Fallout From Japanese Patent On Help Icon

MeridianOnTheLake writes "The Tokyo District Court has ordered the destruction of Ichitaro, a software product that is the only serious competitor in Japan to Microsoft Word, and has been on sale since 1985. The ruling is based on the claim of a competitor, Matsushita, that the use of a help icon to invoke a help function infinges on one of their patents. "We are a global enterprise and we are just following international practice to enforce our IP rights," Kitadeya (Matsushita) said." Here's more on the story, as covered by Bloomberg and The Japan Times.

Comments

It's not the thing, it's the method

[Dancin_Santa]

If Ichitaro would have just used the standard Microsoft (that's the software platform they target) context-sensitive help, none of this would be an issue.

Instead, they hired on an ex-Matsushita employee and he went on to use the Matsushita patented method for the help system. So they sued, as is their right.

This is not a problem with the patent system. However what it does bring up is "How much knowledge can you take away from your previous employer, even if all that knowledge is just in your head?" As we gain ground in technology, such to the point that Johnny Bnemonic-style memory expansion is possible, how can patent holders and companies owning "trade secret" IP be protected from information pirates?

Re:It's not the thing, it's the method

[Anonymous Coward]

If Ichitaro would have just used the standard Microsoft (that's the software platform they target) context-sensitive help, none of this would be an issue.

It seems a little too convenient that the company being sued is Microsoft's only serious competitor.

Does anyone else smell the hand of Bill Gates, or is it just me?

Re:It's not the thing, it's the method

[jd]

IIRC, it depends a lot on how obvious the method is (you're not supposed to be able to patent things that are trivial), whether the solution is in the public domain (you can't patent public knowledge) and when the patent was filed with respect to the alledged copy.

It also depends some on the reason why the patent infringement is coming up now. For example, since the company affected is a competitor to Microsoft, did Microsoft pay Matsushita to launch the lawsuit? IANAL, but there may be a case for appeal, if it turns out that the lawsuit was in bad faith, and/or is an attempt by Microsoft to gain further control of the Japanese office market by paying Matsushita to eliminate the only serious competitor.

In general, the courts tend to frown on being used subversively as the "enforcers" of a protection racket.

I'm not saying that this is what is happening. What I am saying is that there are enough suspicious circumstances to warrant a closer look at this, and that the Japanese courts might be persuadable that this isn't as innocent as it appears.

As for the "what you know" problem - since any work "could" be tainted by any prior experience, it would be impossible for any technical person to be re-hired within the lifetime of any patent they may have come into contact with. AT&T argued a similar line, against the BSDers, arguing that since they'd come into contact with AT&T proprietary knowledge, they were tainted and therefore so was any/all their subsequent work.

This is one reason I don't agree with the existing concept of IP. Nobody could ever have more than one job, and once they quit/leave/get sacked, they could NEVER be re-employed. IMHO, that is not protecting anybody and is clearly excessive.

Therefore, it should not be possible to "taint" work with IP, merely by being exposed to it. There has to be a far more material breach, and one which isn't protected against IP claims in some other way (such as being obvious, public domain, etc).

Re:It's not the thing, it's the method

[shanen]

Gee, the whole topic makes me nostalgic. I was a pretty heavy user of Ichitaro many years ago. I think I started with Version 3, and I definitely remembering having Version 6 on a machine around 1995. However Word was already becoming pretty dominant in the market by then, and I really don't think they would care enough about JustSystems as competition to get involved in this. I think it's just sort of law of the jungle stuff ("jyaku niku kyo shoku" (weak meat strong eat) in Japanese), and probably with some revenge for seasoning. The guy in my office says they're going to appeal, so it's not yet over--but almost.

Not sure if anyone interested in the trivia, but here's a bit just in case... The old Ichitaro actually had a lot of elements copied from ancient WordStar, but the interface got pretty much tortured to death when they were trying to add a Windows-style menu system. I'm pretty sure some versions had both interfaces. They had originally been almost completely dominant in the software word processor market, but that was back when NEC had the lock on proprietary Japanese hardware. Their foundation was their Japanese input system, which was still better than Microsoft's for many years. That was called ATOK, and was also sold separately for use as an IME replacement. They tried to expand into integrated office suites about the same time Lotus was getting beaten out of that market. Later on they tried to become an ISP with a system called JustNet, but I think they eventually sold it to someone else. (But I did see a few of their boxes in a large computer store just this weekend, when I was visiting Akihabara.)

