26 Apr 2009
Apple fined $19m in 'Predictive Snooping' case

If you wonder why Apple, M$, IBM and other huge corporations file what appear to be the silliest of patents, look no further. Their claim: "It's self defense!" And to a large extent, as this suit shows, they're right!

But of course, once filed and granted, defensive patents begin to look like serious money in the bank to corporate lawyers. So more suits are filed, and the whole spiral descends another level.

If we can't effect reform soon, we're going to be in a place where everything is somebody's "intellectual property", and nothing can be done without paying someone for the privilege of doing it.

Apple has been ordered to pay $19m in damages after losing a patent infringement case which its lawyers hoped might only cost the firm $270,000.

(link) [The Register]

07:53 /Copywrongs | 0 comments | permanent link

12 Apr 2009
Playmobil Bible faces wrath of lawyers

Much as I'd like to stick this one in 'Humor', I just can't. Are these figures "Intellectual Property"? Or physical objects? Can I be sued for modifying an object that I own and displaying the results?

When I was a kid some of my favorite toys were my GI Joe dolls - no link, because I don't think they make the big, 12 inch variety anymore. But even "GI Astronaut" got a bit boring after a while, so we played "GI Joe and Barbie in the French Revolution", using some faux period doll clothes and my best friend's little sister's Barbie as Marie Antoinette. Needless to say, Anne was not happy with the queen's fate, but at least I didn't have Mattel and Hasbro lawyers suing me for violating their "intellectual property".

Times have changed, indeed.

A German evangelical pastor who's recreated biblical scenes from Playmobil figures has been given until 6 April to pull his website, or face the wrath of the company's lawyers. Markus Bomhard's principal sin was to adapt the figures - for example by gluing breasts to Eve and melting Jesus with a hairdryer the better to attach him to a crucifix.

(link) [The Register]

16:53 /Copywrongs | 1 comment | permanent link

30 Mar 2009
IBM Tries To Patent Offshoring

I wonder if I could get a patent on scum-sucking bottom feeders and then sue Big Blue?

IBM has filed a patent application that covers offshoring employees. Application 20090083107, dated March 26, 2009, is a 'method and system for strategic global resource sourcing.' Figure 2 gives a pretty good idea of what's involved — it shows boxes labelled 'Engineer,' 'HR,' and 'Programmer' with crossing arrows pointing to cylinders labelled 'India,' 'China,' and 'Hungary.' The article speculates that IBM may apply the methodology to its own staff — it reportedly plans to lay off thousands of employees and has even started a program to have IBM workers transfer to other countries at local wages.

(link) [Slashdot]

20:55 /Copywrongs | 0 comments | permanent link

17 Mar 2009
Amazon sued by cable TV giant over Kindle ebooks

Wasn't the original purpose of patents and copyrights supposed to be the "promotion of the useful arts"? Anybody still think they do that?

Life-science-obsessed cable TV giant Discovery Communications has sued Amazon.com over its Kindle ebook devices, claiming patent infringement.

(link) [The Register]

19:48 /Copywrongs | 0 comments | permanent link

09 Mar 2009
IBM Wants Patent For Lotus Notes-Free Meetings

Who wants to use Lotus Notes anytime? Ridiculous.

tOver at IBM, the Lotus Notes team has 'invented' preventing the use of their own product during meetings. Self-described patent reformer Big Blue has asked the USPTO for a patent covering Suppressing De-Focusing Activities During Selective Scheduled Meetings by forcing meeting attendees to 'submit to the computing system suspension requirements.' What's next — a patent for Verizon for blocking cellphone usage during movies?"

(link) [Slashdot]

07:19 /Copywrongs | 0 comments | permanent link

25 Feb 2009
Court Upholds AP For 'quasi-property'

Unbelievable. What the Hel is "quasi-property"? Isn't that like being "quasi-pregnant"? You cannot own facts - oh, wait, of course you can, since we began allowing patents on math, genetics and software.

I guess even this humble blog had best watch what I link to to going forward. Because the slippery slope some of us have been railing about for years just got a good greasing.

