03.16.10
Posted in Asia, Deception, Google, Microsoft, Search at 8:28 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Microsoft’s idea of “search” continues to incorporate business bias, unnecessary censorship, bribes, and advertisements that disparage Google
THE simple reality hurts Microsoft’s Bong [sic] because having about 3% in global market share is laughable, especially when one loses over $2 billion per year in this area. Microsoft is trying to compete with Google, but perhaps it just can’t understand that by fooling users with fake rankings it simply sends out the message that it’s not interested in search, it just wants to decide for users what (mis)information that should get.
Last week we wrote about Microsoft’s Middle East censorship ((this is now confirmed by more sources [1, 2]) and recalled that in China, for instance, Microsoft does even worse things which had the New York Times (NYT) call for a boycott (at least one writer of NYT called for a Bing boycott). Homophobia at Microsoft was also brought up because of this news (Microsoft still censors the subject in some places). So what is Microsoft to search really? It’s just a business looking to maximise profit. The integrity of the search and the honesty is placed very low because Microsoft believes that it can lie to customers as long as some accomplices like the Chinese government are happy. Not a smart strategy, Microsoft, not so smart. This only reinforces the perception that Microsoft is an innately “bad” company.
“This only reinforces the perception that Microsoft is an innately “bad” company.”“Microsoft Bing bribes Farmville enthusiasts on Facebook with farm,” says this report. It would not be the first time that Microsoft is accused of “bribing” to compete with Google [1, 2] and there is also the Verizon deal [1, 2] (Microsoft reportedly paid Verizon half a billion dollars to drop Google).
Microsoft now resorts to brainwash on British TV [1, 2, 3, 4] (Google never did this), it uses US-only numbers from a partner (comScore) to make claims that are difficult to trust because of many conflicts of interests [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10], and in MSN we find new changes [1, 2] which Microsoft boosters like Microsoft Nick are advertising in the form of articles and galleries [1, 2]. This is not reporting, but then again, it’s Microsoft friends from Ziff Davis [1, 2, 3]. Here is another article about the “new” MSN:
–Remember when Microsoft was, well, Microsoft? The House That Gates Built is trying to stand tall against Google with a newly redesigned page for its portal, MSN.com. The new-and-improved site is a little cleaner and a little fresher, but not significantly different. The main purpose of the page seems to be to steer people to Microsoft’s Bing search engine, which is a good deal better than previous Microsoft search offerings but, it must be said, isn’t a Google beater.
Rupert Murdoch, a friend of Microsoft and an ally against Google [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13], seems to be collaborating a little more with Microsoft, the abusive monopolist. Microsoft’s CNET booster writes about it gleefully and more details can be found here:
Now under new management, MySpace is looking to reinvent itself and rise like a Phoenix from the ashes. The once dominant social networking site fell from nearly 70 percent of the social networking market, to only 30 percent in less than a year, and was plummeting on the verge of extinction.
One of the ways that MySpace is looking to build some relevance again is through the Microsoft Outlook social connector feature–giving it some new business credibility it has always lacked. MySpace beat its social networking rival Facebook to the punch to integrate its member information and updates into Microsoft Outlook. Facebook and Windows Live integration is still listed as “coming soon”.
For those who do not know, MySpace is owned by Murdoch and it shows. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Antitrust, Asia, GNU/Linux, Google, IBM, Microsoft, Servers, Virtualisation, Windows at 6:07 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
“[Microsoft's] Mr. Emerson and I discussed a variety of investment structures wherein Microsoft would ‘backstop,’ or guarantee in some way, BayStar’s investment…. Microsoft assured me that it would in some way guarantee BayStar’s investment in SCO.”
