Another Odd Patent from IBM

IBM recently filed a patent that has left many scratching their heads.  The patent is titled “Methodology and Process for Suppressing De-Focusing Activities During Selective Scheduled Meetings,” and it is directed towards preventing people from using IBM’s software products during important meetings.

As reported on DailyTech, IBM stated the following on their patent application:

Within exemplary embodiments of the present invention repeating calendar event scheduling application options are implemented to support the implementation of a distraction-free meeting event. This aspect is accomplished by the calendar event invitation specifically stating that the meeting is expected to be distraction free, and as such, the acceptance of a meeting invitation would require that the meeting invitee submit to the computing system suspension requirements that are necessitated to initiate a distraction-free meeting. This meeting policy is enforced by the calendar event scheduling application being configured to effectively suspend the local activity of a computing system or incoming and outgoing communication requests that are received at the computing system.

Besides the fact that this patent is extremely broad, it’s odd to see a patent application from IBM that could block people from using their own software.  However, IBM has applied for some odd patents in the past, such as one application that evenly split a restaurant bill between a group of people.

Red Hat Sued by Software Tree

Software Tree, a database company that develops object-relational mapping technologies, has filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Red Hat.  The suit alleges that Red Hat’s new Java-based server application, JBoss, infringes on one of Software Tree’s patents.  Software Tree is seeking unspecified damages, as well as an injunction to stop Red Hat from distributing the product.

As reported by Ars Technica, the infringed patent describes a “system and method for exchanging data and commands between an object oriented system and relational system.”  Software Tree claims that the patent was originally awarded in December 2000, and it was reexamined in April 2008 and was found to be valid and enforceable.

Red Hat acquired JBoss in 2006 for $350 million.  Software Tree contends that JBoss Hibernate, part of the JBoss platform, infringes on their patent. 

Red Hat is not new to database patent disputes, as it faced litigation last year with Firestar and DataTern.  Red Hat did eventually come to terms with the two companies, but one those agreements may come back to haunt them.  Red Hat cited the Software Tree patent as prior art during its lawsuit with Firestar.  Consequently, Software Tree is stating that Red Hat’s infringement on their patent was willful.

It is also worth noting that this current suit may be an extension of the ongoing Microsoft-Linux battle, as Software Tree is partnered with Microsoft, Borland, IBM and Sun.  In addition to naming Red Hat in the lawsuit, Software Tree has also named Hewlett Packard, Genuitec and Dell as defendants.

Patent Licensing Deal Will Lower Cost of Blu-ray

In a joint press release, Panasonic, Philips and Sony announced that they are working with other patent holders to create a license for Blu-ray products.  The license will cover essential patents for Blu-ray discs, DVDs and CDs.  Furthermore, it is expected that this deal will lower royalty rates by at least 40%, reducing the cost of movies, music or games to consumers.

The licensing program will be offered by a new licensing company that is based in the United States.  The head of the license company is Gerald Rosenthal, a former head of IP at IBM and CEO of Open Invention Network.  In addition to lowering the cost of royalties, this licensing program will create a “one-stop-shop” for product licenses, reducing the burden on licensed companies.  As Mr. Rosenthal said:

By establishing a new licensing entity that offers a single license for Blu-ray Disc products at attractive rates, I am confident that it will foster the growth of the Blu-ray Disc market and serve the interest of all companies participating in this market, be it as licensee or licensor.

The companies are stating that this license will be introduced in the middle of 2009.  This program also offers measures to identify unlicensed products in the market, as well as a system to address those who have not properly obtained a license.

Hopefully this license will fulfill the promise of reducing the prices of Blu-ray discs, making it easier for the consumer.

New IBM Patent for Bionic Body Armor

Ever wonder what it would be like to dodge bullets like Neo in the Matrix?  Or be able avoid balls like Peter La Fleur and become a dodgeball champion?  Thanks to a new patent by IBM, these fantasies may not be far off.