A federal court ruled that the AP can sue competitors for 'quasi-property' rights on hot news, as well as for copyright infringement and several other claims. The so-called 'hot news' doctrine was created by a judge 90 years ago in another case, where the AP sued a competitor for copying wartime reporting and bribing its employees to send them a copy of unreleased news. The courts' solution was to make hot news a form of 'quasi-property' distinct from copyright, in part because facts cannot be copyrighted. But now the AP is making use of the precedent again, going after AHN which competes with the AP, alleging that they're somehow copying the AP's news. The AP has been rather busy with lawsuits lately, so even though the AP has a story about their own lawsuit, we won't link to it.

(link) [Slashdot]

07:39 /Copywrongs | 0 comments | permanent link

17 Feb 2009
Draconian DRM Revealed In Windows 7

If only half of this is true, it'll make Vista look like a cakewalk. And insure that "XP Forever!" becomes a rallying cry for a long, long time.

A few days' testing of Windows 7 has already disclosed some draconian DRM, some of it unrelated to media files. A legitimate copy of Photoshop CS4 stopped functioning after we clobbered a nagging registration screen by replacing a DLL with a hacked version. With regard to media files, the days of capturing an audio program on your PC seem to be over (if the program originated on that PC). The inputs of your sound card are severely degraded in software if the card is also playing an audio program (tested here with Grooveshark). This may be the tip of the iceberg. Being in bed with the RIAA is bad enough, but locking your own files away from you is a tactic so outrageous it may kill the OS for many persons. Many users will not want to experiment with a second sound card or computer just to record from online sources, or boot up under a Linux that supports ntfs-3g just to control their files.

(link) [Slashdot]

07:32 /Copywrongs | 0 comments | permanent link

16 Feb 2009
New Bill Would Repeal NIH Open Access Policy

One of my mother's favorite quips was "He who pays the piper calls the tune!" If we pay for it, we own it. I know of no private company on earth that grants it's employees full rights to products they develop on company time while on the payroll. This is exactly the same situation: and the "Fair Copyright in Research Works Act" should be renamed the "Rip Off Taxpayers Research Monies Act".

The Fair Copyright in Research Works Act has been reintroduced into Congress. The bill will ban open access policies in federal agencies, such as the National Institutes of Health (NIH). These policies require scientists to provide public access to their work if it has been funded with money from an agency with an open access policy. Such policies ensure that the public has access to read the results of research that it has funded. It appears that Representative John Conyers (D-MI), the author of the bill, is doing the bidding of publishing companies who do not want to lose control of this valuable information that they sell for exorbitant fees thereby restricting access by the general public to an essentially public good.

(link) [Slashdot]

09:26 /Copywrongs | 0 comments | permanent link

07 Feb 2009
Is Apple's Multi-Touch Patent Valid?

Oh! What a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive.

There is evidence that Apple's multi-touch patent application may have failed to list some prior art that showed gestures in multi-touch interfaces as early as the mid 1980s. Some of these examples even appear in the bibliography Wayne Westerman's doctoral dissertation, and he's one of the inventors on the application's list. If true, that could leave them wide open for legal attack, should they try suing someone like Palm for patent infringement. Also, Apple may be infringing some key multi-touch patents owned by the University of Delaware — and co-developed by Westerman while getting his doctorate.

(link) [Slashdot]

21:08 /Copywrongs | 0 comments | permanent link

27 Jan 2009
Apple Awarded Patent For iPhone Interface

What will this mean to other touch screen developers? It'll force them to waste money on lawyers so they can keep doing the things they've been doing for the past ten years...

This is a prime example of what's wrong with the patent system in this country - the sooner we get rid of patents on software (and, by extension, math), the better off we'll be.

Apple's 358-page patent application for their iPhone interface entitled Touch screen device, method, and graphical user interface for determining commands by applying heuristics has been approved after more than two years of review by the US Patent Office. Apple's claims include: 'A computer-implemented method for use in conjunction with a computing device with a touch screen display comprises: detecting one or more finger contacts with the touch screen display, applying one or more heuristics to the one or more finger contacts to determine a command for the device, and processing the command. The one or more heuristics comprise: a heuristic for determining that the one or more finger contacts correspond to a one-dimensional vertical screen scrolling command, a heuristic for determining that the one or more finger contacts correspond to a two-dimensional screen translation command, and a heuristic for determining that the one or more finger contacts correspond to a command to transition from displaying a respective item in a set of items to displaying a next item in the set of items.' As Apple seems eager to defend their intellectual property, what will this mean to other touch developers?