–Larry Goldfarb, Baystar, key investor in SCO
Summary: Poor Microsoft complains about a “mainframe monopoly” which does not run Microsoft Windows and the same strategies it used in Europe are being extended to India
THIS morning we wrote about the suggestion (not ours) that Microsoft had something to do with Apple’s patent lawsuit against GNU/Linux [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]. Evidence for this is lacking, whereas the following case is clearer because Microsoft owns part of the firm that is issuing the legal challenge against IBM. For background about Microsoft’s ’second SCO’, those who have not read the following posts ought to consider reading them first. It’s rather clear that Microsoft uses at least one firm, T3, to attack GNU/Linux on the mainframe (the other potential one is Neon [1, 2]).
Based on the following two articles from the Economic Times (India), Microsoft seems to be doing in India what it has already done in Europe:
1. IBM accused of mainframe monopoly
Rarely do you see IBM under attack in India. But it is now. And IBM believes that it’s actually Microsoft that is behind the attack, under the facade of a forum called Open-Mainframe.
The issue first arose late last week when two Indian research bodies, the Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations (ICRIER) and Indicus Analytics, released a report suggesting that IBM had misused its dominance of the Indian market for mainframes (high end computers used when the scale of operation is massive), and that if this misuse continued, it could adversely impact India’s efforts towards inclusive growth.
2. IBM, Microsoft point fingers at each other
IBM, the world’s largest IT services company, has accused Microsoft, the world’s largest operating system manufacturer, of sponsoring an India report released last week that criticises IBM India’s trade practices in the $500-million local server market, terming them as restrictive. The report calls for unbundling of hardware and software by IBM.
Microsoft accuses others of “monopoly”. Does that sound familiar? Microsoft also used firms in Europe against Google just a few weeks ago, by its very own admission. The company is almost gloating about it. From the past week’s news:
1. EC antitrust probe is latest clash in Google-Microsoft war
Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer last week acknowledged his company’s role in pushing government regulators to pursue such investigations.
2. Ten Years After, Microsoft Reverses Its Role With Google
Hang on: Microsoft complaining that Google is being unfair? Yes, you heard that right.
Microsoft is being a huge hypocrite. Just because it faces strong competition from Google (and Microsoft is not used to competition), it tries to evoke laws that are typically used when one breaks the law and abuses rivals (like Microsoft did so many times).
A few days ago we wrote about Microsoft's sheer hypocrisy at SXSW, courtesy of Danah Boyd. This is now covered in the following posts:
Microsoft is a nightmare when it comes to privacy [1, 2, 3, 4, 5], so how dare it pull this card? This is the behaviour of a company that sees itself as above the law, such that ends justify the means.
Going back to the IBM case, Microsoft would love to abolish GNU/Linux through hypervisors (its partners at Citrix already help in that regard). Other allies in India, companies such as Wipro [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6], are signing new deals with Microsoft in order to keep Free software out of the country (Wipro has a history of going against standards too).
Bangalore, India-based IT services firm Wipro Technologies has embraced the cloud computing model and announced its plans to offer Microsoft’s Business Productivity Online Suite (BPOS).
Under a “Dedicated Advisor” agreement with Microsoft, Wipro Technologies will be able to assist its global enterprise customers in migrating to BPOS via a palette of professional services including assessments, migration and solution implementation accelerators, according to the company.
Microsoft’s scandals in India [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10] are a broad subject that we won’t be repeating today. But in summary, Microsoft is now abusing the Indian system in order to declare mainframes running GNU/Linux “illegal” (monopoly abuse). █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
03.08.10
Posted in Asia, Boycott Novell, GNU/Linux, Microsoft, Windows at 10:55 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: How Microsoft and its executives take positions of power in other companies and countries, which in turn suffer as a result
Microsoft is feeling the pressure [1, 2, 3, 4] and it wants to world to become as dependent as possible on Microsoft’s existence. The company is having some kind of a rally in the Middle East [1, 2, 3], as we have shown and covered on many occasions (with examples) in recent months, including some in Jordan. The government continues to put its arms around Microsoft (also here):
AMMAN – The government will sign a JD14 million agreement with Microsoft Corporation to provide the country’s ministries and public agencies with software and training, a government official said on Wednesday.
