patent

Patent court of appeals heads to Silicon Valley

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit will be on tour in Silicon Valley the week of November 3.

The court, which is in charge of reviewing appeals of patent-related cases for the entire United States, normally works only in Washington, D.C. So if you live near Silicon Valley, and you're interested in patent law, this is a rare opportunity to see the judges in your own backyard.

Judges from the court will hear cases at several locations during that week including at Santa Clara University School of Law, Stanford University School of Law, and … Read more

Sun seeks patent protection for OpenOffice with LGPLv3

Sun is shifting the license that governs OpenOffice from the Lesser General Public License (LGPL) version 2 to LGPLv3 in an effort to give the open-source office suite greater patent protection. I'm not sure it's going to work:

By moving from version 2 of the LGPL to version 3, Sun is bringing new language prohibiting the use of software patents to OpenOffice.org. "The most important protection for developers comes from creating mutual patent grants. ... LGPLv3 does this," [Sun's Simon] Crosby noted. In effect, a code issuer using either the plain GPL or LGPL … Read more

Novell's Miguel de Icaza: "We should have stayed with the open-source community"

In the past I've criticized Miguel de Icaza, Novell's rock star open-source developer, for getting too cozy with Microsoft. Even so, I've never doubted Miguel's commitment to open source.

All the worse for him, therefore, that he has to live with Novell's mistakes. Microsoft convinced Novell to go along with its strategy to create a walled garden of "safe open source" (meaning, all open source that pays Microsoft a fee) versus "risky open source" (meaning, all open source that doesn't pay Microsoft a fee). Red Hat was right to resist … Read more

End of an era? Patentability of business method patents

Maybe you are of a sufficient vintage to remember the game show Let's Make a Deal. But have you ever thought about the similarities between that show and the U.S. patent system?

In the game show, contestants would have to pay a price (a wallet containing $500) to see what was behind door No. 3 (maybe a live goat; maybe a brand new faux wood-paneled station wagon). Similarly, in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, the government pays a price (allowing a unique brand of monopoly) to see what is in envelope No. 3 (your invention). The analogy may seem far-fetched, but the basic premise is the same: that is, paying a price to see what is otherwise concealed. And even in the realm of patent law, sometimes the government ends up with...a goat.

Fortunately, unlike the game show, there are several ways the USPTO can get out of the deal even after the envelope is opened and the invention disclosed. To be worthy of a patent, the invention must be new, useful, and non-obvious. While the "new" and "non-obvious" requirements normally get most of the attention, the USPTO and the U.S. Court of Appeals for patent cases (the Federal Circuit) have taken a somewhat surprising approach in the past couple of months to back out of deals with potential patentees--rejecting patent applications on the basis of usefulness. In other words, the Federal Circuit has been deciding that certain classes of inventions just aren't patentable.

What is really creating a buzz in the patent world is that the USPTO and the Federal Circuit have recently addressed an almost decade-old class of patents that has developed a reputation as the runt of the litter as far as patents go--business method patents. Love them or hate them, the Federal Circuit's 1998 decision in the State Street Bank case has been widely interpreted to allow for the patenting of new and novel business methods. Since that case, the USPTO has been inundated with business method patent applications and, more specifically, software applications. The question is, will this trend continue?

… Read more

Patent police raid booths at CeBit trade show

Dozens of exhibitors at Europe's largest gadget confab were in for a surprise this week: Suspecting patent violations, German authorities raided 51 booths, carting off cell phones, navigation devices, and other gear that allegedly infringe on patents.

According to an Associated Press report Thursday, more than 180 police and customs officials took part in the bust, which affected 51 exhibitors at CeBit in Hannover, Germany. Of the accused, 24 were from China, 15 were from Taiwan or Hong Kong, nine were from Germany, and the others came from Poland, the Netherlands, and Korea.

The police didn't name which … Read more

The Patent Reform Act will harm the U.S. technology industry

The proposed Patent Reform Act of 2007 will be coming up for a vote in the Senate in a few months. A similar version of the bill has already passed in the House.

The bill has certain relatively benign provisions, but let's ignore them since they just cloud the argument and are of little interest to either side in the debate.

Let's instead just cut to the chase. In lay terms, the bill makes it easier to challenge issued patents and harder for patent holders to obtain compensation through the U.S. legal system.

Regardless of how that sounds to you, make no mistake - this debate is between two opposing sides with their own interests at heart.… Read more

Are the rules changing for patent suit site selection?

Forum selection--or the ability to choose the geographic location of the court where a suit for patent infringement is litigated--is one of many controversial issues related to patents these days.

Generally, the first person to file the lawsuit gets to choose where the suit is brought. This is called the "first-to-file" rule. It works much like the lines you stand in at the grocery store, airport security, or countless other places; it's simply first come, first served.

However, in the context of patent litigation, being first in line is a big deal. Different courts have different procedural … Read more

$30.4 billion, not $11.4 billion, in software patent damage to the economy

End Software Patents earlier claimed that the US economy suffers an $11 billion hit each year due to needless software patents. It turns out that End Software Patents was wrong.

The number is actually $30.4 billion.

What's $20 billion between friends? The group revised upward its earlier, more conservative estimates based on the following [PDF]:

The U.S. Courts reported 2,830 patent lawsuits (of all kinds) filed in FY2006. Bessen and Meurer estimate that as of 2002, 25% of patent infringement suits are over software; all signs indicate that the current number is much higher, but we … Read more

Microsoft, Visto settle mobile e-mail patent dispute

Microsoft and Visto, which provides mobile e-mail services, said Monday that they have settled a long-running patent dispute.

The companies did not disclose details of the settlement; Visto had alleged that Microsoft violated its mobile e-mail patents. In a press release, Visto said it has entered into a licensing deal with Microsoft that involves "cash and non-cash consideration."

The case was slated to go to trial on March 10.

In 2006, Visto prevailed in a patent infringement suit brought against Seven Networks. The company ultimately was awarded about $7.7 million in damages.

Still unresolved is a patent … Read more