions many times before.

This is the kind of thing we want. Here is another new example:

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board has issued a rare granted motion to amend in Valeo North America v Schaeffler Tech, suggesting the Board is willing to consider well-crafted substitute claims

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has granted two substitute claims in Valeo North America v Schaeffler Tech.

Meanwhile, Dennis Crouch continues trying to slow PTAB down and discredit its decisions. Here is his latest attempt to draw attention that inflames or harms the relationship between CAFC and PTAB (in spite of them agreeing ~80% of the time).

We recognise that many of our readers are new to this and rely on expansion of acronyms etc. Put in simple terms, there are court cases that now make trivial the invalidation of abstract patents such as software patents; but enforcing the rules against such patents, especially old patents, can be difficult without PTAB. The patent microcosm — i.e. firms that profit from litigation and shakedowns — is trying to corrupt politicians right now. It tries to bamboozle them into killing PTAB after it eliminated many bogus patents and as one new headline put it, “STRONGER Patents Act would “gut” the PTAB” (if it got passed, but not even the patent microcosm expects it to pass).

“The direct attack on Alice itself is still in the making and there are companies like IBM and Microsoft pushing hard for it.”We wrote about this subject before. It overlaps several other efforts to weaken if not eliminate reform. As TechDirt put it the other day, “Could You Design A Worse Patent Reform Bill Than The STRONGER Patent Act By Senator Coons? Don’t Think So” (wait, there’s more on the way… as we shall show soon).

The direct attack on Alice itself is still in the making and there are companies like IBM and Microsoft pushing hard for it. Don’t take AIA, PTAB, or even Alice for granted. Not even taking Michelle Lee for granted was a safe bet because personal attacks from the patent microcosm seem to have pushed (if not forced) her out. After IAM tried to push a corrupt man into her position Watchtroll is having a go also (suggesting replacements [1, 2]), multiple times in fact after it repeatedly attacked Michelle Lee with baseless ‘scandals’ (over a dozen times). IAM still cites Watchtroll as an authority and whines about SCOTUS doing the right thing on patents (like Alice). Here is the relevant paragraph:

That was definitely one of the takeaways from the ‘US pendulum’ session in which the panelists debated a slew of recent court decisions and the overall state of patent rights in the US. IP Watchdog’s Gene Quinn was clear on the impact that Lexmark might have. “It could be the biggest decision of our lifetime, there are a lot of people panicked by the case,” Quinn said. “It will dramatically decrease the revenue for companies doing business overseas, I don’t see any way around it.”

Maybe he can just attack some more judges in his blog, defame Directors of patent offices, and resort to whatever dirty tricks (with IBM’s help) to perturb the system. They already buy themselves some ‘academics’, moles and lobbyists like David Kappos to help with this, as we shall probably show in greater detail later this month.

06.25.17

IBM, Apple and Facebook Pursue Software Patents in India in Defiance of the Ban

Posted in Apple, Asia, IBM, Patents at 8:58 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

India is a software powerhouse. Let’s keep it that way.

Malviya Bridge
Malviya Bridge, inaugurated in 1887, is a double decker bridge over the Ganges at Varanasi.

Summary: Multinationals from the United States, or digital colonisers with ambitions to spy on and control finance, continue to behave as though Indian law is not applicable to their operations in India and repeatedly attempt to patent software anyway

INDIA, by some criteria, grew to the point of having the world’s largest software industry. There are also lawyers in India who are hoping to prey on the software industry by imposing a patent tax on all software.

“There are also lawyers in India who are hoping to prey on the software industry by imposing a patent tax on all software.”LexOrbis promotes software patents in India without even understanding these. Also in spite of India banning these. Now comes this self-promotional puff piece. What gives? When will they understand or accept that Indians simply do not want (or need) software patents? When is enough “enough!”?

