Bonum Certa Men Certa

A Turning Point for Software Patents? (Video)



Ogg Theora



Direct link



If Larry Lessig's experiences are anything to go by, expecting change in the USPTO is just as unlikely as stopping massive lobbying.

On the issue of Microsoft and software patents, see this post from last night.




   Message-ID: <df912e69-c174-4e09-88a2-e560a50a0320@m44g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>    From: Rex Ballard <rex.ballard@gmail.com>    Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy    Subject: Re: On Microsoft's Business Model After Loss of $90,000,000,000 in Value    Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2008 14:13:28 -0700 (PDT)



On Jul 27, 11:26 pm, Roy Schestowitz <newsgro...@schestowitz.com> wrote: > A prayer for Microsoft > ,----[ Quote ] > | Microsoft did not invent proprietary software. It may well benefit from > | proprietary lock-in, but is not the cause of it, and it's unreasonable to > | expect Microsoft to unilaterally disarm to the detriment of its shareholders.

The irony is that it was Microsoft who sought very aggressively through the 1970s and early 1980s to PREVENT the patenting of software, because they didn't want to have to worry about big guns like IBM, DEC, HP, Sperry, Harris, Lotus, and AT&T patenting software and then using that as leverage to either extract profits from Microsoft or prevent Microsoft from competing in their markets.

Imagine if IBM had been able to patent all of the software used in OS/ 2 before giving the technology to Microsoft. If IBM had been able to do that, there wouldn't be a Windows NT, there probably wouldn't be a Windows 3.1 or a Windows 95 either.

Imagine if Xerox had been able to patent all of their object oriented technologies and all of the devices in the Xerox Alto back in 1978. Microsoft and Apple wouldn't have been able to reverse engineer the technology and sell it without paying a dime to the Xerox or Palo Alto Research Center.

Imagine if HP had been able to patent their vector graphics algorithms and scalable vector graphics back in the 1970s, when the were doing plotters. Microsoft and Adobe would have had to pay a premium price to HP.

Imagine if Tektronics had been able to patent it's interactive graphics software back in the 1960s and 1970s. Much of the technology used in PowerPoint, Excel charts, and might have been locked up by a company that didn't want to be put out of business by $1000 PCs.

Imagine if SCO had been able to patent their OpenDesktop - No Windows 9x or NT 4.0 or XP desktops.

How about Sun and NetView and OpenView - if Sun had held patents on that technology, they could have locked Microsoft out of the market.

What if the contributors to Motif (HP, IBM, DEC, CMU, MIT,...) had been able to patent that technology. They could have prevented HP from selling the technology to Microsoft without giving those companies and contributors control over Microsoft's licenses. My guess is that the MIT graduates would not have been so willing to let Microsoft lock out UNIX and Linux in their software licenses.

Imagine if the Open Source community as far back as the 1960s had been able to patent their technology, mandating that all who use it, in ANY FORM, use it under the terms of the GPL. Most of Microsoft Office would be GPL, and even much of Windows might have been under GPL. It's a sure bet that Marc Andreeson wouldn't have let Microsoft produce anything even remotely like a browser without either having complete control over Microsoft's software licenses or being able to force Microsoft to publish the NCSA licensed source code.

Even Microsoft's media players is based on software developed by Kodak for image management and media management back in the 1980s and early 1990s. Software that Kodak was not allowed to patent (applied for and rejected), because the patent office would not permit the patenting of an algorithm or recipe or "software device" unless an identically functioning software device could be implemented entirely in discreet logic. Ironically, for many of the software devices that were patented, the "hardware" device was often implemented using programmable gate arrays rather than actual discrete integrated circuits and transistors.

About 90% of the value of Microsoft today is a direct result of their ability to legally reverse engineer and steal algorithms and intellectual property from former partners, competitors, and Open Source, and remarket it as Windows and Office, unfettered by the desires and requirements of others.

> | No, our work is to change the industry, not the behavior of but one of its > | participants.

Yes, now that, for the first time in 25 years, we have a competitor we can't buy, bankrupt, or control, and that competitor is continuing to expand market share and erode our 85% profit margins down to 45%, Microsoft must resort to trying to sneak as many patents past the patent office as possible, providing as little prior art as possible, in order to get patents that Microsoft can use to prevent OEMs, corporate customers, and government regulators from making a mass exodus from Windows and Office to Linux and Open Office, not to mention thousands of other competitor and third party products that Microsoft will no longer be able to "lock out" through it's exclusive OEM contracts.