(link) [Slashdot]

07:39 /Copywrongs | 2 comments | permanent link

23 Jan 2009
Microsoft Brings Back DRM

M$ is brain damaged. This will fly about as fast and high as the proverbial concrete balloon.

Microsoft yesterday unveiled its MSN Mobile Music service — and a surprise return to digital rights management (DRM). While companies such as Apple and Amazon have finally moved to music download services free of copy protection, MSN Mobile locks tracks to the mobile handset they are downloaded to. It also charges more than the other services per track, and offers no way to transfer your tracks to your new phone when you upgrade. The company's Head of Mobile UK spoke to PC Pro about the launch, but his answers are almost as baffling as the service itself. Best quote: Q: 'If I buy these songs on your service — and they're locked to my phone — what happens when I upgrade my phone in six months' time?' A: 'Well, I think you know the answer to that.'

(link) [Slashdot]

07:50 /Copywrongs | 0 comments | permanent link

22 Jan 2009
RIAA Tries To Appeal Order Allowing Internet TV Court Broadcast

We don't need no education ...

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "The RIAA has appealed the order entered several days ago allowing the January 22nd hearing in SONY BMG Music v. Tenenbaum to be streamed over internet TV. Additionally, they've made a motion for a stay. I'm just a country lawyer, but as far as I know: (a) it's not possible to appeal the order, (b) it was procedurally improper and ineffective to file a notice of appeal, and (c) it was improper to direct their motion for a stay to the District Court Judge. Well, let's hope the arguments in the First Circuit will be streamed, too. Meanwhile, one commentator wonders why the tooth and nail opposition to broadcasting, since the professed aim of the litigations was to 'educate' the public?"

(link) [Slashdot]

07:29 /Copywrongs | 0 comments | permanent link

12 Jan 2009
20+ Companies Sued Over OS Permissions Patent

A really ridiculous example of patent trolling, but one of the commenters in the Slashdot thread has an interesting point: what if management and shareholders of the corporations that file these kind of suits were held personally liable for their outcome? That would sure put the brakes on patent trolling, eh?

I say let's extend this: libertarians demand freedom, but understand that with that freedom comes responsibility. You're free to sue whomever you wish - and you're also free to face the consequences. The "artificial people" constructed by the State (aka "corporations, "limited liability companies", etc.) are designed specifically to dodge this responsibility.

And that's the root of a lot of problems with the business culture of "capitalism".

According to the article on Ars Technica, Microsoft, Symantec and 20 other companies are being sued over patents covering 'systems for governing application and data permissions, as well as ensuring application integrity.' The patents were granted in the 90's to the Information Protection and Authentication of Texas (IPAT). From the article: 'A response from any of the defendants is still forthcoming, and it is unclear whether the authentication and permissions systems that IPAT's patent describes are precluded by prior art. Even if IPAT has a leg to stand on in court, however, it certainly didn't take the easy route to recovering any damages by suing 22 companies.'

(link) [Slashdot]

07:58 /Copywrongs | 0 comments | permanent link

08 Jan 2009
The Restaurant Name Game

Trademark abuse sometimes gets overlooked in the general mess that is our current IP law regime ... but it's a serious problem nonetheless. There was a local steakhouse steakhouse forced to surrender it's moniker by a Mexican restaurant in Kentucky with the same name. I can't even remember the name they were fighting over. But that's probably because the name picked after the lawsuit generated more local buzz than the original: The Lost Name Steakhouse.

Forge restaurant changes its name in a legal dispute.

(link) [New York Times]

07:58 /Copywrongs | 0 comments | permanent link

30 Dec 2008
Chilean anti-piracy law drafted on pirated software

ROTFLMAO!

Chilean lawyer Guillermo Frκne is having a bit of a bad hair day after it was revealed that draft legislation aimed at cutting the internet connections of illegal downloading ne'er-do-wells was presented in .doc format written on pirated software.

(link) [The Register]

19:17 /Copywrongs | 0 comments | permanent link

Previous 15 entriesNext 15 entries