02.07.08
Software Patents Still Chaotic, Reform Might Make Them Worse
A couple of days ago we stressed the fact that even Linus Torvalds has become concerned about software patents. These patents need to be eliminated because no matter how ridiculous the law is and how much corruption was involved in making it so, it does becomes a factor. People keep speaking about a reform, but whose side will the reform work for? Those with the lobbyists and the money, surely.
Reverse Reform: Making Things Even Worse
As Ars Technica might put it, a reform would not obviate the need for the EFF’s work. Instead, the proposed reform would put more barriers that hinder the EFF. It’s a case of making the system even worse under a disguise which makes it seem like an improvement.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation supports the Patent Reform Act of 2007, but the group does worry that the law in its present state could reform the EFF’s Patent Busting Project right out of existence.
Via Digital Majority:
This patent reform is about software companies who tries to get rid of the disadvantages of software patents, while keeping the advantages.
This is not gonna work.
The solution is to scrap software patents entirely.
This is not going to solve anything for small software companies that cannot even afford to go to court.
Patents: Only If You’re Rich
As was stated last month, if you are an obscure inventor, then your chances of obtaining (and keeping) a patent are slim. The Register’s new article puts it into perspective.
CIPA estimates that the new rules will save more than €7,000 in costs per patent, on average. Previously an applicant could get the right to have a European Patent Office patent just by filing in English, French or German.
The quote about talks only about the “savings”, but not the actual cost. That is why they call it an |intellectual monopoly”. Individuals can rarely afford to take things to court. All you are left with are extremely wealthy companies piling up patents which can be used offensively at times of trouble, or be sold to patent trolls. Would these patents be used offensively? They already are.
Who Needs to Develop When Lawsuits Are More Profitable?
Have a look at this new article, “Patent Exhaustion”.
Okay, this post is a bit inside baseball. But some lawyers and law students may at least find this of interest. In an upcoming case, Quanta v. LG Electronics, the Supreme Court may refine the “patent exhaustion” doctrine to make it more difficult for patentees to extract royalties from multiple parties for the same device.
This is brought up in response to patent trolls that sometimes sue over 100 companies at the same time. This is madness.
Junk Patents Du Jour
In case you wish to see bizarrely-simple patents, have a look at the figures in this new article.
A European patent application filed by Nintendo has reveals a raft of ways the console giant could extend the use of the Wii Remote, ranging from the strange to the downright ridiculous.
You will find a video with many other ridiculous patents here. █
Highlight: Novell was the first to acknowledge that Microsoft FUD tactics had substance. Novell then used anti-Linux FUD to market itself. 
Highlight: Xandros let Microsoft make patent claims and brag about (paid-for) OOXML support. 
Highlight: Linspire's CEO not only fell into Microsoft arms, but he also assisted the company's attack on GNU/Linux. 
Highlight: Microsoft craves pseudo (proprietary) standards and gets its way using proxies and influence which it buys. 
Highlight: The invasion into the open source world is intended to leave Linux companies neglected, due to financial incentives from Microsoft. 
Analysis: Xen, an open source hypervisor, possibly fell victim to Microsoft's aggressive (and stealthy) acquisition-by-proxy strategy.