This is a big mistake. To embrace Microsoft is to put one’s future in the hands of yet another company/entity; it’s an increased risk, not just an increase in cost. Microsoft has sold many people the illusion that it is not troubled and won’t vanish, but this is totally false and PR agencies help this myth spread itself. In reality, Microsoft kills many of its products and suffers layoffs.
Another problem that we spotted last week is that a former Microsoft executive entered MOD Systems. Here is a press release on the subject.
MOD Systems, Inc. announced today that notable technology industry executives Will Poole and Dan Gerrity have joined the company’s Board of Directors. Poole and Gerrity have spent decades developing early stage companies and building successful organizations in the software, retail and digital entertainment industries. Their support of MOD Systems comes as the company prepares to introduce a broad digital entertainment solution that brings movies, television shows, music and games to consumers through kiosks in retail and other out-of-home environments. Poole and Gerrity join MOD Systems’ existing board members Michael Towers and CEO Anthony Bay, along with board observers from NCR Corporation (NYSE:NCR) and Toshiba Corporation. NCR and Toshiba are MOD Systems’ largest investors.
This is a mistake because Will Poole is loyal to an abusive company; he may have already undermined GNU/Linux at NComputing [1, 2, 3, 4], which slipped into obscurity now that it competes without any distinguishing factor. In the following new article that covers NComputing, the author doesn’t name any platforms other than Windows
Previously, NComputing offered similar setups for schools using a generic PC running a personal version of Windows XP or Vista. But with Microsoft’s new server software, schools will have a fully licensed operating system for their host PCs that is designed for simple installation in education and library settings and is fully supported by Microsoft. In the past, some educators were uneasy about similar setups because of the licensing question and the lack of support from Microsoft for these arrangements.
What about GNU/Linux? And why are NComputing’s GNU/Linux offerings no longer mentioned (at least in the above text)? NComputing grew closer to Microsoft after it had let a Microsoft executive enter its board. And now what? Here is another former Microsoft executive entering Move.
In an effort to reverse its losses, Move last year hired Steve Berkowitz as its CEO. Berkowitz’s background includes stints as CEO of Internet search engine Ask.com and as an executive in Microsoft Corp.’s Internet division.
How can these companies employ people who worked for a convicted monopolist by choice, let alone make them CEOs (like Juniper and VMware)? No wonder they are so troubled. The headline of the report above is “Move’s 4Q loss deepen amid real estate woes”. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
03.04.10
Posted in Apple, Asia, GNU/Linux, Google, Kernel, Microsoft, Patents at 3:31 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Microsoft to be paid for Linux-powered products from I-O Data and Apple wants ‘Linux tax’ (from Android) too
SOFTWARE PATENTS are not illegal in Japan (it’s one of the very few countries that accept them rather than except them), but Microsoft continues to refuse to tell what makes its racketeering justified (see the Amazon deal for example [1, 2, 3, 4]).
Sanyo, which is based in Japan, is one of the companies that fell for exFAT, but what patents does I-O Data think that it’s paying Microsoft for? It will not tell. And so Microsoft’s extortion carries on:
This time it says “Linux” in the title of the press release from Microsoft. They get more and more aggressive all the time, deal after deal.
REDMOND, Wash. and KANAZAWA, Japan, March 3 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ — Microsoft Corp. and I-O Data Device Inc. have entered into an agreement that will provide I-O Data’s customers with patent coverage for their use of I-O Data’s products running Linux and other related open source software.
Here is the coverage so far:
• I-O Data takes up Microsoft patent license
• Microsoft In Linux Software Patent Deal
Redmond-based Microsoft Corp. said late Wednesday that it is in a deal with Japanese firm I-O Data Device Inc., where it will provide I-O Data’s customers patent coverage for their use of I-O Data’s products running Linux and other open source software. Financial terms of the deal were not disclosed, however, the firms said that I-O Data is compensating Microsoft for the IP coverage. Microsoft has been inking a number of deals with companies–many of them network attached storage providers like I-O Data–over possible patent violations in Linux.
