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

04.19.16

Software Patents Decreasingly a Threat in the United States, But IBM and Microsoft Lobby for a Rebound

Posted in IBM, Microsoft, Patents at 8:11 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

David Kappos as lobbyist
Source: David Kappos interview with Intellectual Property Magazine (2010), modified by us

Summary: Software patents are not as scary as they used to be (because many are effectively found to be of no value, or ruled invalid by US courts), but patent aggressors including IBM and Microsoft work towards a software patents comeback, aided by well-connected officials such as David Kappos (above)

THE reality behind software patents in the United States (or patent policy in general) isn’t just shaped by the USPTO, which grants patents too sparingly, but also by the courts, which increasingly demonstrate that the USPTO isn't doing its job (which should be examination and thus elimination of weak applications).

“Judging by the Bilski case, it might take another decade before Alice is shaken at all (if at all).”According to this new examination of upcoming SCOTUS cases, there is no imminent challenge to Alice. Judging by the Bilski case, it might take another decade before Alice is shaken at all (if at all). “Following its April 15 Conference,” wrote Patently-O, “the Supreme Court denied certiorari in a set of cases, including Vermont v. MPHJ; Limelight v. Akamai; Hemopet v. Hill’s Pet Nutrition; and Tas v. Beachy. In its April 1 Conference, the Court denied cert in Retirement Capital v. US Bancorp. That case had questioned whether subject matter eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101 is a ground specified as a condition for patentability under 35 U.S.C. § 282(b)(2).”

It seems like very good news, unless you’re some patent lawyer or patent aggressor such IBM or Microsoft (they both pay the former Director of the USPTO to discredit SCOTUS rulings and restore the fangs of software patents by altering § 101). Over in Texas (capital of patent trolls, see yesterday's article to that effect) the press now bemoans Alice, i.e. the death of many software patents in the United States. The article was composed by patent lawyers (surprise surprise!) and it says:

Yes, we’re being a bit dramatic here but Alice has been killing patents, and especially software patents, at an impressive clip. In this case, Alice refers to the 2014 U.S. Supreme Court opinion Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank. In that opinion, the Court announced a new two-step process to determine whether an idea is patentable and, ever since, this two-step process has been applied by courts and the Patent Office to disallow patents at an unprecedented rate. Law360 calculated that courts are granting around 70 percent of Alice motions. In raw numbers, there were more patents killed in the 14 months after Alice than in the five years before it.

It all sounds like good news, unless one is a greedy patent lawyer, especially from a place like Texas. Decline in proactive activity which invalidates software patents in the US has just been reported by MIP. To quote: “A total of 118 petitions were filed at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) in March, down from 150 in February but up on the 99 in January. In contrast, 145 petitions were filed in March 2015.”

“It all sounds like good news, unless one is a greedy patent lawyer, especially from a place like Texas.”Perhaps — and we are only guessing here — after Alice-led challenges (which ultimately killed patents at the knock of a gavel) more companies realise that software patents would not survive the courts anyway. It means that there’s less incentive to sue at all. Suing can lead to loss of patents. As MIP put it in another article, “Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) petition filing in the first three months of 2016 fell to its lowest quarterly figure for two years.”

What matters, however, is rate/ratio of invalidation.

So less than two years after PTAB’s formation it seems to have become less necessary because the core issue, which is patent scope (or quality), is being addressed/tackled by Alice.

FOSS Force, a site which deals with Free/Open Source software (FOSS) matters, has just run a poll about software patents and here is what it came up with (see charts in page). To quote the author: “In recent years software patents haven’t been nearly as much in the news as they once were. This is partly due to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Alice Corp. vs. CLS Bank which took a slew of patents off the table. Also, thanks to the efforts of companies such as Newegg to duke it out in court instead of rolling over and settling, many patents that had been successfully leveraged by the trolls for years have been invalidated.”