> | The place to start (and end?) is patents, which most everyone > | seems to hate,

Especially Microsoft. Microsoft hates patents more than anybody, especially when the only way to nullify a patent and win a judgement in Microsoft's favor, is to trot out dozens of Open Source devices and prior art, and admit that they used that code and technology as their model. It would nullify the patents, but it might also nullify hundreds or thousands of Microsoft patents as well.

> | yet most everyone also seems to continue arming themselves > | with patents in a mad race to mutually assured destruction. A Cold War, all > | over again.

Most of the rest of the industry, including IBM, HP, Sun, and Kodak, some of the companies who consistently file the highest number of patent applications and are granted the greatest number of patents, tend to use these patents DEFENSIVELY. They combine with other patent portfolio holders in order to establish a huge patent "umbrella" designed to protect them from unethical lawyers representing naive clients. An "inventor" reads some articles in some magazines, comes up with an "idea" based on those articles, and then goes to one of those 1-800-PATENTME lawyers, who files a very poor quility patent, keeps publicity to an absolute minimum, and then waits for the Patent and Trademark Office to award the patent. Then they find a big company, like IBM, HP, Sun, Kodak, or Microsoft, and file a lawsuit for hundreds of millions of dollars, along with a barrage of about 2,000 initial disclosure filings. Many of these lawyers even use Mail- Merge documents to print up the canned forms.

The defendant knows that this is only the beginning, and that every motion will cost thousands of dollars to satisfy, so they offer a "settlement" for the entire portfolio held by the lawyer, including lots of useless inventions, that typically amounts to what the company would have spent satisfying the disclosure orders for this one case, often just 3-4 million dollars.

Since the lawyer is working on contingency, and gets a third, and they are a partner in the patent portfolio and entitled to half the remaining royalties, and may have qualified the inventor as an "employee" based on token consideration paid in advance of the patent filing, the inventors may not see a dime of the settlement for any of their inventions.

> http://news.cnet.com/8301-13505_3-10000366-16.html

> Yesterday: > Microsoft loses 90 Billion Dollars [in less than a year] > http://slated.org/microsoft_loses_90_billion_dollars

Microsoft has been trying to maintain the value of their stock through buy-backs and dividends which effectively set a "floor" price for the stock. In addition, even though Gates has been selling as much as 1 million shares a day, he's been selling that stock directly to Microsoft, which again looks better on paper than if he "dumped" that stock on the open market.

The problem is that the real value of the stock is still based on the fundamentals, including revenues, expenses, net profit, and earnings per share, as well as profit margins.

For several years now, Microsoft has been boasting of their 85% profit margins, 20-25% top-line growth, and nonexistent debt.

This most recent quarter has shown profit margins dropping to 45%, and top-line growth in core business only growing by 10-15% and much of that seems to be as a result of "Double Dipping", selling OEMs Vista Home Premium, then selling them Vista Business Edition, for almost as many computers.

These lucrative contracts expire at the end of July or the end of August depending on the OEM or CIO involved. The OEMs are willing to offer slightly higher rates per license, but only on condition of more flexibility in how the final system is configured (Windows as VM, Windows XP images, and Vista "Lite" images. They are also insisting on a single rate single license which can be either Vista Home Premium OR Vista Business, either of which can be "downgraded" even to Vista Home Basic if the customer wants a "Lightweight" image for VM configuration..

The other thing the OEMs seem to be demanding is the ability to control the boot sequence, including the ability to boot Linux first, then start Windows after that. The user can then "switch" between Windows and Linux, or put Windows in one of the Linux windows and have the "best of both worlds" the same way Mac users do.

For HP, Dell, Acer, and Lenovo, the competitor to beat is no longer one of the Windows OEMs, it's Apple, who offers both a high-quality UNIX environment, AND a low-cost Windows environment, in a single computer, with both systems running concurrently.

Keep in mind that Microsoft offered this to Mac because OS/X was doing so well on it's own that Microsoft was afraid of being knocked completely out of the Apple marketplace, followed by a rapid expansion of OS/X UNIX WITHOUT MICROSOFT. Had this formula succeeded, even if it took slightly longer, Microsoft was at risk of becoming completely irrelevant.

At least this way, the OEMs still pay for a copy of Vista on every desktop and laptop, and they even pay a slightly higher price. In addition, Corporate and Institutional customers who want to stick with XP rather than Vista will still be able to have "dual-mode" capability with XP, and Microsoft can still charge them for transferable licenses if the institution hasn't already purchased them.

> Recent: > Microsoft sees slide in profits > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7366106.stm

Keep in mind that a slide from 85% margins to 45% margins is a problem that most CEOs would LOVE to have, but many of those same CEOs are still rather unwilling to give some huge percentage of their 10-20% margins to feed Microsoft's 45% margins. This is one of the reasons that they are not terribly keen on mass migrations to yet another Microsoft monopoly solution.