• Microsoft Provides Patent Coverage for Linux-Based Devices from I-O Data
• Microsoft embraces another Linux company
• Microsoft, I-O Data in patent deal
• Microsoft licenses Linux software to Japanese firm
• Microsoft’s Linux Patent Scare Trumps SCO
Just this week, Microsoft convinced Japanese hardware vendor I-O Data to sign up for Microsoft patent licensing to protect against Linux patent issues. Over the last three years Microsoft has been successful at getting multiple vendors including Amazon, Novell, Brother International Corp, Fuji Xerox Co. Ltd, Kyocera Mita Corp., LG Electronics, Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. and TomTom International BV to buy into their argument that they need protection from Linux patent infringement.
SCO was never that successful.
Time and again, people in the open source community have asked that Microsoft lay their patents on the table so that Linux vendors could deal with Microsoft’s concerns. To date Microsoft has not done so.
So why has Microsoft succeeded where SCO failed when it comes to Linux patents?
• Microsoft and I-O Data Sign Linux Patent Deal
This is similar to the deal with Melco, which Microsoft reportedly sued in order to extort.
Microsoft seeks to normalise unthinkable extortion and it needs to be stopped. Where are companies like IBM hiding when this extortion is happening? Don’t they see it as a duty to challenge this? Well, some of these companies like IBM and Google quietly support software patents, but with this conspiracy of silence they continue to hurt Linux, and especially Free software.
Microsoft’s attack on Linux is now joined by Apple’s attack on Android [1, 2, 3]. They both use software patents and make a lot of people very angry, including (former) supporters of themselves. Even Apple enthusiasts are left with a bad taste.
There are two aspects surrounding Apple’s patent litigation against HTC that demand further consideration. First, the severe problems with the U.S. patent system as a whole, particularly with regard to software patents. Second, the strategic implications of Apple’s decision to file suit.
Apple is challenging the whole of Android (and to an extent Linux too), as one member of the FFII put it. “Apple is a public danger that use[s] software patents to suppress competition,” says FFII’s president.
Most software and Internet firms have pledged not to sue unless someone first sues them. Sun, Google, Oracle, Cisco and many more think that patents would have an ugly effect on the market otherwise. Apple appears to have left that defensive ideal by waging patent war with Android using HTC as its proxy.
The problem is proprietary software, which usually goes hand-in-hand with software patents (IBM and Google are predominantly proprietary too). Support Free software and call for the abolishment of software patents internationally. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
03.03.10
Posted in Asia, FOSS, Microsoft at 4:06 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Novell supports the BSA et al, thus harming some of its own interests as an arguably “open source” (or “mixed source”) company
A LOT of people may not know this, but Novell is a backer of the BSA and its clique, which has been attacking Free software recently, along with other front groups.
Here is a reminder or two from this week’s news that Novell is with the BSA.
Watch what happens in Vietnam after its statements that promote broad support of Free software in government (and also ODF [1, 2, 3]). See what was posted in an education forum (edu.net.vn) on behalf of the BSA:
I am writing with regard to Draft Circular No. /2010/TT-BGDDT of the Ministry of Education and Training, providing for the use of free and open source code in academic institutions, particularly by providing for “the list of and methods to exploit and use free and open source code software in management, teaching and learning, R&D activities in academic institutions” (Art. 1).
The Business Software Alliance (BSA) welcomes this opportunity to comment and supports the purposes for the issuance of the Draft Circular, which includes reduction and elimination of software piracy (Art. 4.3), enabling compatibility with similar products which are closed source code commercial software (Art. 4.5), ensuring security for IT infrastructure and information and database (Art. 4.6) and use of open standards (Art. 4.7). However, BSA expresses its concern that mandating the use of OSS will not accomplish the Draft Circular’s stated purposes and may, in the long term, stifle the growth of Vietnam’s software industry.