“Both are aggressive patent predators amid layoffs which threaten their very monopolistic existence.”It sure seems like things are improving in the US, but don’t take that for granted. Companies like IBM and Microsoft (or more recently Apple) hire lobbyists in an effort to restore the old state of affairs, enabling more patent extortion against small companies. Recall what Microsoft is still doing against FOSS distributors (using patents on software for coercion and taxation) and then consider IBM's controversial joining. Both are aggressive patent predators amid layoffs which threaten their very monopolistic existence.

As we noted here some days ago, having maliciously destroyed Yahoo, Microsoft might now go after Yahoo’s patents, which MIP says aren’t that expensive anyway. To quote: “It identified 2,000 US patents currently assigned to Yahoo that are active and in-force. Yahoo’s 2015 10-K reveals the company reported almost $300 million in gains related to patent sales between 2013 and 2015.”

As for IBM, there’s some new patent propaganda (just published for IBM marketing), femmewashing its patents and wrongly equating them with “invention”.

04.15.16

Nuevas Patentes de Software de Google, Microsoft y Apple, Más Cabildeo de David Kappos (Financiado por Microsoft y Apple)

Posted in America, Apple, Google, IBM, Law, Microsoft, Patents at 7:21 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

English/Original

Article as ODF

Publicadoen America, Apple, Google, IBM, Law, Microsoft, Patentes at 8:40 am por el Dr. Roy Schestowitz

David Kappos demuestra que las leyes están a la venta en los EE.UU. Incluso las leyes de patentes

David Kappos

Fuente: : David Kappos 2013 interview

Kappos PAI

Kappos a la cabeza de un grupo financiado por grandes corpóraciones pero conveniéntemente no fue llamada Partnership of Megacorporations

Sumario: Las patentes de software no van a desaparecer todavía simplemente porque compañías como las integrantes de la Sagrada Familia: Microsoft, Apple and IBM (de donde Kappos proviene) usan su dinero para cabildeo, esenciálmente comprando la legislación

EL otro día escribimos acerca depatentes sobre conducir, siendo el contexto (enparte)la iniciativa de Google, que hizo noticias la semana pasada, e.g. [1, 2, 3, 4]. Google está tratando de patentar el conducir [1, 2], lo que trae un montón de preguntas acerca de la esfera de patentes y arte previo, los seres humanos ya manejan carros y lo han hecho por muchos años). Sin dudar estas son patentes de software. Ellas afectan el área de mi investigación, la que es computer vision/machine vision (puramente software/mathematics), no señal de procesamiénto (hardware connotación en ello).

Si a Kappos le queda algo de dignidad, va a tener que esconderse debajo de una roca y no reforzar la percepción de que el sistema de patentes por el que trabajaba está profundamente corrupto.
De acuerdo a otras noticias (“Microsoft patents end-to-end encryption”), lala NSA es un pionero en vigilancia másivaquiere un monopolio en encryption [1, 2, 3, 4], en relación a un sistema operativo que es la antithesis de encryption (vigilancia másiva en tiempo real).
Mientras tanto, también nos enteramos que, un agresor de patentesconectado a Microsoft, continúaenjuiciando a Symantec. Como un defensor patentes de software lo puso: “Finjan Holdings, Inc. (NASDAQ: FNJN), padre de la filial de Finjan, Inc., anunció hace unas semanas que la prueba de Patentes y Junta de Apelación (PTAB) de los Estados Unidos de patentes y Marcas (USPTO) emitió la resolución final de los intentos de los de Symantec Corporation (NASDAQ: SYMC) para invalidar las patentes de 8 Finjan diferentes a través de la revisión de interpartes (IPR).

Por lo tanto, en este caso particular, la PTAB no eliminó las patentes de software, para variar. Motivo de celebración entre los abogados de patentes, pero ¿qué quiere decir de todos los demás? La agresión de patentes de Apple con las patentes de software sigue siendo, de acuerdo a esta noticia, una “cosa” ya que “esta última patente es más orientada a programas.” Muchas de las patentes de Apple ha estado usando para atacar a Linux (o Android) han sido las patentes de software o patentes de diseño, que son inherentemente similar a (o) un tipo de patentes de software.