Re:It's not the thing, it's the method

[sharok]

In all honesty, given that His Billness's OS is on at least 90% of personal computers in the world, it follows that 90% of whatever happens can be traced back to him, either by intent or by chance.

Re:It's not the thing, it's the method

[HanB]

It would be acceptable if the court could order the help function to be replaced. But ordering the whole product to be destroyed is the real power of patents in the hands of big companies.

Admitted, a small company can sue a big company and make a lot of bucks from it, but a big company can handle that. On the other hand a big company can crush it's compatitors.

In this case it's even worse, a big company orders a small company to do the dirty work for them.

I bet they threatened them with a patent-lawsuit.

zerg

[Lord Omlette]

Open Source the offending software, then let them try to take down SourceForge!

Re:For those wondering...

[Anonymous Coward]

I forgot to mention.... Matsushita DID offer Just System the right to purchase a patent license to continue using the help feature. The price I am not aware of, but Just System pretty much told Matsushita to shove it.

That is so insane...

[TheOnlyJuztyn]

Is this kind of petty moneymaking really what the fathers of patent law intended? When is a court going to take a stand on this crap? We're talking about the legal ownership of common ideas here. I can see some places where it is useful, like velcro and the shape of a coke bottle, where the idea is actually unique - but being able to patent the use of an ICON to access a HELP page? - Both very common computer terms stiched together by an uninspiring and unoriginal idea. What's next, someone patenting the use of a 'Submit button' to pass data through a form? Whoops, slashdot's gotta a cease and desist notice knocking.

Where do we draw the line?

Re:some interesting ideas on patent law

[Mr. Slippery]

"...the associations that collect royalties for musical performances and pay these to the composers."...

Because what we really need is another RIAA!

RIAA != ASCAP/BMI/SESAC.

RIAA are evil bastards who exploit musicians, degrade the art of music, and will be first against the wall when the revolution comes.

ASCAP et. al, while flawed in execution, are based on a good idea: songwriters should get a cut when someone makes money off a song they wrote. If I sell a CD with a cover of "Tangled Up in Blue", or play it at a gig at my local tavern, these are the guys who make sure Dylan gets his nickel out of the profits. (Google for "songwriter royalties performance mechanical".) However - and this is key - if I'm playing for fun not profit, Bob doesn't get a penny.

For years I've been suggesting that royalties for copying recordings ought to work the same way - share for free, but if you're selling the artist gets a cut.

cross licensing

[jeif1k]

Microsoft probably has a patent cross-licensing agreement with Matsushita, or at least they may have already forged an agreement (maybe as part of another deal). It actually stands to reason that Microsoft initiated all of this.

Re:Prior Art?

[jeif1k]

It was filed in 1989, which is what counts. The fact that it floated around in the patent system until issue in 1998 shows how good the company is at playing the system.

Publicly disgrace company

[tod_miller]

Matsushita, which sells its products under the Panasonic brand

I certainly won't be buying anything Panasonic for a long while. I hope that by making it a public disgrace for a company to endanger 78% of the installed office environments in Japan (think what loss of productivity would occur if they spread enough FUD to make those people buy thier product, and install it, and learn it?).

Japan has a very honourable work ethic in terms of employee/employer relations, they value the company, so the political fall out over this may yet to come.

Erm

[jb.hl.com]

Can we please know when the patent was applied for, so we can see if there's any prior art?

I would have thought that in 1985 Apple would have already had a help icon on their Macs...

Screenshots

[randalx]

The dispute centered on the way that a help function works in the Ichitaro and Hanako software. The way the software presents information violates Matsushita patent number 2,803,236...

Can anybody get a screenshot of what exactly they are arguing over since it's not just an icon?

What would happen if...

[fireman sam]

The "icon" used was in fact the ISO or SI (or whatever) standard glyph for "information". You know the one, the white lower case 'i' on a blue background. It isn't help, it is information. Therefore it isn't a help button.

Prior art?

[Handpaper]

It looks like there's thirteen years worth of prior art here:

Justsystem started selling Ichitaro in August 1985

Matsushita patent number 2,803,236, which was registered with the Japanese patent office in 1998

Note the article says 'registered' not 'granted', so it would appear that 1998 was the start of the patent process, which makes a submarine patent look unlikely.
It is possible, however, that the problematic help system was added after 1998, though the article makes no mention of this.

If somebody has access to the court ruling and can provide a translation, I'm sure things will become a lot clearer.