Look at some of the replies, for example: “BSA is a lobbying group paid by microsoft among others, whatever they say it’s tainted by the fact that they are not an advisory group they are promoting the solutions of the organization that pays them.”
Why is Novell still feeding the BSA? If the BSA not only enforces compliance with proprietary software licences but also attacks Free software through lobbying avenues, then Novell is no friend of Free software. But we already knew that, didn’t we? █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
03.02.10
Posted in Africa, America, Asia, Database, Microsoft at 10:31 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Microsoft wants to control more aspects of people’s lives and those who enable this are identified and named
(Mis)Education
Microsoft is still exploiting the education systems for more control over the curriculum and the tools, just as it recently did with the IEEE (more on that here). Microsoft proceeds to Imperial College (London) and Washington University, based on the ‘Microsoft press’ which masquerades as academic media (1105 Media). They are advertising the Live@edu scam.
Health Vulture
Microsoft’s HealthVault uses Silverlight, so it punishes those who are not Microsoft customers, but there are worse things. For more control over people’s medical records [1, 2] Microsoft is now misusing the word "choice" and coercing HHS while unleashing press releases and attending/organising events. No medical system anywhere should allow a corporation to have private control of vital tools and patients’ data. Microsoft claims “choice and flexibility” in its press release, as long as you choose Microsoft (i.e. no choice and no flexibility). It even (mis)uses the word “open” in the title. Microsoft Nick and others have covered this [1, 2, 3], but they did not list the drawbacks or outline the deception. It’s more like ghost-writing or editing (of press releases), it’s not journalism.
India (Microsoft’s Future)
Over in India, Microsoft is to manage people's identities (it’s a scary thought) and Microsoft is still moving jobs over there. More recently it was the legal team and here is another new article about it:
Microsoft Outsources Legal Work to India Amid Budget Cuts
In a surprising move, Microsoft Inc. has inked a contract with a legal outsourcing provider to outsource to India. The provider CPA Global will employ lawyers in India to get the legal work done.
Law.com chose the headline “Tech Lawyers Say ‘Uh Oh’ as Microsoft Outsources Legal Work to India” and “India is critical to Microsoft’s strategy” says another news headline from last week. Expect more parts of Microsoft to move to India and reduce the company’s expenses.
Goldman Sachs Meets Microsoft Slime
We previously wrote about Microsoft and Goldman Sachs in [1, 2]. The ‘Microsoft press’ and the Seattle Times report from last week’s Goldman Sachs event where Microsoft promoted itself (including some of the above, namely ‘cloud’ services for government/public service to store data on Microsoft servers), with help from Microsoft booster Gavin Clarke, who is sliming Oracle by quoting Microsoft’s slurs.
Addressing Goldman Sachs Technology and Internet Conference in San Francisco, California, Microsoft’s server and tools chief Bob Muglia criticized Oracle for peddling a return to “1960s computing,” as the rival company goes against industry trends and backs obsolete technologies.
This is utter nonsense. Muglia has said other darn things about Free software, going back several years ago [1, 2].
If Microsoft is so future-proof as Microsoft wants people to believe, then why did Bill Gates carry on dumping Microsoft (MSFT) shares last week? He seems to be dumping these as fast as he is allowed, being an insider. This has gone on for years.
Director of Microsoft Corp. (MSFT) William H Gates Iii sold 7,000,000 shares during the past week at an average price of $28.77.
He is investing in other monopolies.
Elsewhere in the World
Over in Jordan, Microsoft continues targeting the government and the business sector. Elsewhere in the Middle East Microsoft is trying to control Information and Communication Technology (ICT).
Microsoft Jordan hosted a training workshop for 150 of its customers and partners on the increasing importance of effective and integrated business intelligence (BI) solutions that will help drive better decision making across organisations and government institutions, resulting in improved IT skills, reduced costs and enhanced business performance.
Here is Microsoft exploiting UNESCO again. It makes a partnership while publishing this press release to start a whole lot of media fluff.