Ahora que las patentes de software están generalmente bajo ataque y se enfrentan a una amenaza existencial en los EE.UU. (SCOTUS ya ha matado a muchos de ellas con Alice y pronto se podría hacer lo mismo con las patentes de diseño debido a la agresión de Apple) el ex Director de la USPTO, David Kappos, asoma su fea pelada cabeza de nuevo. Ahora trabaja como un grupo de presión para la Sagrada Familia: IBM, Microsoft, Apple, etc., y deshonra a la USPTO ya que actualmente recibe el dinero para cambiar las leyes a favor de susamos/clientes (que es una forma de “puertas giratorias” para la corrupción, girando/moviéndose de acuerdo a su influencias/conexiones con dinero). Como sitio este sitio de abogados acaba de ponerlo“El ex director de la Oficina de Patentes y Marcas de EE.UU., pidió el lunes por la abolición de la Sección 101 de la Ley de Patentes, que establece los límites de la materia patentable-elegibles, diciendo que decisiones como Alice en el tema son un” verdadero desastre “y amenazan la protección de patentes para las industrias clave de Estados Unidos. “lo que quiere decir con” verdadero desastre “es que crea incertidumbre para sus clientes/amos, como IBM, Microsoft y Apple (los que le sueltán la marmaja de dinero). Esto es una continuacion de algo que notamos aquí con anterioridad. Si a Kappos le queda algo de dignidad, va a tener que esconderse debajo de una roca y no reforzar la percepción de que el sistema de patentes por el que trabajaba está profundamente corrupto.

04.14.16

Codiciósos Acumuladores de Patentes de Software Caen en Picada en Los EE.UU

Posted in GNU/Linux, IBM, Microsoft, Patents, Samsung at 9:04 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

English/Original

Article as ODF

Publicado en GNU/Linux, IBM, Microsoft, Patents, Samsung at 10:58 am por el Dr.

Going down

Sumario: Casi dos años después de la histórica decisión Alice compañías que se embarcan de manera grade en las patentes de software (y regalías de patentes) están perdiéndo su preeminencia en elsistema de patentes de los EE. UU.
De acuerdo a este nuevo informe de IAM, Samsung es ahora el número 1 en las patentes de los EE.UU. (total). IBM está cayendo por la escalera con bastante rapidez en medio de despidos y vale la pena mencionar que IBM es ahora un agresor patentes. Ataca a las empresas legítimas, con las patentes de software como arma [1, 2] (estrategia de patentes típico de las empresas que estan en decadencia). Hablando de estas empresas, Microsoft está en el número 4 en su país de origen, tras haber perdido impulso no sólo como empresa (ahora en su mayoría una sanguijuela y parásito de patentes), sino también como un solicitante de patentes.

La buena noticia de todo esto es que, tradicionalmente, como muchos sitios señalan correctamente, las empresas coreanas no son agresivos con patentes. Samsung no es una excepción a esto. Además, que Samsung es una empresa productora (hardware), por lo que no muchos de sus patentes pertenecen al software. Samsung utiliza una gran cantidad de Linux en sus sistemas; en algunos casos se desarrolla sus propios sistemas operativos como Bada Tizen, o en lugar de confiar ciegamente en Android.

Otro informe IAM admitió que no era correcto. Habíá afirmado previamente que el troll de patentes de Ericsson se estaba cambiando el nombre/reformado de nuevo, pero esto resulta ser falso. IAM luego dice que algunas personas en Taiwan consideran hacer lo mismo (la creación de un troll propio, como el Licensing de Microsoft o Unwired Planet en el caso de Ericsson), pero sobre todo cita a las personas que se benefician de un litigio, no tecnólogos. Bueno, eso es clásico solamente de parte de IAM …

Mirando a algunos sitios centrados en patentes más creíbles, rápidamente nos enteramos de más de burbuja estallándo en este ámbito de las patentes. “La decisión del juez Dyk y unidos por el Juez Principal Prost y el juez Taranto afirma el despido de un tribunal inferior on-the-escritos de demanda por infracción de patentes de GTG,” dice Patently-O. “La celebración es que el procedimiento reivindicado para el análisis de ADN para el desequilibrio de ligamiento no es elegible para reclamar la manera más eficaz una ley de la naturaleza. La idea básica se deriva del descubrimiento de los inventores de que las regiones codificantes (exones) típicamente se correlacionan con “enlaces” ciertas regiones no codificantes (intrones). [...] GTG es una empresa australiana que había demandado previamente a unas pocas docenas de compañías por infringir la patentes 179. Las demandas se han reexaminado (a petición de Merial) y la patentabilidad confirmado.”

