SoftwarePatents
Latest
Supreme Court could produce meaningful patent reform in abstract software case
The US Supreme Court is wading into the battle over software patents by agreeing to hear a case between two financial firms you've likely never heard of. This comes just as the legislative arm of the government is getting ready to address the problem of patent trolls. (There's not much Republicans and Democrats can agree on, but a hatred of trolls is apparently one of them.) The hope is that both the Supreme Court and Congress will address what many see as the largest problem with the American patent system: low quality patents and frivolous law suits. Alice Corporation, which runs a derivatives market, charges that foreign currency exchange firm CLS Bank Internation violated a number of its patents relating to computer-based trading systems invented in the 1990s. The defense has argued that four of the patents in the question are invalid, and twice lower courts have agreed with them, both in March of 2011 and in May of this year. The most recent ruling, handed down by a divided appeals court, found that Alice's claims were too vague to be protected under patent law.
USPTO planning two roundtable discussions with developers about software patents
We know, we know: the patent system is broken. But what exactly should the US Patent and Trademark Office do to reform itself, particularly where nebulous software claims are concerned? If you ask the developers themselves, they might tell you code was never meant to be patented. Obviously, an outright ban might not sit well with USPTO officials, so the agency is instead taking a different tack: it's hosting two roundtable events with the developer community to discuss the future of software patents. These discussions, which will take place in February in New York and in the Silicon Valley, will focus on the the terms used to define a patent's scope, among other topics. For those of you interested in attending, you'll need to register by February 4th by sending an email to SoftwareRoundtable2013@uspto.gov (you'll also need to list various credentials, which are outlined in the Groklaw post linked at the bottom of this post). Even then, seating is limited and entry is first-come, first-serve. If you can't attend, the events will both be webcast, and the USPTO is inviting developers to send in written comments (the deadline for that is March 15th). Consider this your FYI and if you really do intend to go, comment or even host a presentation at one of the events, you'll want to hit up the links below for more details.
USPTO director David Kappos to depart in January, leave mixed record in tech patents
Patents play an at times all too instrumental role in technology, so it's a potentially momentous event whenever there's a change in the gatekeepers at the patent office. Brace yourself for a possible sea change, then, as USPTO director David Kappos says he's bowing out in January. While we're still waiting on the reasons and a confirmed replacement, the exit will likely be a disappointment for those who like Kappos' patent reform efforts: the former IBM executive has taken steps during his tenure to implement the soon-to-be-active America Invents Act, which speeds up the patent approval process while filtering out some of the junk, and to cut back on a filing backlog that was getting out of hand. We can see how some might not mind the departure, however. Kappos has been quick to defend software patents as needed for innovation at a time when they're being tossed out and challenged over questions of obviousness and possible abuse in stifling competition. We'll only know his full legacy in technology once the AIA takes effect; depending on the choice of successor, it might not be long afterwards that the USPTO changes course. [Image credit: Center for American Progress, Flickr]
Microsoft wins injunction against Motorola in German court, aims to strike patent license deal
Motorola and Microsoft are no strangers to the patent war tango, and today marks the third injunction against the Droid maker in the German court. Judge Dr. Guntz of the Munich I regional court ruled that Motorola infringes on a Microsoft patent for "soft input panel system and method," granting Microsoft the ability to ban sales of some Motorola devices in the country. Essentially, the patent in question covers the software required to let applications flexibly receive input from different sources, such as the touchscreen keyboard and voice input. As Florian Mueller of Foss Patents points out, the functionality covered by this patent is utilized by the vast majority of apps, and among Android device makers only Google-owned Motorola Mobility is not paying Microsoft a patent license for this feature. Microsoft Corporate Vice President David Howard issued a statement with a not-so-subtle dig at the company in question: "We will continue to enforce injunctions against Motorola products in Germany and hope Motorola will join other Android device makers by taking a license to Microsoft's patented inventions." Google can (and most certainly will) appeal the ruling, so the saga continues...
Microsoft inks Android patent deal with Itronix, causes more heads to explode
We've already noted our slip into Bizarro World, a strange and topsy-turvy land where -- thanks to patent-infringement claims -- Microsoft strikes licensing deals with Android device makers. Redmond has used a carrot-and-stick strategy thus far, suing competing manufacturers (Barnes and Noble, Motorola) while reaching a protective royalty agreement with HTC, which, not coincidentally, also makes Windows Phones. Today, another company joins the licensee list: General Dynamics Itronix, known for its rugged computers, some of which do run Windows. Neither company offered much in the way of details, other than declaring that Itronix will pay royalties, but we've no reason to believe it's too different from HTC's arrangement. See the press release after the break for an excellent example of terse, unrevealing business-speak.
Microsoft says Android infringes on its patents, licenses HTC (update: talking to other Android manufacturers as well)
The lawyers up in Redmond seem to have been woken from their slumber with the sudden realization that -- oh look! -- Google's Android OS infringes on Microsoft's boatload of software patents. How specifically it does so is not identified, but Microsoft believes that elements from both the user interface and the underlying operating system are in violation of its rights. This is very much in keeping with the Windows maker's crusade to assert patent claims over Linux, which in the past has garnished it with cross-licensing deals with Amazon and Xandros, as well as a settlement from TomTom. Lawsuits are not yet being discussed here, but lest you think this is a small-time disturbance, longtime Windows Mobile / Windows Phone partner HTC has already decided to shorten its list of troubles by ponying up for a license from Microsoft that covers its Android phones -- it would be pretty insane if Microsoft sued one of its biggest and most important hardware manufacturers for patent infringement, after all. Even still, it's now an unfortunate fact that HTC is having to pay Microsoft royalties to use Google's operating system. Strange days, indeed. Update: Microsoft deputy general counsel of intellectual property Horacio Gutierrez just sent us a statement saying that the company's been "talking to several device manufacturers to address our concerns relative to the Android mobile platform." We're taking that to mean the same as above: Microsoft isn't too interested in suing any of its Windows Mobile / Windows Phone partners, so it's trying to work out patent license deals with those companies in advance of any nastiness. It's an interesting strategy: patents forbid anyone from making, using, or selling your invention, so Redmond can protect its partners while still leaving open the possibility of a lawsuit with Google itself down the line. In fact, we'd almost say it seems like Microsoft's agreement with HTC is as much of a threat to Google as Apple's lawsuit -- Redmond's basically saying you can't sell an Android device without paying a license fee, and we'd bet those fees are real close to the Windows Phone 7 license fee. Clever, clever -- we'll see how this one plays out. Here's Horacio's full statement: Microsoft has a decades-long record of investment in software platforms. As a result, we have built a significant patent portfolio in this field, and we have a responsibility to our customers, partners, and shareholders to ensure that competitors do not free ride on our innovations. We have also consistently taken a proactive approach to licensing to resolve IP infringement by other companies, and have been talking with several device manufacturers to address our concerns relative to the Android mobile platform. [Thanks, Jack]