According to Gizmodo, IBM has filed for a patent that would scan the area for incoming projectiles.  If one is detected, the system would deliver a shock to muscles, causing reflexive action away from the projectile.  As the patent application states:

The present invention relates generally to the protection of an individual against a projectile propelled from a firearm. More particularly, the present invention relates to a body armor system and its method of use that is capable of detecting a projectile propelled from a firearm, computing the trajectory of the projectile, and moving the individual out of the path of the projectile to avoid being hit.

Although this patent seems legitimate, it may be hard to take it seriously.  It may be tough for such a system to trigger a human movement that would be fast enough to dodge a bullet.  But then again, it may do wonders in dodgeball!

Will Eco-Patent Commons Help Global Sustainability?

Last month, the Eco-Patent Commons was launched to spur creativity and collaboration in solving the problems of environmental sustainability.  According to Change.org, several companies have already participated, including IBM, Sony, Nokia, and Pitney Bowes.  These companies have combined to release close to three dozen patents related to energy conservation, preventing pollution, and using greener materials in manufacturing.

The World Business Council for Sustainable Development classifies the Eco-Patent Commons as the following:

The Eco-Patent Commons is an initiative to create a collection of patents on technology that directly or indirectly protects the environment.  The patents will be pledged by companies and other intellectual property rights holders and made available to anyone free of charge.

One must wonder about the effectiveness of such patents, since there is not necessarily any monetary benefit from gearing patents towards the Eco-Patent Commons.  Until solving environmental sustainability becomes lucrative, most companies will still gear their R&D towards products that will be high in value, rather than altruism.

Avistar Issued Patent for Text and Video IM

Avistar Communications Corporation has announced that they have received a new patent, relating to instant message systems supporting both text IM and video IM over the internet.  The patent, issued this past Tuesday, involves logging in from an arbitrary communication device and providing popular IM buddy list features, Avistar stated in a press release.

Since September 2008, the company has received 14 patents, which have added patent coverage to technologies involving text IM, VoIP and desktop video conferencing.  Although Avistar currently holds 97 patents, these recent patents add to important aspects of real-time communications including wireless, mobile devices, buddy list directories, VoIP, video, and communications servers.

Simon Moss, the CEO of Avistar, stated, “Avistar’s commitment to research and development means that our customers continue to get the latest technology, allowing us to set the pace for the industry.  We believe our patent portfolio represents the world’s most comprehensive and deepest IP holdings in this rapidly growing commercial area.”

Avistar provides business-class technology, and currently serves companies such as IBM, Sony, LifeSize Communications and Polycom Inc.

Epson Joins RPX’s Defensive Patent Service

RPX Corporation announced today in a press release that it has acquired a sixth member for its Defensive Patent Aggregation service.  RPX, which acquires patent rights and provides them as a defensive patent aggregation, has also acquired memberships with IBM, Cisco and other large and small technology companies.

RPX’s service was introduced in November 2008, and their management is already responsible for more than $2 billion in patent transactions.  Companies pay an annual membership fee to RPX in order to reduce patent risks and costs created by non-practicing entities (NPEs).  NPE’s, or patent trolls, acquire patents for the sole purpose of offensive licensing against operating companies.  Also, since NPEs do not make or sell products, they are not subject to counter-claims.

The president of RPX, Eran Zur, said “IT companies like Epson have become very common targets for patent assertion from non-practicing entities and RPX addresses the industry’s need for a strong patent defense offering.  We expect that the RPX service will help Epson avoid substantial future litigation and licensing costs.”

Software Engineer States Why Software Patents Harm Innovation

Recently, there have been a lot of critics advocating for the repeal of software patents.  Yet, one wouldn’t suspect an anonymous software engineer to also explain why he also dislikes software patents.  As reported on Techdirt, it seems as if the person quoted below most likely works for a firm like IBM.  They explain how their company actively encourages and rewards engineers to file for as many patents as possible.  However, they believe that all of this patent filing is damaging innovation:

Speaking from my own experience, corporations (such as the one I work for) spend a lot of money to innovate. However, I would “press that button” and get rid of IP law immediately, given the chance. I agree completely with the arguements made in the article – as such, I’ll just bring up a few other issues:

I think IP law is incredibly damaging to innovation and competition. In the case of software patents, moreso in that they take resources (primarily money which gets redirected to legal teams) from firms who are forced to research existing patens, and also defend themselves against IP lawsuits.