Actualmente, las patentesd de software no son tan potentes como solían ser (en las US courts/PTAB) lo muestran. Esperamos que las decisiones de los años venideros enviáran la señal de que hay poco/inexistente incentivo para las patentes de software, irrespectivamente de la laleniencia de la USPTO.

04.13.16

New Software Patents From Google, Microsoft and Apple, Plus New Lobbying From David Kappos (Paid by Microsoft and Apple)

Posted in America, Apple, Google, IBM, Law, Microsoft, Patents at 8:40 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

David Kappos demonstrates that laws are up for sale in the US, even patent laws

David Kappos
Source: David Kappos 2013 interview

Kappos PAI
Kappos-led group, funded by large corporations but conveniently not named Partnership of Megacorporations

Summary: Software patents are not going away just yet because companies such as Microsoft, Apple and IBM (which Kappos came from) use their money for lobbying, essentially buying legislation

THE other day we wrote about patents on driving, the context being (in part) Google’s initiative, which made the news this past week, e.g. [1, 2, 3, 4]. Google is trying to patent driving [1, 2], which brings up all sorts of legitimate questions about patent scope and prior art (humans already drive cars and have driven cars for many years). These are undoubtedly software patents. They affect my area of research, which is computer vision/machine vision (purely software/mathematics), not signal processing (hardware slant to it).

“If Kappos has any dignity left, he will go hide under a rock and not reinforce the perception that the patent system he worked for is deeply corrupt.”According to other news (“Microsoft patents end-to-end encryption”), the NSA surveillance pioneer wants a monopoly on encryption [1, 2, 3, 4], in relation to an operating system that’s the antithesis of encryption (mass surveillance in real time).

Meanwhile we also learn that Finjan, a Microsoft-connected patent aggressor, carries on suing Symantec. As a software patents proponent put it: “Finjan Holdings, Inc. (NASDAQ: FNJN), the parent of wholly-owned subsidiary Finjan, Inc., announced several weeks ago that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) of the United States Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO) issued the final rulings on attempts by Symantec Corporation’s (NASDAQ: SYMC) to invalidate 8 different Finjan’s patents through inter partes review (“IPR”).”

So, in this particular case, PTAB did not eliminate software patents, for a change. Cause for celebration among patent lawyers, but what does it mean to everybody else? Apple patent aggression with software patents is still, according to this news, a ‘thing’ as “this latest patent is more software orientated.” A lot of the patents Apple has been using to attack Linux (or Android) have been software patents or design patents, which are inherently similar to (or a type of) software patents.

Now that software patents are generally under attack and face an existential threat in the US (SCOTUS already killed many of them with Alice and it might soon do the same to design patents because of Apple’s aggression) the former USPTO Director, David Kappos, rears his ugly head again. He now works as a lobbyist for IBM, Microsoft, Apple etc. and disgraces the USPTO as he currently receives money to change laws in favour of these clients (that’s a form of “revolving doors” corruption, turning/converting his influence/connections into money). As this lawyers’ site has just put it: “The former director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office on Monday called for the abolition of Section 101 of the Patent Act, which sets limits on patent-eligible subject matter, saying decisions like Alice on the issue are a “real mess” and threaten patent protection for key U.S. industries.” What he means by “real mess” is that it creates uncertainty for clients of his, such as IBM, Microsoft, and Apple. This is a continuation of something that we noted here before. If Kappos has any dignity left, he will go hide under a rock and not reinforce the perception that the patent system he worked for is deeply corrupt.