“Infosys, an Indian giant, already spoke out against software patents and virtually stopped pursuing them.”Watch IBM’s Manny Schecter (he is their patent chief) along with his ilk still promoting software patents in India, not only behind the scenes but also publicly. A few weeks ago he wrote: “Great that India is promoting #IP education, but #India must also recognize a broader scope of #patent eligible subject matter…”

He was alluding to software patents, as usual. Meanwhile, the English-speaking news in India (several articles such as this one, found via numerous accounts) says that patent aggressor Facebook is pursing patents that are not allowed in India. This is a software patent:

Facebook has sought an Indian patent for its electronic payment system enabled through messaging.

Apparently, based on this other report, both Apple and Facebook ignore patent law in India and pursue such patents. To quote, “Apple and Facebook’s move to apply for patents relating to digital payments comes despite India’s stand on not allowing patents on software, unless paired with hardware in an innovative way.”

“Patent maximalism would impress nobody but the likes of Microsoft, which is close to TCS and Wipro.”Infosys, an Indian giant, already spoke out against software patents and virtually stopped pursuing them. According to this new report, TCS and Wipro (the other Indian giants) still “seek more patents”. Patent maximalism would impress nobody but the likes of Microsoft, which is close to TCS and Wipro. Here is the part about Infosys:

Infosys has embraced open source technologies, also joining the Open Invention Network (OIN) to share IP on Linux programs and support “patent non-aggression”. This will also reduce research costs and focus on building technologies with community participation and strengthen its offerings.

We wrote about this 3 months ago.

We strongly encourage all Indians to get involved and organise against software patents in order to guard their best industry.

05.14.17

IBM and Its Revolving Doors Lobby Are Plotting to Undermine Supreme Court Rulings to Restore Patentability of Software

Posted in IBM, Law, Patents at 4:22 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Truly malicious company that seeks to thwart democracy

IBM and the Holocaust
Yes, it’s a real book based on a true story

Summary: IBM has become so evil that it is now trying to steal democracy, label programmers “thieves”, and basically attack the rule of law by extra-judicially overturning a Supreme Court decision

THE previous post reinforced the trend of software patents dying in the US, irrespective of what the USPTO does (because the courts have the final word and the highest court said “no” to software patents in Alice).

“It is widely known that when large corporations want to accomplish something in politics they can just bribe (or “hire”) some politicians, e.g. to change the law.”A few days ago we became aware of a new push to pressure politicians into undoing Alice. It is widely known that when large corporations want to accomplish something in politics they can just bribe (or “hire”) some politicians, e.g. to change the law. As usual, IBM, Microsoft etc. (acting via their front groups) are trying to rob us all and undermine patent progress. There were some tweets about it, which triggered a flurry of communications with us about 4 days ago. It quickly started to become clear what was happening around that time.

“Apparently,” wrote a patent reformer (whom we respect), “it is already being heavily lobbied even though there is no bill yet. A successful bill would have to focus on bio, not software…”

This is “not a good sign,” Benjamin Henrion responded. “The big guys have already written the bill.”

Yes, this is how they operate. They did this in other countries too, e.g. in New Zealand. We wrote about that at the time.

“They did this in other countries too, e.g. in New Zealand.”So basically, a bunch of patent parasites and patent trolls want to maximise their damage to the industry and in order to achieve this they are trying hard to change the law. Looking for some earlier context we found this: “Congressional staffers at Stanford PAE conference: patentable subject matter reform will be the first patent bill introduced this Congress…”

Amazing? Yes. Surprising? No. We saw that coming.

Henrion responded, “the great return of a software patent bill written by the patent industry?”

Not if we raise awareness of this and fight back.

“Amazing? Yes. Surprising? No. We saw that coming.”Then came the “Swamp” friends of Watchtroll and his ilk, with tweets like this: “@USinventors proposal on subject matter eligibility is also shaping the Congressional discussion. Depends on TC Heartland & non judiciary” (TC Heartland is due soon).

Someone asked: “Any discussion about proposed legislation (i.e., what might be the definition of patent eligible matter)?”