Many software patents are particularly silly. Many of these are issued for algorithms – the vast majority of the time, these algorithms are only available outside the company via patent! That is, when they are shipped externally, it is in a form that is not readable (object code). Sure – this can be reverse engineered. But for a particularly complex program or operating system, this in itself would be a colossal endeavor. Yet, a patent is issued for it – and the patent describes exactly what the algorithm does!

Another firm could look at the patent and use the invention. In most cases, it would be impossible to tell that they’ve “stolen” anything. Here they are counterproductive.

I should also mention the obvious – the corporation which holds the patent already has a huge advantage! They will ship a product with these innovations before any other corporation can ship its’ product. Quite frankly it will generally be a significant period of time before another product can be shipped which contains these innovations – even if the innovation was immediately obvious and known. This will not generally be the case.

Then you have the patents for user interface – these are just silly. I’ve seen patents issued (granted, this was a long time ago) for using a particular color on a “dummy” terminal.

Anyway, I hope I do not sound like a hypocrite (because I hold IP patents). As I said, it is a part of my job. I also cannot fault my company for taking advantage of whatever silly laws are created. I simply view this as another case of the state interfering with the market, and the market adjusting to exploit the foolishness of the laws.

This quote is quite an interesting take from someone who is in the software industry.  Are software patents that stifling to innovation?  Should the Obama Administration act on all these calls to stop software patents?

U.S. Patent Dominance Declining?

According to IFI Patent Intelligence, a Delaware-based patent research firm, America may be losing its footing as the most dominant country in corporate innovation.  The story, reported by Delaware Online, suggests that although IBM took the top spot in 2008, it is facing increased competition from Asian companies.

IFI Patent Intelligence is regarded as a national leader in chemistry and biology patent information.  In the report, it stated that although U.S.-based IBM recently broke the American record for the amount of patents granted in one year, there is evidence that the rest of the world is catching up.  American companies accounted for 49% of U.S. patents granted to companies, compared with 50% in 2007.  American firms also hold 12 positions in the top 35 (and only 4 positions in the top 10), which generated 26% of all technological patents granted in 2008.

Meanwhile, Japanese companies hold five of the top 10 slots and 23% of the total.  Germany is third with 6%; South Korea placed fourth with 5%; and Taiwan was fifth with 4%.

“It’s important not to confuse quantity with quality,” said Darlene Slaughter, general manager of IFI. “What’s clear is that many of the world’s largest companies are placing a higher priority on protecting their intellectual property… Securing patents may be even more important in a down economy, since it gives patent-holders an edge over their competitors.”

It should be noted that the economic downturn isn’t reflected in patents granted during 2008, as many of these patents were applied for in 2005 and 2006.  But, it’ll be interesting to follow the amount of patents issued in the coming years, as there was a three year slide in patent approvals after the most recent recession in 2001.

T3 Files Antitrust Complaint Against IBM

T3 Technologies, a U.S. computer company, has filed a complaint against IBM, accusing the company of “abusing its monopoly power in the mainframe industry.”  According to the BBC News, even though the two companies are based in the United States, the complaint was filed with the European Commission.

Mainframes, the technology in question, are high-end computers used by large organizations.  As T3 said in a statement, “Only IBM now offers IBM-compatible mainframes and… controls over 99% of all existing IBM-compatible mainframes in use today.”  T3 also claims that IBM withheld patent licenses and certain intellectual property.

IBM has yet to comment on the complaint, but in 2007, Platform Solution also filed a formal complaint with the European Commission.  That complaint also accused IBM of refusing to license third parties and refusing to supply interface information on mainframes.  However, the case was dropped when Platform Solution was bought out by IBM.

Next Page »