04.12.16

Software Patents Hoarders Going Down in the United States

Posted in GNU/Linux, IBM, Microsoft, Patents, Samsung at 10:58 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Going down

Summary: Nearly two years after the historic Alice decision companies that rely a great deal on software patents (and patent royalties) are losing their prominence in the US patent system

According this new IAM report, Samsung is now number 1 in US patents (total). IBM is falling down the ladder rather quickly amid layoffs and it is worth mentioning that IBM is now a patent aggressor. It attacks legitimate companies, with software patents as a weapon [1, 2] (typical patent strategy of failing companies). Speaking of failing companies, Microsoft is at number 4 in its home country, having lost momentum not only as a company (now mostly a leech and patent parasite) but also as a patent applicant.

The good news about all this is that traditionally, as many sites correctly point out, Korean companies are not aggressive with patents. Samsung is no exception to this. Morever, Samsung is a producing company (hardware), so not so many of its patents pertain to software. Samsung uses a lot of Linux in its systems; in some cases it develops its own operating systems such as Bada or Tizen, rather than blindly rely on Android.

Another IAM report admits that it was wrong. It previously claimed that the patent troll of Ericsson was being renamed/reshaped again, but this turns out to be false. IAM then says that some people in Taiwan consider doing the same thing (creating a troll of their own, like Microsoft Licensing or Unwired Planet in the case of Ericsson), but it mostly quotes people who profit from litigation, not technologists. Well, that’s just IAM…

Looking at some more credible patents-centric sites, we quickly learn of more bubble-bursting in this area of patenting. “The decision by Judge Dyk and joined by Chief Judge Prost and Judge Taranto affirms a lower court’s dismissal on-the-pleadings of GTG’s patent infringement claim,” says Patently-O. “The holding is that the claimed method for analyzing DNA for linkage disequilibrium is ineligible for as effectively claiming a law of nature. The basic idea stems from the inventors discovery that coding regions (exons) typically correlate with “linked” certain non-coding regions (introns). [...] GTG is an Australian company that had previously sued a few dozen companies for infringing the ‘179 patent. The claims have been reexamined (at Merial’s request) and patentability confirmed.”

Nowadays, software patents aren’t quite as potent as before (in US courts/PTAB) and it shows. We hope that the coming few years’ decisions will send out the signal that there’s little incentive to software patenting, irrespective of USPTO lenience.

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

04.08.16

Lobbyists for Software Patents in ‘Journalism’ and ‘Reform’ Clothing (With Microsoft Connections)

Posted in Debian, Deception, GNU/Linux, IBM, Law, Microsoft, Patents at 6:23 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

One big happy family with lots of money in circulation and pro-software patents agenda

David Kappos PAI

Summary: The latest examples of unequivocal pushes for software patents, under the guise of ‘reporting’ (poor-shaming) or patent ‘reform’ (nothing to do with reform), courtesy of IAM ‘magazine’ and David Kappos, respectively

PATENT quality at the David Kappos-led USPTO has been poor and declining. This was apparently the goal, or an obvious (predictable) consequence of the strategy. It leaves the United States in a state of total mess, where a lot of startups are forced to cough out ‘protection money’ or go out of business. Not only patent trolls are causing this havoc but also large patent aggressors, such as Microsoft and IBM. Imagine what this kind of mess would mean to India, where a lot of software is being developed and the budget of local firms is relatively tight (hiring lawyers in another country is extremely expensive).

“Not only patent trolls are causing this havoc but also large patent aggressors, such as Microsoft and IBM.”Taking stock of the latest propaganda from IAM ‘magazine’, Techrights cannot help but berate and ridicule this so-called ‘magazine’ (more like a lobbying pamphlet). It’s not even a magazine, it’s Kool-Aid in paper form and a paywalled Web site (to keep only the choir in the know, no dissenting voices allowed). Here is today’s IAM brainwash about US patent ‘quality’ (the number of granted patents doubling in just a few years is evidently an indication of declining quality) and even worse brainwash that misrepresents the views of Indians, composed by an Anglo-Saxon who is employed to write such tripe. No Indian is even quoted in this article, except a law firm (obviously no bias there!).