Microsoft Corp., in collaboration with UNESCO, has launched an initiative of its own kind to save several rare languages from being lost after they have been falling victim to the ever-changing cultural landscape.
The news is missing the point by repeating sound bites from UNESCO.
“Linguistic diversity is under threat,” UNESCO director-general director Irina Bokova said in a release. “This loss not only erodes individual communities and cultures, but more broadly, the very makeup of our societies.”
It is Free software — not Microsoft — that keeps languages alive. There are many examples to that effect, but it’s not what this post is about. In general, it’s sad to see that UNESCO sometimes plays along with a convicted monopoly abuser. UNESCO was previously promoting ODF [1, 2, 3], which is about communication across platforms (multilingualism being similar). As for the language issue, last month we explained the language game Microsoft is playing [1, 2]. It’s doing this a lot in Africa and South America, but the new examples which we gave last month were all from Africa. █
“It’s possible, you can never know, that the universe exists only for me. If so, it’s going quite well I must admit.”
–Bill Gates
Permalink
Send this to a friend
02.26.10
Posted in America, Asia, Europe, FOSS, Google, Law, Microsoft, Patents, RAND at 6:31 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Lawyers masquerading as innovators lose their case against Google; many new reports from the US show a patent case against search engines; Europe still faces risks of UPLS and India’s CIS protests against software patents
THERE is a lot of patent news we haven’t found the time to cover, so here it is very quickly.
United States
Google’s important patent trial involves “a pair of entrepreneurs with one failed business idea [and] almost no computer programming experience,” to use the words of the president of the FFII, Benjamin Henrion (or as TechDirt put it, “Google Fights Back And Wins Against Bogus Patent Lawsuit From Guy Who Couldn’t Even Code His ‘Invention’”). Here are some of the details:
This week: the software giant’s hard-nosed strategy for dealing with patent-holding plaintiffs gets put to the test—and proves successful.
Late last month, Google won its first patent infringement lawsuit to go to a jury trial, in the Eastern District of Texas. The plaintiff was Function Media LLC, a patent holding company owned by husband-and-wife inventors Michael Dean and Lucinda Stone. Unlike like many of those who file patent suits in the plaintiff-friendly venue, Dean and Stone actually live in the Eastern District, residing in Tyler.
“A “disturbing” number of the lawsuits come from companies controlled by patent lawyers, sometimes asserting the lawyers’ own “inventions”,” says Henrion. But Google has also just been sued by a real company whose implementations Apple and Microsoft famously copied:
Last Friday, Xerox filed a lawsuit seeking compensation over patent-infringement claims. The copy giant claims that Google and Yahoo have been using its own technology for search queries and data integration. A spokesman for Xerox said that, following failed jaw-jaw, it was time for war-war.
Google is no innocent victim though. Hadoop’s patent issue is one that we wrote about last week when we called Google to stop patenting of software. Google perhaps insists that Hadoop is “safe”, but this is not a legal guarantee and there is no reason for one company to be put at the mercy of another because of the burden of patents.
In mid-January, Google won a patent for MapReduce, the distributed data crunching platform that underpins its globe-spanning online infrastructure. And that means there’s at least a question mark hanging over Hadoop, the much-hyped open source platform that helps drive Yahoo!, Facebook, Microsoft’s Bing, and an ever-expanding array of other web services and back-end business applications.
Hadoop is based in part on a MapReduce research paper Google published in 2004, about six months after it applied for the patent.
Here is an opinion piece just published by IDG. It calls for elimination of software patents.
Software patents make no sense. Like music, art, and other creative pursuits, software is almost always derivative work. There is not a chance in hell that Facebook invented this idea. I am certain there have been social news feeds around for at least a decade or more. I am not going to spend the time finding all the prior art, but I am sure there are patent lawyers doing that already for various social networks who are now potential subjects of patent litigation from Facebook.
