Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Patents and the Penguin

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the something-to-think-about dept.

In an article entitled Patents and the Penguin, the non-partisan Alexis de Tocqueville Institute observes, "[i]t is not uncommon today for patent fights to erupt even between parties that have engaged in rigorous diligence. By contrast, open source developers and distributors do not engage in patent searches, thus, there is a real possibility we will see a major patent fight involving open source, sooner than later. The article also ominously warns: "IBM will be competing with large Linux-based developers and distributors themselves. As the deployment of Linux increases, it can be expected that IBM will be going head-to-head with its "friends" in the Linux community. It is unquestionable that the biggest irony of all will be when Big Blue resorts to using its war chest of patents against a "friend" in the Linux community." Even Homer Simpson can see this coming.

6 of 251 comments (clear)

  1. Seems Unlikely by supersnail · · Score: 4, Informative

    IBM has publicly expressed its disapproval of software patents, citing, among other things the cost of litigation.
    IBM is the owner of a vast number of patents which provide substantial revenue for the company, however, the vast majosrity of these are hardware patents, and, even here IBM has been reluctant to get involved in litigation except fot the most blatent violations.

    --
    Old COBOL programmers never die. They just code in C.
    1. Re:Seems Unlikely by khb · · Score: 5, Informative
      Humm, a very different perspective can be found at http://www.forbes.com/asap/2002/0624/044.html Where Gary Reback, famed IP attorney, says:

      My own introduction to the realities of the patent system came in the 1980s, when my client, Sun Microsystems--then a small company--was accused by IBM of patent infringement. Threatening a massive lawsuit, IBM demanded a meeting to present its claims. Fourteen IBM lawyers and their assistants, all clad in the requisite dark blue suits, crowded into the largest conference room Sun had.

      The chief blue suit orchestrated the presentation of the seven patents IBM claimed were infringed, the most prominent of which was IBM's notorious "fat lines" patent: To turn a thin line on a computer screen into a broad line, you go up and down an equal distance from the ends of the thin line and then connect the four points. You probably learned this technique for turning a line into a rectangle in seventh-grade geometry, and, doubtless, you believe it was devised by Euclid or some such 3,000-year-old thinker. Not according to the examiners of the USPTO, who awarded IBM a patent on the process. After IBM's presentation, our turn came. As the Big Blue crew looked on (without a flicker of emotion), my colleagues--all of whom had both engineering and law degrees--took to the whiteboard with markers, methodically illustrating, dissecting, and demolishing IBM's claims. We used phrases like: "You must be kidding," and "You ought to be ashamed." But the IBM team showed no emotion, save outright indifference. Confidently, we proclaimed our conclusion: Only one of the seven IBM patents would be deemed valid by a court, and no rational court would find that Sun's technology infringed even that one.

      An awkward silence ensued. The blue suits did not even confer among themselves. They just sat there, stonelike. Finally, the chief suit responded. "OK," he said, "maybe you don't infringe these seven patents. But we have 10,000 U.S. patents. Do you really want us to go back to Armonk [IBM headquarters in New York] and find seven patents you do infringe? Or do you want to make this easy and just pay us $20 million?"

      ... In corporate America, this type of shakedown is repeated weekly.

    2. Re:Seems Unlikely by Alsee · · Score: 4, Informative

      Even better - check IBM Worldwide Patent Licensing Practices:

      For products in the IT field that practice an IBM patent, the royalty rate follows the guideline of one percent of the selling price of that product. If more than one patent is practiced in a product, the maximum rate is five percent of the selling price of that product.

      GPL software is generally downloadable for $0, thus $0 royalties. I guess IBM could demand a percentage of the price of boxed software sold in stores. Oooooo, vewy vewy scawy. Real wrath-of-God stuff here guys! Fire and brimstone falling from the sky, dogs and cats living together!

      So the good-old Alexis de Tocqueville Institute has declared IBM is about to sue its Linux friends into oblivion. Riiiiiight.

      Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of FUD!

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
  2. How soon they forget.... by 44BSD · · Score: 5, Informative

    Non-partisan, you say? I think not.

  3. Re:Come again? by Doesn't_Comment_Code · · Score: 4, Informative

    Best information from Wired:

    A Microsoft spokesman confirmed that Microsoft provides funding to the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution.
    ...
    Microsoft did not respond to requests for comment on whether the company directly sponsored the debate paper. De Tocqueville Institute president Ken Brown and chairman Gregory Fossedal refused to comment on whether Microsoft sponsored the report.


    Just one more independant review - my ass.

    --

    Slashdot Syndrome: the sudden, extreme urge to correct someone in order to validate one's self.
  4. Funded by Microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Is this the same "non-partisan Alexis de Tocqueville Institute" which is funded by Microsoft? That suggested "Open Source Software allows terrorists an easy time hacking into our systems"? Or did people forget this already?

    http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/06/04/228240 &mode=thread&tid=109