Even after Alice, which challenges software patents in their home country, IAM continues to bat for software patents. IAM is London-based, which makes it even more outrageous, until one checks where IAM’s funds actually come from…

Techrights cannot help but berate and ridicule this so-called ‘magazine’ (more like a lobbying pamphlet). It’s not even a magazine, it’s Kool-Aid in paper form and a paywalled Web site (to keep only the choir in the know, no dissenting voice allowed).”Robert R. Sachs from Bilski Blog (shrewdly named after the famous Bilski case) is preparing a paper (and a series of articles derived from it) about why software patents are just mental processes, hence abstract. In many ways, software patents a major deception, exploiting people’s misunderstanding of how software actually works (it’s not hard to scam or bamboozle patent judges who never wrote a single line of code).

Earlier today I confronted the editor in chief at IAM, who is a trolls denialist (he still pretends that no such problem exists, just like people who deny human-caused global warning or climate change). This editor and his guys (the only woman there is clerical) are not reporting. They’re pushing for software patents in India today, using distortion of facts and outright lies. Shame on IAM for doing this. As I put it earlier today, in response to the editor: “As long as you guys do reputation laundering for patent trolls and software patents while they PAY you, you’re fake news. PR.”

“They’re pushing for software patents in India today, using distortion of facts and outright lies.”It’s increasingly important to shed light on what IAM really is and who’s funding it (and what for).

As I put it earlier today, IAM “continues to demonstrate that it’s not a real newspaper/magazine but just paid lobbying pretending to be reporting. Disgusting.”

IAM is full of patent maximalists (look at the authors’ background) who want more patents in more places, more domains, more companies, and so on. IAM is funded by those interests. What does that say about IAM? It’s like a magazine about energy which is funded by oil and coal companies, in order to suppress any coverage of alternative forms of energy. Bias by omission at the very least. This villainous, trolls- and EPO-connected IAM ‘magazine’ now shames India over India’s very tactful decision to block software patents, in the same way it repeatedly shamed Germany for not doing enough (much to the editor’s displeasure) to openly promote UPC, which incidentally IAM got paid to promote (even by the EPO's PR firm). It doesn’t take a genius to see what’s going on here, who pays, and cui bono etc. IAM dedicated their latest issue to the world’s largest patent troll [EN|ES] — an issue which apparently included this article, whose whole premise (and headline) is a big lie. The title says “India’s tough new line on software patents could hamper plans for boosting its digital start-ups” (no kidding!).

“It’s increasingly important to shed light on what IAM really is and who’s funding it (and what for).”In reality, the very opposite is true as software patents would hamper India’s plans for boosting its digital start-ups. Ask these start-ups and they will say so. Ask Microsoft or IBM (or their patent lawyers in India) and they will say ‘on behalf’ of these start-ups just a bunch of lies. Ask lobbyists of big companies and patent lawyers (like those that pay IAM) and they too will tell lots of lies. It’s the same scenario we saw in New Zealand and in Europe, where Microsoft even pays lobbyists to pretend to represent small businesses and actually say the very opposite of what European SMEs think and believe in. IAM now demonstrates that it’s no better than these lobbyists. The difference is the way they publicly characterise themselves.

Indian startups need code, not patents, which are priced out of reach anyway, never mind cost of litigation. IAM wrote: “It seems to me that this could cause some big problems for the digital start-ups that the government is so keen to support. Many of them will have computer-related innovations at the heart of their business models; if it becomes much more difficult for them to obtain patent protection on these, then the reasons for them to consider relocating outside of India could well become even more compelling.”

“Indian startups need code, not patents, which are priced out of reach anyway, never mind cost of litigation.”This is nonsense. Where is the evidence that without software patents those start-ups would move out of India and given that the software market is an international market (definitely not local), what difference would relocation make anyway? It might make a difference for multinational corporations such as IBM or Microsoft, no doubt about that…

Speaking of Microsoft, last night we discovered (not too shockingly) that Microsoft is putting money on Debian’s table (conference). It becomes — gasp — a sponsor. Yes, it’s E.E.E., but does Debian understand that? As we noted some days ago and last weekend, Microsoft still sponsors patent maximalism conferences (with Microsoft-funded lobbyists who promote software patents), wherein it can further influence the EPO (its partner in crime, so to speak) and European politicians. Can Microsoft be trusted at all while it’s extorting and blackmailing Debian-based device manufacturers using software patents? That’s a rhetorical question.