Of course, Microsoft is also up to their usual "Dirty Tricks", trying to get disgruntled employees to "drop the dime" on their employers for copyright violations. This improves Microsoft's ability to blackmail the CIO into accepting the mandatory updates. Unfortunately, many CIOs have now established formal anti-piracy policies, and are encouraging their employees to use Open Source applications instead of pirating "share-ware" and leaving it unregistered.

Many companies even have automated "software audits" and will notify an employee's manager of "security Violations", including unregistered share-ware. Even when a company does permit shareware, they often provide their employees with the tools to install registered shareware, that has been licensed at an enterprise rate.

With measures like these in place, the CIO and IT management are much less vulnerable to the classic "blackmail by piracy". They can thank the BSA or other auditing service for identifying the problem, discipline the employee and his manager (which may or may not also involve termination), remove the offending software automatically, and request a second audit after 30 days (the notice BSA usually gives when their first "surprise audit" finds indications of piracy.

Ironically, services like Microsofts SMS, IBM's Tivoli software management, and other third party "Security Audit" tools have made the anti-piracy much easier to manage and monitor. In addition, the use of a "standard corporate image", provides a solid argument that the CIO had not specifically granted permission for the piracy, that anti- piracy policies were in place.

The bigger problem for Microsoft, is that all this "Anti-Shareware" has killed the third party market and fed the Open Source market. As a result, you are much more likely to see OpenOffice, FireFox, Eclipse, and Cygwin and much less likely to see "trial versions" of commercial third party software. This of course, is also killing the ISV support for Vista, or even continued support for XP.

Perhaps this is why so many commercial Independent Software Vendors are now rolling out Linux versions (where there is less likelihood that the BSA will use their software to call in Microsoft).

Recent Techrights' Posts

Misinformation is Not Intelligence
It's low-grade plagiarism and it fails to show any signs of intelligence
'Tech' Gimmicks Are for Advertising, Not for Usability
In the case of Microsoft, they latched onto slop
BetaNews Sacked Brian Fagioli and Deleted His Comments, But He Still Tries to Use the "BetaNews" Brand for Self-Affirmation
Fagioli takes the work of other people
[Meme] Hard to Be a Better Person?
Sooner or later they'll realise that for each pound I spend they need to spend about 1,000 times more
 