The Washington Post has another new opinion piece that speaks of “dangers of over-zealous intellectual property cops” and says:
The industrial inventors of the nineteenth century, too – heirs to the heroic ideal of James Watt – would have understood today’s enforcers. They complained loudly that patents needed to be easier to police and longer-lasting, denouncing rival industrialists as piratical. Their campaign to secure patentees’ prerogatives had many implications, one of which was the passage of Britain’s first modern patent law.
But it also sparked a counter-campaign to abolish patenting altogether. Led by Victorian Britain’s principal arms manufacturer, it denounced the very idea of a patent as monopolistic, retrogressive, and philosophically absurd – and it identified the practice of enforcement as a serious impediment to the nation’s progress. Although it came very close to triumphing (and a parallel bid in the Netherlands did triumph), the campaign against patenting eventually failed.
[...]
In principle, there is no reason why not. Conflicts over intellectual property in its various domains — gene patenting, GMOs, pharmaceuticals, and digital media, to mention only a few — are an everyday presence. Criticisms and piratical practices in any of these realms have the potential to ramify into major challenges to the conceptual structure of modern intellectual property itself. What has been missing so far has been a sufficiently general trigger. The practice of policing could supply it. It would be ironic if the greatest revision of intellectual property’s nature in 150 years were to be set in train by the very measures adopted to preserve it sacrosanct.
“A counter-campaign to abolish patenting altogether, it denounced the idea of a patent as monopolistic retrogressive absurd,” adds Henrion to the above.
This patent system has been hijacked by lawyers who do not invent anything but instead just feed on the system. "Patent Watchtroll" (lawyer/lobbyist for software patents, Gene Quinn) says: “Patent attorneys have always been at least one step ahead, and even if the Supreme Court tries to kill software patents we will figure out a way to characterize it so that it will be patentable.”
“This patent system has been hijacked by lawyers who do not invent anything but instead just feed on the system.”Here is Black Duck’s CEO Tim Yeaton (former marketing person at Red Hat) explaining or at least justifying [1, 2] the application for a software patent that his company received rather than acquired. It’s the usual excuses. Red Hat is not innocent, either. In fact, it participates in Peer-to-Patent and Henrion says that “those who invest in projects like Peer-to-Patent are part of the conspiracy.”
Here is Activision getting slapped for game patent violations [via]:
The immense popularity of musical video games such as Guitar Hero, Band Hero and DJ Hero appears to have generated some unwanted attention for Activision Publishing, Inc. (“Activision”). In particular, on February 12, 2010, Patent Compliance Group, Inc. (“PCG”) filed a qui tam action against Activision, alleging that Activision has falsely marked many of its video games including Guitar Hero 5, Band Hero, DJ Hero and Guitar Hero Smash Hits (collectively “Activision video game products”) as patented or patent pending.
BerryReview wonders if the BlackBerry flashlight application can be patented too.
Now I am curious what you all think. Even if it were possible should developers be able to patent a way of performing a function programmatically on your BlackBerry? I personally think that would be ridiculous and I know for a fact that it is VERY difficult to get a software patent. From what I understand at most developers can get copyright for the written code but that is only relevant if another person copies the actual code which is hard to prove…
There seems to be this silent consensus that the patent system does not serve the interests of the right people. “The USPTO grants patents for business methods, so that you can exclude your competitors from doing business the same way,” adds Henrion with some timely proof.
Europe
Software patents may become a problem in Europe unless they are fought against. Henrion has collected a lot of new evidence that includes his observation that the “European Commission awards study on software patents and standards to Fraunhofer, OOXML proponent and Microsoft proxy”; to quote the relevant part:
V.3) NAME AND ADDRESS OF ECONOMIC OPERATOR IN FAVOUR OF WHOM A CONTRACT AWARD DECISION HAS BEEN TAKEN:
Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft zur Förderung der Angewandten Forschung e.V. as legal entity acting for Fraunhofer Institut für System- und Innovationsforschung, Hansastraße 27 c, 80686 Munich, GERMANY.