“If IBM uses radical sites like Watchtroll (which mocks judges) to lobby for software patents while paying former officials to ‘buy’ the law, then IBM certainly turned us into its enemy (we used to be a friend).”Well, it didn’t take long for Watchtroll to advertise this, with IBM taking the lead, as usual. In fact, for IBM to associate with such people says a lot about IBM. If IBM uses radical sites like Watchtroll (which mocks judges) to lobby for software patents while paying former officials to ‘buy’ the law, then IBM certainly turned us into its enemy (we used to be a friend).

Don’t forget the role played by David Kappos, the former Director of the USPTO. David Kappos is now selling influence/access, thus disgracing the USPTO which he came from (he had come from IBM before that).

“David Kappos is now selling influence/access, thus disgracing the USPTO which he came from (he had come from IBM before that).”It’s not too expensive buying policy in the US. Corporations such as IBM, together with an IPO “task force” (that’s what they call it) do this right now. David Kappos — now bankrolled by IBM, Microsoft etc. — tries to make software patents legally enforceable again, using old euphemisms such as “clarity” (to make it seem like they don’t steal democracy and stomp on the Justices).

It didn’t take long for this to be promoted by IBM

As Henrion told the IBM manager, “it would show that Congress members are lackeys of large corporations, but that’s not new.”

“IBM is very, very evil now.”IBM is now aided by a lobbyist (revolving doors in USPTO, also paid by IBM before and after his time at the USPTO). It is purchasing (or at least trying to purchase) new laws so as to override the highest court.

What does that tell us about IBM? Has it ever gotten more benign than it was back in the days of extreme patent aggression, notorious help to the Nazi regime, and so much more? IBM is very, very evil now. IBM links to this puff piece from Patently-O, which said this: “According to at least one hearsay report, members of Congress are working toward a new patent reform bill on subject matter eligibility – likely partially following the models prepared by the IPO and pushed by Dave Kappos (among others). There is some chance that it will be introduced this month.”

Yes, “Dave Kappos”… he refers to him as though it’s a close friend. Dave…

“To IBM, it stops nowhere. They’re bullies. They have become huge parasites again.”IBM continues advocating software patents, saying just a short while ago: “If one can #patent a process implemented in circuits, the same should be true for a process implemented in #software”

No ambiguity here. IBM is an enemy of Free/Open Source software.

Henrion responded with, “then if it is implemented in software, mental acts should also be patentable. Where does it stop?”

To IBM, it stops nowhere. They're bullies. They have become huge parasites again.

“They once again hijack the word “fix” to mean break. They want to undo the fix.”Watchtroll, who has been working alongside IBM for a while, says: “Read (and sign) the U.S. Inventor petition to Congress to fix the U.S. patent system. http://www.usinventor.org/petition/”

So they already have a site up and Henrion says that “patent madness it means.”

They once again hijack the word “fix” to mean break. They want to undo the fix. We have noted this deceptive pattern for over a year. How misleading a hijack of words.

“Software patent bill [are] being written by IBM coming to Congress,” Henrion keeps warning this weekend. “Every programmer engaging in some form of logic for a living,” he writes, “needs to think about buying patent insurance…”

“It probably won’t take long for Microsoft to publicly join IBM in pushing for this “fix” [sic], which means making Patent Trolls Great Again.”Henrion has already been the victim. He is a programmer like myself.

We are deeply and utterly disgusted to see a sort of alliance between Watchtroll, IBM, and Patently-O too, promoting the attack on software developers. The other day Patently-O once again promoted old myths about patents, which are neither a right nor property. Using their misleading words, they keep calling those whom they rob “thieves”, alleging that people who write their own code are “stealing” (as opposed to trolls who shake them down for ‘protection’ money).

It probably won’t take long for Microsoft to publicly join IBM in pushing for this “fix” [sic], which means making Patent Trolls Great Again. Keep an eye on “MicrosoftIP” in Twitter (in the coming days, maybe even as early as tomorrow).

« 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