Slashdot Mirror
SBC Demands Royalties for Links in Frames
John Miles writes "Offering yet another persuasive argument in favor of employee substance-abuse testing at the US Patent and Trademark Office, SBC Communications is asserting exclusive ownership of the concept of links in browser frames. With SBC's convenient new rate plan, now you, too, can afford to license your favorite HTML feature!"
SBC Communications claims they own Patent on Internal links and Includes, threatens to sue the little guys first, then move to the big guys.
We received a 40 page package from SBC Intellectual Property today informing us that our web site - which has links on the left side that go to other web pages within the site - but does not lose the left side navigation links - was in violation of their "Structured Document Browser" Patent.
Here is the letter that was sent to us.
January 14th, 2003
Dear President of MuseumTour.com
SBC Intellectual Property is the owner of US Patent no. 5,933,841 entitled "Stuctured Document Browser". The purpose of this letter is to advise you of an opportunity to acquire a license to the patents - view patent link at the bottom of this pag.:
- We recently observed several useful navigation features within the user interface or your site www.museumtour.com. For example your site includes several selectors or tabs that correspond to specific locations within your site documents. These selectors seem to reside in their own frame or part of the user interface. And, as such, the selectors are not lost when a different part of the document is displayed to the user - see screen shots from museumtour.com enclosed. By sperating the selectors from the content, Museumetour has truly simplified site navigation and improved the shopping experience for its users.
As you review the Structured Document Patent you will notice that the above-discussed features appear to infringe several issued claims in our patent. In light of Museum Tours presumed respect for the intellectual property rights of others, we are pleased to offer you a Preferred Rate license under the structured Document Patent - see enclosed rate schedule -
Actual licensing amounts are calculated using SBC's then current Royalty equation. SBC will gladly determine your actual licensing amount if you provide us with your 2002 Company Gross Revnue (their fees are based on how much annual revenue the company does).
For your convenience and to assist your analysis of the patent, I have enclosed a document that charts the claim language of an example claim to your site structure.
After reviewing the patents and determining wheather you prefer a prepaid license or a recurring annual licence please contact Ms. Jill Walker at 512.231.7008 to determin your actual royalty amount. If you have your 2002 gross revenue number Ms. Walker will provide you with an accurate oyalty number and will facilityate the execution of an appropriate license.
Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.
Sincerly,
Harlie D. Frost
President
It's worth noting that the cited patent is dated 3rd August, 1999, nearly two years after the 1997 release of the W3C HTML 4 specification, which added, among other things, support for frames in HTML.
O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!
Interestingly enough, it seems to cover both browsers that have the capability of multi-frame links and the actual use of such links. (I could be wrong; I quickly scanned it instead of reading. Correct me if I am.)
It also was submitted May 1996 and granted August 1999. So if we're looking for prior use, we need to be focusing on the 1996 date, I imagine.
Also of note: the assignee is AmeriTech Corporation of Hoffman Estates, IL. Wonder what relationship they have to SBC?
i can't wait for them to sue the united states government [umich.edu] for patent infringement.
Government use of a patented invention is viewed as a taking by eminent domain, not an infringement.
Infringement, by the Government, of privately owned patents, is governed by 28 U.S.C. 1498, which provides that a suit against the Government in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims is the exclusvie remedy for patent holders who allege their patented invention has been infringed by the U.S. Government or by one acting for the Government. The primary purpose of this statute is to protect and relieve contractors from any liability for infringement by the owner when an invention is used by or manufactured for the United States. By virtue of this statute, the Government may be held liable to the patent owner for payment of the "reasonable and entire compensation" for its unauthorized use of the patent. Unlike a private party, however, the Government cannot commit the tort of "patent infringement." Governmental use of a patented invention is viewed as an eminent domain taking of a license under the patent and not as a tort.
The Government may delegate its eminent domain power over patents to contractors acting on its behalf. This is accomplished through inclusion of the "Authorization and Consent" clause in the contract [FAR clause 52.227-1]. This clause is usually included in research and development contracts and is a very significant power to grant to a contractor as it makes the Government responsible for the contractors' infringement of any patents during the course of performance of the contract; the patent owner must bring her/his action against the Government, not the contractor.
Sometimes the Government does not wish to fully delegate its eminent domain power to a contractor. This is accomplished by inclusion in the contract of the "Patent Indemnity" clause [FAR clause 52.227-3] which obligates the contractor who infringes a patent to indemnify the Government for any liability it incurs.
http://webreference.com/dev/frames/
A tutorial on using frames, copyrighted in 1996, that includes instructions on how to update one frame with a link in another.
SBC's patent was filed for in 1999.