Fraunhofer consistently serves Microsoft's interests. Henrion has also noticed that “BusinessEurope [is] pushing for patent harmonisation with Free Trade Agreements” and a “conference in Starsbourg [PDF] [will cover] the UPLS central patent court and software patents via the backdoor”; then there is what he considers “the European Commission’s report [PDF] [which is] hostile to Free Software, promoting software patents in standards and the undefined RAND term”
We at Boycott Novell are very grateful to Henrion, who caries on along the footsteps of Hartmut Pilch. As Pilch put it at one point, Microsoft is part of the problem; it has been a major part of it for a long time.
India
Over in India, Microsoft and other companies are trying to legalise software patents (Microsoft is unique among the lobbyists). CIS has just issued this lengthy statement opposing software patents.
CIS believes that software patents are harmful for the software industry and for consumers. In this post, Pranesh Prakash looks at the philosophical, legal and practical reasons for holding such a position in India. This is a slightly modified version of a presentation made by Pranesh Prakash at the iTechLaw conference in Bangalore on February 5, 2010, as part of a panel discussing software patents in India, the United States, and the European Union.
As we showed in an earlier post, ACTA strives for an overhaul on an international level. It’s important to keep an eye open. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in America, Asia, Europe, Intellectual Monopoly, Law, Patents at 2:51 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Latest information about ACTA includes explanation of the secrecy, or at least those who insist on secrecy while they conspire against the public
“Inducing copyright infringement will be in ACTA,” says the president of the FFII regarding this new report. Yesterday he shared videos of the hearing about ACTA in the EU.
The top EU official responsible for data privacy slams the ACTA process. This report says that a warning from Peter Hustinx “comes as nations negotiating the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) recently concluded the seventh round of talks at a meeting in Guadalajara, Mexico.” That was a while ago. There is now a Dutch ACTA leak (see article in Dutch) and the following new reports reveal some new information worth highlighting:
• New ACTA Leak: U.S., Korea, Singapore, Denmark Do Not Support Transparency
Throughout the debate over ACTA transparency, many countries have taken public positions that they support release of the actual text, but that other countries do not. Since full transparency requires consensus of all the ACTA partners, the text simply can’t be released until everyone is in agreement. Of course, those same countries hasten to add that they can’t name who opposes ACTA transparency, since that too is secret.
• New ACTA leaks reveal internal conflicts among negotiaters
Countries negotiating the secretive Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement are clashing over a proposed three-strikes regulation, the legal basis for such a treaty and the lack of transparency in the process, according to newly leaked documents.
The European Parliament is demanding answers from the European Commission about ACTA, while public outcry and criticism are driving many European countries to demand clarity about the secret talks, which have been ongoing for more than two years. But these E.U.-member nations are being frustrated by the European Commission.
• World, get ready for the DMCA: ACTA’s Internet chapter leaks
The oddest thing about the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) secrecy is that, whenever we see leaked drafts of the text, there’s nothing particularly “secret” about them. That was also the case with this weekend’s leak of the “Internet enforcement” section of the ACTA draft; as we’ve noted in the past, ACTA appears to be a measure to extend the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) to the rest of the world, and that’s exactly what the Internet section tries to do.
• Written Declaration presented today in Brussels
“ACTA is legislation laundering on an international scale, trying to covertly push through what could never be passed in most national parliaments” declared the socialist Member of the European Parliament Lambrinidis in his presentation of a written declaration that aims at establishing the official oppositon to ACTA of Europe´s elected representatives. He also criticized ACTA´s intention of “systematic monitoring of citizens in the hands of internet service providers, giving them more power than police have in anti-terror operations”.
• Europe ‘will not accept’ three strikes in Acta treaty
The European Commission has pledged to make sure the Acta global treaty will not force countries to disconnect people for unlawfully downloading copyrighted music, movies and other material.
“The EU Commission maintains that any criminal action should be for infringements on a large, commercial scale only,” says the president of the FFII. But the ACTA affects international patent law, thus it’s relevant to us. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
« Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »
