Slashdot Mirror
US Patent Office To Re-Examine Blackboard Patent
Mr_5tein writes "Groklaw is reporting that the US Patent and Trademark Office has just ordered a re-examination of the e-learning patent owned by Blackboard Inc, thanks to a filing by the Software Freedom Law Center. SFLC's press release states, 'The Patent Office found that prior art cited in SFLC's request raises "a substantial new question of patentability" regarding all 44 claims of Blackboard's patent...' The SFLC explains that though such re-examinations may take a couple of years to complete, approximately '70% of re-examinations are successful in having a patent narrowed or completely revoked.'"
Its good that there are agencies out there that look for bad patents and bring them to the gov't's attention, but it would be much better if the patent clerks did a better job screening the patents, or these challenges came during the comment period.
http://bgcommonsense.blogspot.com
I read the title and I thought: "Hey, has someone patented the blackboard? Cool!"
-- Cheers!
I develop educational software myself, so I'm very pleased with this. Two points seem to be especially interesting:
memomo: free web based language trainer DE-EN-ES-FR-IT
For years, the patent office was granting patents based upon adding the words "Internet based" to what was otherwise an unoriginal idea.
...wait for it.... "digital".
Education? Not new.
"But its on the Internet". Hey! That's new!
There are still literally thousands of patents floating around that were based on this mindless logic, and it still happens today.
Just last week, Microsoft patented a "digital means of recording one's life history". One might call it a diary -- or a time capsule,
but no this was something new. Why? Because its
Sigh.
------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
I guess it would be pretty difficult for them to get over the prior art issue, considering they started in 1997. Maybe they're contending that all that other elearning before they even existed wasn't REAL elearning.
;)
As I work for a company that would have been negatively affected by this patent, I am really glad that this is happening. We've had "prior art" elearning related to basically all of their patents since 1995/96 specifically in a web-based format. Now watch the stock ticker on their site go zooming down once this actually goes through.
I think that, like frivilous lawsuits, frivilous patents should have equally painful repercussions. Blackboard should have to pay anyone showing reasonable claim to prior art a penalty for this
It's interesting that government dollars--uh, our dollars--are used to spend "years" to determine if a commercial interest may continue to make money from this patent.
Go captialism?
The free exchange of information should be free and open to all without regard to class, race, religion, etc.
- Just my $0.02, take with a grain of salt, your mileage may vary.
This might explain why the USPTO shows so little interest in making sure that the patents it awards are of high quality. For the USPTO it makes absolutely no economic sense to it spend more time on individual patents than the absolute minimum.
After all, there is this appeal procedure right? So if people have objections to patents we issue they can use that. In the mean time, when you're paid by the item it makes absolutely no sense to spend too much time perfecting each item you make. And if people out there don't like a patent we issue, then they can pay us a fee for a review procedure.
Simple economics really. That's what management is all about, right?
Anyone knows how much work is involved in checking up if those claims are valid or not? I seem to be underestimating the task. I would have expected that this was something that could be handed off to an intern to just run off a checklist: yes|no
"Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
To higher ed faculty who are unaware, Available is a modern day web appication, free alternative to BB, et al.
The Patent seen at Google
Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity
I guess its back to the old drawing board...
As an LMS tech at a community college, I'm very hopeful that this will be reversed. I've evaluated several LMS's because we are currently near the end of our contract with our current one, and there's really nothing that Blackboard does that is very different than what everybody else offers. Right now, we're looking into Moodle and Sakai, as well as some commercial products.
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
Having VERY intimate knowledge of Bb (no, NOT an employee), I can tell you for a fact they are the quintessential bullies: they may be the biggest kid on the block, but they're none too smart.
They treat a good many customers as if Bb was the customer -- they are constantly issuing demands, determining their own timelines/deadlines. For example, they've been known to contact a school and say, "hey, we're taking your server down for maintenance/updates at such-and-such time, so be ready" instead of "when's a good time to do that?". They honestly feel these schools have no other choice as far as software, but a good many of their customers are waking up to the fact that Angel et al. are superior in most - if not all - aspects.
My opinion is the folks at the top KNOW their software just doesn't stack up well against the competition and that's why they're such thugs and so vehement in this whole patent mess. They probably figure "well, if we prevail in this patent mess, we can just license it out to these other vendors, make a nice fat percentage off that, and not even bother producing our own software anymore."
A good plan I guess. Make a piece off every distance learning program and lay off almost every staff member. That would make for a hell of an ROI.
BTW, be warned: I'm following Bb's lead of patenting a concept by patenting: the wheel, the lever, gardening, internal combustion engines, electicity, underwear, English AND Spanish language, and supermodels. Definitely supermodels.
Blackboard helps to pull in resources so it's easier for education materials to get to the students and to help communication bewteen students and teachers.
It's too bad Blackboard sucks. My college switched from it to Angelhttp://ais.its.psu.edu/angel/ and the server when from having constant hiccups to being totally stable except for heavy load when peoepl schedule classes or they need to upgrade parts.
Otherwise I'm glad they're reviewing it. Maybe this small step to reviewing patents will have them reexamin patnet sthat were just given out like free burgers.
In Soviet Russia, dots slash you!
Typically tens (or even hundreds) of thousands of dollars in attorney fees for the patent owner and hundreds of man hours for some of the most experienced patent examiners at the USPTO. A reexamination is a complex legal proceeding that involves a lot more than a checklist. Reexaminations can easily last 10-15 years, so this decision doesn't really mean anything yet.
A good example is the patent from the Blackberry (NTP v. RIM) suit. RIM settled for over $600 million dollars but NTP's patent is still in reexamination (as it has been for several years now). NTP is even threatening others (Palm) with the patent while it is in rexam.
The benefit to public when the USPTO grants a reexamination is that courts will often stay (put on hold) a patent infringement suit until the reexamination is concluded.
There was no reason for the parent post to be http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=218926&cid=177 69878 modded down
It hasn't gone unnoticed that the people who bitterly wined about it couldn't make a counter claim, why? Because they know that if they claim that it's "property", or that it "protects" inventors, or that it "incentivizes" high cost R&D, they would be called on their BS. So their only option left was to wine and attack me personally. Well, fine. I take it as a compliment, but the parent point is still valid and deserves to be recognized as such.
Hypocrite. Fine, then show me that I'm wrong when I said that patents stopped the generic manufacture of AIDS drugs in Africa and the death of a million people. Show me that I'm wrong when I said that patents held back airbags and antilock brakes in cars for 20 years while millions died. Show me that I'm wrong when I said that patents punish collaberation and so drive up R&D costs, because companies don't want competitors to get a patent that can be used to lock them out. Well, you didn't.
I find that to be a thoroughly depressing response, see reply to the post above yours. Yeah, you're wrong allright.
The abuse of patents has become so widespread that it is time to drop the concept. If someone can implement a product or service, good for them. If they can sell that product or service and provide their customers to satisfaction, great. But when some coat tailing company that filed a patent 3 years ago comes stomping in to collect on something they did nothing to produce, market, and support this is just wrong. Costs of producing anything will continue to skyrocket because of this behavior. So why bother? If I knew someone was going to come out of the woodwork to collect, I wouldn't bother, and the time necessary to investigate all potential patents that might infringe is too costly. Look at the video game industry, its amazing how they have been burned by this kind of activity. Patents are wrong and are against all tenents of capital economies.
Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
I apoligize then, I didn't mean to come off like that. It's just that I feel the same way, people say ... it's a property ... it's a property ... it's a property ... it's an incentive .... it's an incentive ... it's an incentive ... it's protection ... it's protection ... it's protection ... it's protection ....
I wasn't trying to be rude, but I just get so sick and tired of it.
Straw man argument. He never said you were wrong, he only said your way of writing is very close to propaganda.
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
I'd be happy to go hunting for evidence of such on the same day you show me a reasonable argument that any of the advances you describe would have been researched and developed in a country without strong patent protections. The fact that they weren't tends to weigh in against you, though, so I wouldn't spend a whole lot of time on it if I were you. Patents aren't "tools of violence" any more than the automobiles you mention are "tools of violence." There are no "tools of violence" there are only tools, and tools have no moral dimension. If they are used well or ill they remain only tools, and continue to have no moral dimension. You are confusing the tool with its use either because you are ignorant of the difference between the two or unaware of how critical to your "argument" obliterating such a difference is. It's all well and good to criticize the uses to which patents have been put. I would be suspicious of the intellectual credentials of anyone discussing the subject who did not do so. Dumping on the institution of patents qua patents, however, bespeaks either a willingness to deceive the reader (and/or yourself) or a deep-seated ignorance of nature of the issue.
-- The Sage does nothing, and nothing is left undone. --Lao Tzu
Technically you're both correct, but in practice this is crazy. Patents are murderous to the point that they are genocidial and people are going around calling them a protection, a property, and an incentive. In that context, how could anyone complain that I sound like I'm spewing propaganda! Fine, I came off wrong, but shit - but this is nothing like the tidle wave of "incentive,protection,property" crap I get rammed down my throat on a regular basis. I'm sorry, but maybe someone needs to be in other peoples face about it. Does anyone think the patent situation is going to get better? Well, when patents come knocking on your door to kick you ass, I doubt you'll think I "propagandized" enough.
They tricked my mother into getting hooked on a patented drug (fosimax) that killed her normal bone growing mechanisim, so now she needs them to stay alive and they are making my life at work and career a fucking hell. Maybe I have a right to be an asshole.
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/77 4168.cms
India is kicking our ass, and have no patents on pharmacuticals at all (but they do on manufacturing process). Also, they are a tool of violence, just like slavery is. Sure some masters are nice to their slaves, and some people are reasonable about patetns, but that's bullshit. You are presuming that people have a right to that kind of control to begin with. I wouldn't be such a hard ass on patetns if I hadn't lived it.
I see your point, but there's more to it than just the cost of the software. I am at a small liberal arts school, and I thought having Moodle was a no-brainer. Free software! There's more to it than that though. A few more things to consider: Through a consotium of small regional colleges, we get a price break on BB. BB sets the thing up and runs it on their hardware. BB has all sorts of training options for your faculty/staff. Face it, most faculty are not going to figure this stuff out on their own, they want it served up to them. This is the big one: BB fields all technical support calls. So when John Student can't seem to log on, BB support takes care of all that, not your overstretched IT workers at the small college. Our limited IT staff could easily spend half their days (particularly at the beginning of the semester) fielding support calls that could involve almost any computer related issue that might wind up affecting someone's ability to log on (think internet access, viruses, etc.). In the end, as much as I hated to admit it, the student support costs alone made BB a no-brainer. On the other hand, at a larger school that was committed to online learning, I would think that hiring your own people just for Moodle might be economically justifiable. BB was not cheap when we had it, and our prices went up significantly after their merger with WebCT. Our consortium has now switched to Sakai.
1) India is not kicking our ass. India is providing services for us. Regardless, India is not creating any of the advances you used as examples, but rather manufacturing the products of them. Similarly, I have to question the validity of your claim if the best evidence you can find to link is a two-year-old 2 para speculative bit from the Times of India (which isn't exactly known to be impartial where India vs the world issues are concerned). Where are the more recent articles about this actually coming to pass? I suppose they were somehow blocked from being written by patents on business journalism processes?
2) You cannot invalidate my argument by painting it with slavery. You can probably fool stupid people with that rhetorical technique, but no rational person will fall for it. You'll need to do better. Patents, just for one, are legal. Slavery is not. The fact that slavery was, at one time, legal, didn't change the fact that it violated the essential human rights of the persons subjected to it. I have a hard time swallowing the idea that patents should be regarded in the same ballpark, and so will anyone else with 2 brain cells to rub together.
3) People have a right to the control over their creations offered by patents because such is the law. If you don't like living in a society founded on the supremacy of the law, I can suggest any number of countries in the 3rd world where you can enjoy relief from this burdensome practice.
Understand, I'm not arguing that the patent process is perfect (as I stated previously, you would have to be feeble-minded in order to fail to see that it is flawed) only that attacking patents themselves is intellectually dishonest and/or ignorant. I don't really care what you "lived." In my experience, people always have reasons why some big thing held them back from succeeding. That big thing is rarely, if ever, their own inadequacies or failure to properly prepare for the realities of the world in which they were working. Patent law, sir, is a part of that world. You're free to dislike it. You're free to hate it or rail against it as you wish. I'm free to rebut your arguments and will continue to do so as long as you persist in making such silly ones.
-- The Sage does nothing, and nothing is left undone. --Lao Tzu
Look it's not only the case in India, but in Germany before they had patents (aspirin), and in Italy before they had patents. And Ironically, even the US, before we started to respect European patents. It is well documented. The decline of medical R&D after patents were implemented is also well documented. You're the one that is ignorant, where's your prof otherwise! You're the one who wants to impose these massive restrictions on what people can share and copy. The burden of proof is on you pal.
.... "bullshit"! Those millions in Africa who die of AIDS while companies were forbidden to sell generics
..."
"You cannot invalidate my argument by painting it with slavery"
Oh yes I can. The "it's the law" argument is bullshit. The "it's a property" argument is bullshit. The "it's an incentive" argument is bullshit. The "it's behind the great wealth of US industry and commerce" is bullshit. So what other arguments do you have left
(that were legal in India BTW) absolutely had their rights violated. Patents are not in the same ballpark, they are worse.
"People have a right to the control over their creations offered by patents
Bullshit. Not even the creators of patent saw it as a basic right, that's why they have expiration date (for now). People have a right to use knowledge that they gain freely without fraud or coercion and to use that knowledge without suffering coercion.
"Understand, I'm not arguing that the patent process is perfect "
Like slavery, people could see all the shit, but couldn't bring themselves to be truthful. Sad souls indeed.
The patent system is yet another case where old laws don't sufficiently extend to current technology. Patents were originally targeted at physical inventions. That realm moves at a much slower pace than computer software. I think the U.S. would be much better off without software patents allowed at all. But assuming there are here to stay for a long time, other reforms that would greatly cut down on the nonsense patents would be:
- Greatly reduce the duration of software patents. If they only lasted 5 years or less, there'd be somewhat less interest in filing for them.
- Issue them only to individuals, not corporations. This is sort of the case right now as individual names are always listed on patents. But corporations then take ownership of them. The rights should be permanently stuck to the person(s) it was issued to.
- Make them non-transferrable. If corporations want to amass a huge patent portfolio, they better keep those individual patent owners happily employed.
- Have Congress create better rules for handling patent disputes. Get the endless litigation out of our court system. Put the power back in the hands of the inventors and prevent bullying of those who don't have large resources for legal defense.
Obviously a lot of the problems with the patent system are a reflection of problems in the U.S. legal system, and the expenses it incurs, so improving patents requires much broader legislative work.
Table-ized A.I.