“Can Microsoft be trusted at all while it’s extorting and blackmailing Debian-based device manufacturers using software patents?”Incidentally, having mentioned David Kappos earlier, he too is now acting more as a lobbyist (official-turned-lobbyist a classic way of turning influence into money), funded by Microsoft and others in order to promote software patents. Remember that Horacio Gutierrez and his Microsoft chums once (or more than once) paid Florian Müller to do the same thing. Here is a recent article which a reader sent to us last night. It neglects to mention the special role of Kappos there. It just says that “Apple is taking a bigger role in pushing for patent reform in the United States by teaming up with IBM, Microsoft, and other companies as part of the Partnership for American Innovation. The organization’s goal is to lobby the Federal government to adopt the changes it wants to improve the country’s patent system.”

No, it wants to promote software patents. When Microsoft says patent “reform” it means software patents lobbying (same for Apple and IBM). They hijack the word reform and their chief lobbyist at PAI is David Kappos himself.

“Microsoft is now in the Kappos-led group that pushes for software patents.”“By the way,” told us one reader, “we’ve been wondering here about why Microsoft is so quiet and not attacking FOSS deployments and legislations. We figured that they must be working on something that can do an end-run around both. Digging a bit, it might be that they are confident that TTIP, TISA, and CETA will ban FOSS. There’s been no coverage of that to speak of in the mainstream press. In the same digging, I see that I’ve underestimated the importance of Wikileaks as well as the motives for Microsoft and its government stooges to crush it. As far as I know, TISA or TTIP is also pushing software patents, but I’ve read almost nothing yet and am about to start.”

Microsoft is now in the Kappos-led group that pushes for software patents. as our reader put it, “reform turns out to be one of their weasel words.”

The same goes for “loving” Linux. Watch out, Debian. You’re already fractured and fragmented due to systemd. Now you let the patent bully enter your events? Will buttons that say "Microsoft loves Linux" be distributed to put people off, as usual? It perfectly fits the latest E.E.E. pattern.

“I’ve killed at least two Mac conferences. [...] by injecting Microsoft content into the conference, the conference got shut down. The guy who ran it said, why am I doing this?”

Microsoft's chief evangelist

04.03.16

Patents Roundup: More on Patent Shakedowns, IBM Rejoins the Shakedowns Club With Software Patents, China Worries About Patent Certainty (Too Low a Standard)

Posted in America, Asia, IBM, Patents at 2:07 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

“The digital version of a protection racket.”

“Steve Jobs threatened to sue me, too. [and also] Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer. They’d flown in over a weekend to meet with Scott McNealy. [...] Bill skipped the small talk, and went straight to the point, “Microsoft owns the office productivity market, and our patents read all over OpenOffice.” [...] Bill was delivering a slightly more sophisticated variant of the threat Steve had made, but he had a different solution in mind. “We’re happy to get you under license.” That was code for “We’ll go away if you pay us a royalty for every download” – the digital version of a protection racket.”

Jonathan I. Schwartz, Sun

Summary: Patent news from the United States and new input from China, where there is growing concern about the scope of patents and certainty that granted patents are in fact valid and enforceable (except using shakedowns for ‘protection money’ or secret settlements)

Patent Litigation Costs and Exploitation Thereof

A lot of firms in the US, primarily but not only patent trolls, take advantage of the high cost of patent lawsuits and basically try to settle with victims (prospective defendants). This is a form of ‘protection money’ strategy, akin to racketeering or extortion. Even the copyright field/domain now tends to have such parasites, often referred to as “copyright trolls” (a relatively new term, coined only a few years ago). Watch this new article (or blog post) which states: “Most patent holders would agree that licensing patents for revenue has gone from bad to awful — from difficult less than a decade ago, to virtually impossible today.”