YouTube is a Spamfarm, Slopfarm, and Clickfarm (a Lot of Numbers There Are Fake)
Those who don't fake look unpopular and unimportant
We Don't Do JavaScript and Pages Are Small
Thankfully Gemini Protocol has nothing like JavaScript
'Tech' is Not Technology
Some people use terms like 'Old Tech'
IBM's Debt Rose by Almost 10 Billion Dollars in the Past 6 Months Alone
The "hey hi" circus is coming to an end
Yes, Master
Gaslighting by actual racists
Microsoft Bribes and Buys Politicians to Tell Europe What to Do About Free Software (Which It's Attacking)
Microsoft: we speak for the thing that we are attacking! Follow the money...
Making Backups Quickly and Reliably
Backups are imperative, more so in an age of uncertainty, unpredictable weather, and worsening standards (quality of products going down while prices go up)
Techrights Investigation: Estimating the Point in Time LinuxIac Turned Into LLM Slop (Part of the Time)
Bobby Borisov got lazy
10th Month, Ten Weeks From Now, at Ten AM
In Wentworth Institute of Technology in Boston
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Thursday, July 24, 2025
IRC logs for Thursday, July 24, 2025
A Nadella Memo Distracts From Microsoft's Cheapening Of the Workforce
Right now the "MSM" (mainstream media) is flooded/overwhelmed by garbage pieces that relay lies for Nadella
Vanishing Faces of GNU/Linux
Free software projects do not depend on any one person or company to still exist
Microsoft Says It Lost 400 Million Windows Users, Now It's Waiting for GNU/Linux to Stop Booting on 'Old' PCs
When it comes to Windows, Microsoft is fully aware of the issue and statements it made earlier this summer suggest it lost 400 million Windows users
Slopwatch: LinuxTechLab, linuxsecurity.com, LinuxIac, and More
Also: The Register's Microsoft agenda (new editor)
Gemini Links 25/07/2025: Gemtext Aware Titan Editor and Gemini Protocol Comeback
Links for the day
Links 24/07/2025: Convicted Felon Quits UNESCO, "Vibe Coding Goes Wrong", and Signalgate Gets Worse
Links for the day
Gemini Links 24/07/2025: Forgejo Woes and Smolnet Directory Week
Links for the day
Links 24/07/2025: Storage Tapes Still Kicking, Windows TCO 'on Steroids' (Microsoft-Induced Catastrophes)
Links for the day
Bobby Borisov (LinuxIac) Has Apparently Begun Experimenting With LLM Slop, So We Cannot Trust LinuxIac Anymore
So did LinuxIac become a slopfarm? Maybe not yet, but it's getting there
Informa TechTarget's ITProToday is Becoming a Slopfarm Generated by Microsoft Chatbots
Busted.
The LLM Con Artists Are Highly Destructive
Who will ever be held accountable for this scam?
Too Bribed by Microsoft to Move to Free Software?
Microsoft lies and Microsoft bribery (in politics)
New US Editor for The Register is a Microsoft Booster
"Avram Piltch has served as US editor for The Register since July 2025."
Microsoft Hiring European Politicians is Another Form of Bribery; There Should be a European Investigation
When Microsoft bribed people in Europe for OOXML (there's no denying this!) a European government delegate said that Microsoft operated like a cult
Reda Demanded That FSF Removes Its Founder, Now Reda Works Directly for Microsoft
A sellout and a traitor, first working for GAFAM, now Microsoft
PCLinuxOS is Raising Money to Support Development After Fire Incident at the Host
PCLinuxOS has not had announcements lately
Speed of the Site Should be Better Now
The "bot attacks" impact the speed of the sister site too
Getting More From AnalogNowhere
Recently we used many images from AnalogNowhere
Microsoft, Microsofters and 'Secure' Boot Shills Already Storming the LWN Report About Expiring Certificate, Shooting the Messenger
LWN has clearly stuck a nerve
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Wednesday, July 23, 2025
IRC logs for Wednesday, July 23, 2025
Disable "Secure" Boot Today (the Only Better Time to Do So Was Yesterday)
Don't trust anything Red Hat tells you about security
Links 23/07/2025: Windows Killed Company After 150+ Years, US Government Mimics Russia's Attacks on the Media
Links for the day
Freedom Generally Wins at the End, History Shows (But It's Constantly Attacked, Too)
At the moment people realise "Linux" (e.g. Android) isn't enough to guarantee any freedoms
Over 3 Months Later Brett Wilson LLP Still Unable to Recruit a Media Lawyer?
"Immediate start", but not found... still unfilled
“Inhumane” and “Disgusting” Mass Layoff Execution, According to Microsoft Staff
The workers are looking for other places to work
The Free Software Foundation (FSF) Has a New Slogan for Its 40th Anniversary
The freedoms are what's most important
Microsoft is Trying to "Pull a Nokia" on GNU/Linux as Desktop/Laptop Platform
We all remember that rather well, don't we?
LLM Slopfarms gbhackers.com, "Cyber Press" and CyberSecurityNews Are Drowning Google News (and Shame on Google for Feeding and Facilitating Them)
All are run by the same people
Links 23/07/2025: Droplets GUI Patent Monopoly Challenge, Nokia Leverages Illegal Patent Court Against Rivals
Links for the day
Gemini Links 23/07/2025: Community in Geminispace and Challenges With Old Computers
Links for the day
Links 23/07/2025: Slop Patents Tackled, Slop Copyright Misuses Tackled by Politicians
Links for the day
Our Three Lawsuits Against Microsofters Are About to Become a Lot More Relevant to GNU/Linux
The Master will easily understand why Garrett has been attacking me since 2012
Links 23/07/2025: Retreating From Transparency on Jeffrey Epstein, We No Longer Have Press Freedom
Links for the day
Gemini Links 23/07/2025: Piano and Food
Links for the day
New and Old
On Ageism in Tech
Slop Is Not Intelligence and It Does Not Enhance Productivity
Like voice dictation, which cannot tell the difference between "sheet" and "shit"
EPO Crimes Are Spreading to the British Court System
Society is now paying the price for failing to tackle crimes at the EPO
It's Time to Dump SharePoint and Here's What to Use Instead
Nextcloud, ownCloud, Bookstack, MediaWiki, and MediaGoblin
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Tuesday, July 22, 2025
IRC logs for Tuesday, July 22, 2025
Brett Wilson LLP Has Gone Silent
Sometimes silence says more than nothing at all
Slopwatch: LinuxSecurity, Planet Ubuntu, and LinuxTechLab
some slopfarms show no remorse and they don't value their reputation at all
Links 23/07/2025: Book Bans, Storms, and Kangaroo Court for Patents Commits More Unlawful Acts of Overreach
Links for the day