Slashdot Mirror
Canon of Important Software IP Cases?
A not-so anonymous Anonymous Coward asks: "I'm interested in knowing some of the most significant cases that have influenced the field of software intellectual property law. As someone who is interested in pursuing patent law as a career, I'm interested in reading some of the 'big' cases to get a better idea of what issues and situations motivate and drive patent lawyers."
I'm interested in reading some of the 'big' cases to get a better idea of what issues and situations motivate and drive patent lawyers.
Money.
But you should definately check with the American Intellectual Property Law Association, they're your best bet for solid IP info (which slashdot isn't.)
One of the earliest litigations of software IP, I think; or at least one that had the largest impact. A synopsis. Even more briefly: "look-and-feel" isn't a legal term. Furthermore, you can no more protect an interface for a software application than you can "protect the operating interface to a motor vehicle."
--
$tar -xvf
I don't believe the validity of the shrink-wrap software license has ever been *thoroughly* settled.
Someone like Ashton-Tate did win a fairly definitive lawsuit granting copywrite protection to a program's look and feed.
"Eve of Destruction", it's not just for old hippies anymore...
This article seems to be at least somewhat interesting, but here is a guide to software IP. HTH
It overturned a previous case Diamond v. Diehr where algorithms, as an application of math, were found to be "natural law" and unprotected by patent law.
You tell me how "whilst" differs from "while," and I'll stop calling you a pretentious jackass.
Don't forget Apple's frivolous lawsuits against other companies, which, like Apple, copied the Xerox Smalltalk GUI.
You are certainly going down the right path in thinking about the "big picture" of the legal field in which you want to practice. However, I'd offer to caveats/suggestions:
(1) Don't be mislead into thinking that your practice will usually involve issues of the magnitude of those in the "leading" cases. Those cases are leading cases becuase they are unusual, and because they are watershed cases that totally rearranged the legal landscape. Most litigation practice involves filling in the minute gaps left open by the big cases, if you're lucky enough to deal with big cases at all. For better or worse (probably worse) day-to-day legal practice is about details, not the big picture.
(2) You might consider taking a look at a general intellecutual property casebook (one prepared for law students). Obviously, there are many "general" IP cases that are very important in the software domain. (My copyright text, for instance, contained many software copyright cases). I'm sure that there are casebooks for Software IP too. These are a great place to start. They don't assume much background, and the cases are often condensed to include only the important bits.
IAAL (though not a Software IP lawyer).
"The dinosaurs died because they didn't have a space program." - Niven
The validity of the GNU public license. It's playing out right now. Follow it. And support it.
"Eve of Destruction", it's not just for old hippies anymore...
Yes, IAAL. I switched careers into IT a few years ago. Why? It is a long story.
First, reconsider becoming a lawyer. Consider carefully the advice of lawyers who are no longer practicing -- there are many of them. Ask them why they left the law. You might start here.
Then, if you still think that you want to study and practice law, find a law library and the intellectual property (IP) section therein. Many local bar associations have small law libraries, and law schools tend to have larger ones. The definitive work on copyright used to be Nimmer on copyright, which will provide more citations to case law than you will know what to do with. The librarian (or perhaps the lawyers and paralegals using the library) will be able to direct you to the cases cited. Nimmer probably has his counterparts in related IP fields (e.g., patents, trademarks, tradenames, and trade secrets), but I do not know the titles off hand. These counterpart books will also provide citations, both to case law and to other sources of authority, such as statutes, regulations, and treaties. If the library has such counterparts, they will probably be in the IP section of the library, along with Nimmer. The books containing the cases are often elsewhere in the library, not in the IP section.
Third, consider your choice of law school carefully. Most law schools offer only one, introductory course on IP law, but some law schools (e.g., George Mason University in Northern Virginia, near D.C.) provide several advanced courses beyond that introductory course. Having those additional courses could make a difference in determining whether you receive the job offers that you want.
Fourth, remember that most lawyers practicing patent law have a technical background, e.g., an engineering or science degree. You would probably need to have considerable technical knowledge in order to practice patent law. Sometimes, you will also need to pass the patent bar exam (cannot remember the official name of this exam) as well as the bar exam of the jurisdictions in which you wish to practice.
Last, while in law school, consider taking at least one course on federal income taxation and perhaps an additional course devoted to the taxation of property transactions (sometimes called "capital transactions"). Nearly every business transaction involving IP is certain to have important, complex tax consequences. You need to know those consequences in order to help the client plan the transaction.
A lawyer & digital forensics examiner. Also an expert on open source software (OSS).
Stac Electronics v. Microsoft
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
More generally, if you are interested in the history of proprietary software, some classics are Brian Reid's Scribe programm, which he sold to Unilogic, and which was one of the first ones to technically enforce restrictive licensing terms (via a timebomb), and Bill Gates' "Open Letter to the Hobbyists", one of the first and - for obvious reasons - most well-known documents to call people violating software copyrights "thieves". Google should find a lot on both of them, although neither event was ever dealt with in court, AFAIK.
Programming can be fun again. Film at 11.
State Street Bank & Trust Co. v. Signature Financial Group, 149 F.3d 1368 (Fed. Cir. Jul. 23, 1998) is a big one concerning the patenting of business methods. I think it also has some relevance to the world of software patents as well.
"I have a porkchop, you have a porkchop. I have a veal, you have a veal".
There are many important cases in the syllabus to a cyberlaw class taught at Boalt by Pamela Samuelson, a professor at UC Berkeley and one of the few undisputed cyberlaw luminaries. She is less well-known to the general public than, say, Lessig, but at least as well known within the field. The syllabus is here: http://www.sims.berkeley.edu/~pam/courses/cyberlaw 02/. That should keep you busy for a semester or so ;-).
+1 to the good references from Bain (on being a lawyer), Shenkerian (on Allapat), servoled (on State Street) and inana (on the Berkeley syllabus). Reading cases alone may not provide much context though. You might get a better understanding of the collision of the software & patent tribes from commentary, like Glieck and Lessig, below [1].
The difference of values between these two cultures and rulesets is profound. Glieck's piece led off: "Once the province of a nuts-and-bolts world, patents are now being applied to thoughts and ideas in cyberspace. It's a ridiculous phenomenon, and it could kill e-commerce." This is tough, frustrating turf. And if you wander into the coliseum, you need to think about who pays, and which side you will be on, and what role you will take. But it is terrifically interesting, and fun. IAAL, and an IP guy, and I like it. JBC
[1] James Glieck, Patently Absurd, in the New York Times Magazine, March 12, 2000
[http://www.nyt.com/library/magazine/home/ 200000312mag-patents.html].
Professor Larry Lessig, The Problem with Patents, The Industry Standard, April 1999
[http://www.thestandard.com/article/display/ 0,1151,4296,00.html]
and Patent Problems, The Industry Standard, January 2000
[http://www.thestanddard.com/article/display/ 0,1151,8999,00.html].
Bally/Midway Manufacturing Co had the US rights to PacMan and Ms. PacMan, and spent a considerable sum of money sueing outfits that sold knock-offs during the early 1980s.
One of my friends, Dr. Tom Defanti, was in charge of the SIGGraph conference back then, and raked in a handsome second income as an expert witness. He would compare pirate ROM disassemblies against the proprietary source and testify as to exactly how much of the PacMan code was misappropriated.
Bally/Midway won almost all of these. The court cases set precedents which are cited to this day.