“This is a form of ‘protection money’ strategy, akin to racketeering or extortion.”This article actually bemoans this, as if more ‘protection money’ is a good thing. What this article’s referrer calls “patent industry” is actually a shakedown industry. “Obstacles to innovation” is just gobbledygook intended to make it sound as though innovation and patents are synonymous and interchangeable. Watch this tweet that says “Rather gloomy article on the state of the patent industry and obstacles to innovation” (nothing to do with innovation).

Remarking on this article, Julian wrote: “What an awful article. It refuses to admit that trolls are a problem, sees no flaw in the idea that litigation should be easy. It also believes patents should be “in the middle.” No. Patents exist for public good. There is no “middle.””

IBM Now Acting Like a Patent Troll (Microsoft’s Anti-Linux Strategy)

IBM now does to the Internet what Microsoft has been doing to Linux.

“IBM now does to the Internet what Microsoft has been doing to Linux.”As noted here yesterday, IBM continues to extort companies with software patents it has amassed like an arsenal (by the thousands per year), and this time it’s Priceline facing the firing line. J Nicholas Gross, “Berkeley IP Law Master” by his own description, wrote that “if IBM cant stop patent infringers who can? Priceline “refused to engage in any meaningful discussion on merits” [meaning agree to pay for software patents that are unproven in court, only in the biased and increasingly reckless USPTO]”

“So basically, IBM is now on a warpath of patent extortion using software patents (amid many IBM layoffs).”Here is an article about it which says: “A federal judge has denied several travel and reservation websites’ objections to a report and recommendation that International Business Machines’ patent infringement lawsuit against them should proceed.”

So basically, IBM is now on a warpath of patent extortion using software patents (amid many IBM layoffs). Just like Microsoft. And we’re supposed to actually trust IBM’s OIN? It’s not even so effective. Here comes a new red herring from IBM’s patents chief, who pretends that the only alternative is having no patents at all; well, almost nobody suggests abolishing the whole thing, just software patents. How nice of Manny Schecter to mislead people like this, even with false dichotomies. IBM is becoming increasingly shameless about its patent aggression, even aggression using software patents, i.e. patents that are dubious anyway. Schecter spends too much time hanging out with patent maximalists like Gene Quinn and it truly shows. IBM becomes more like IAM. As the latest figures from Bliski Blog help show, a lot of software patents are still being ruled invalid by US courts. To quote the latest from Bliski Blog (second article in 2 days, which is rare as there are only about a dozen posts per year): “March 2016 is the first month since Alice was decided that the number of decisions upholding patents (15) exceed the number of invalidating decisions (12). However, this is not a sea change. Rather, it’s an artifact of the data: on March 22, 2016, Judge Robinson (D. Del.) released four decisions denying motions to dismiss that had been pending for many months. The clustering of these four decisions spiked the numbers. More important is that underlying trend of invalidating decisions continues upwards.”

“It’s rather disappointing to find that China and the US moved closer into alignment when it comes to patents.”Tell that to IBM. It’s now that confidence in software patents is on the decline (like the number of IBM employees) that IBM chooses to attack perfectly legitimate companies using patent lawsuits.

“Supreme Court vacate Alice patent decision,” as the author of Bliski Blog (Robert Sachs) put it, and “UPSTO reacts” (we covered this before).

China

China’s own Supreme Court (Supreme People’s Court) has meanwhile remarked as follows, based on the USITO: “On March 22, the Supreme People’s Court (SPC) issued a new legal interpretation that will impact patent infringement case resolution. The policy, called the “Interpretation of Several Issues Concerning the Trial of Patent Infringement Dispute Cases (II)” (henceforth “Interpretation II”), will be implemented beginning on April 1.”

“Low-quality patents for the sake of quantity take their toll.”One of the points made there is: “With the compromise interpretation principle, strengthen functions in the publicity and delimitation of claims and increase the certainty of the scope of patent protection” (something which decreased in the US following Alice).

It’s rather disappointing to find that China and the US moved closer into alignment when it comes to patents. They basically patent just about everything under the Sun (or the Dragon) and now there’s low confidence that patents will actually endure in the courts. Low-quality patents for the sake of quantity take their toll.

« 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