BuffaloTech: Notice Regarding Injunction
,----[ Quote ]
| Regrettably, the Court of Appeals has decided not to stay the injunction in
| the CSIRO v. Buffalo et al litigation during the appeal period. Although
| Buffalo is confident that the final decision in the appeal will be favorable
| and that the injunction will be lifted, Buffalo is presently unable to supply
| wireless LAN equipment compliant with IEEE 802.11a and 802.11g standards in
| the United States until that decision is issued.
| information.
`----
http://www.digitalmajority.org/forum/t-54755/buffalotech:notice-regarding-injunction
US court beats up FTC over Rambus 'patent ambush' ruling
,----[ Quote ]
| Rambus, the fast memory designer, has won its appeal to overturn a 2004
| Federal Trade Commission anti-trust ruling.
|
| The DC Court of Appeals today decided that the FTC had not established that
| Rambus had harmed the competition and "therefore that the Commission failed
| to demonstrate that Rambus' conduct was exclusionary and thus to establish
| its claim that Rambus unlawfully monopolized the relevant markets".
`----
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04/22/rambus_ftc_victory/
Patent trolls and patent-busters
,----[ Quote ]
| In recent times, there have been concerns that the patent system been abused
| by opportunistic companies known by the phrase "patent trolls". It has been
| alleged that such entities have stunted innovation and spurred unnecessary
| patent litigation.
|
| [...]
|
| Not everyone fears "patent trolls". James McDonough of Emory University
| School of Law prefers to use the euphemism, "patent dealers in the ideas
| economy". He has argued that, contrary to popular belief, "patent trolls"
| actually benefit society: "Patent trolls provide liquidity, market clearing,
| and increased efficiency to the patent markets - the same benefits securities
| dealers supply capital markets." He maintains that "patent trolls" are a
| useful intermediary in the marketplace.
|
| Others question the very existence of "patent trolls", suggesting that they
| are little more than mythological creatures designed to frighten the
| executives of technology companies at night.
`----
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/04/21/2222428.htm
Recent:
Buy, Cheat, Steal, and Lie: The OOXML Story
,----[ Quote ]
| A 2007 decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit may end
| up coming back to haunt Microsoft in their ongoing U.S. antitrust battle. The
| case revolved around claims by Broadcom that Qualcomm had deliberately
| included its patents in the Universal Mobile Telecommunications System
| standard in order to create a monopoly for its products. The appeals court
| held that if a company acts deceptively to gain adoption of a standard that
| then results in a monopoly to their advantage, they can be held to have
| violated anti-trust laws, irrespective of their right to determine the use of
| their patents. Interestingly enough, the Court of Appeals ruling relies on a
| Federal Trade Commission ruling which in turn relied on — drumroll, please —
| United States v. Microsoft, the very case that put MS under supervision in
| the first place.
|
| All we can say is, we hope that with this many available avenues, something
| is done to rectify the farce acted out over the last several months.
`----
http://www.linuxjournal.com/content/buy-cheat-steal-and-lie-ooxml-story
Another Reason Microsoft's OSP Isn't Good Enough
,----[ Quote ]
| Eek. I understand that to be saying that there are gaps in OSP coverage.
| You'll get documents you can't legally open unless you are using Microsoft's
| software, because the extensions found in Office but not in OOXML proper, so
| to speak, are not covered. Let me explain what I think they are saying this
| means.
|
| We knew we'd get documents we couldn't open effectively from a technical
| standpoint, without at least losing something in the translation. But if
| extensions to the OOXML format, as exemplified in Microsoft Office 2007, are
| not covered by the OSP, and evidently they are not, when you get a document
| with, say, spreadsheet macros, or DRM, what legally protects you if open the
| document? All Microsoft has to do, then, is extend the format, as it already
| has, and you then can only interoperate with them if you use Microsoft
| software too. So. OSP gaps. Nice work if you can get it.
`----
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20080326151405938
OOXML IPR problems
,----[ Quote ]
| Anyway, the phrase that caught my eye last night in one of the presentations
| I was sent was “No IPR problems!”.
|
| I immediately thought “That should have an asterisk.” As in:
|
| “No IPR problems!*”
|
| * If you don’t care about 1) everything you need to use the spec, or 2) are
| interested in using free software.
`----
http://www.sutor.com/newsite/blog-open/?p=2128
Microsoft patents by Brian Jones
,----[ Quote ]
| For fun we just did a quick search of published US patent applications
| with "Brian Jones" as an author, and "Microsoft" as the assignee.
|
| [...]
|
| Some of these, like the packing ones, seem to apply directly to OOXML. What
| isn't clear to us is why Microsoft would pursue patent protection for patents
| rights that their are promising that they won't assert over users of OOXML.
`----
http://www.noooxml.org/forum/t-35323/microsoft-patents-by-brian-jones
Wishful Spinning
,----[ Quote ]
| OOXML gets adopted. More and more projects are started. Let's see which of
| these would survive without funding. Meanwhile a spin factory sends out
| success stories that most bloggers find worthless to discuss. It is possible
| to get the Krauts on board that are supposed to review OOXML but would OOXML
| survive a review by the crowds?
`----
http://www.noooxml.org/forum/t-35292/wishful-spinning
Digging in the Comments: Patents
,----[ Quote ]
| Patent licensing is probably the most important aspect for all third parties
| that want to implement or use the Open XML specification. Unfortunately the
| Ballot Resolution Meeting cannot discuss these aspects because only technical
| and editorial issues would get resolved.
|
| [...]
|
| When you have a patent which covers Open XML and you refuse to license it,
| the standard process gets stalled. Large companies in the standardization
| process are reluctant to use that nuke option. Given the ambush that the
| software patent practice means today it is quite possible that Open XML
| infringes a patent and all parties eventually have an obligation to license
| it.
`----
http://www.noooxml.org/forum/t-31491/digging-in-the-comments:patents
Patent threat looms large over OOXML
,----[ Quote ]
| "If OOXML goes through as an ISO standard, the IT industry, government and
| business will encumbered with a 6000-page specification peppered with
| potential patent liabilities" said NZOSS President Don Christie.
|
| "Patent threats have already been used to spread doubt amongst organisations
| keen to take advantage of the benefits of open source. No one knows whether
| such claims have any merit, but it is calculated to deter the development and
| use of open and alternative toolsets."
`----
http://nzoss.org.nz/node/179
Cyberlaw OOXML Seminar 14 December
,----[ Quote ]
| However, this raises the issue - what assurance does a developer have that
| such a large specification is not the subject of third party patent claims?
| The pedigree of the specification is certainly no reason for hope, Microsoft
| has been the target of third party patent claims for some time now including
| some high profile losses in patent suits. The fact that the specification has
| been developed behind closed doors and on a fast track means that there has
| been no adequate opportunity to evaluate the likelihood of third party patent
| claims against the specifications. The sheer size of the document suggests
| there will be at least a couple hiding in there somewhere.
`----
http://brendanscott.wordpress.com/2007/12/13/cyberlaw-ooxml-seminar-14-december/
ISO warned about possible patent violations of DIS29500 (aka OOXML)
,----[ Quote ]
| I have just send the following email to ISO members (you can find some of
| their email addresses on the INCTIS website) to warn them about the possible
| patent ambush...
`----
http://jeremywang67.blogspot.com/2008/01/iso-warned-about-possible-patent.html
|
|