Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Red Hat Hit With Patent Suit Over JBoss

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the at-least-it's-not-about-perfume dept.

An anonymous reader writes "A small software company is claiming that Red Hat's JBoss open source middleware violates one of its patents and is asking a court to stop Red Hat from distributing the product. Software Tree LLC claims that JBoss infringes on its database patent for 'exchanging data and commands between an object oriented system and a relational system.' Software Tree's partners include Microsoft, and that the suit was filed in Eastern Texas, which is known as a plaintiff's paradise for patent actions."

11 of 201 comments (clear)

  1. Fishy by AKAImBatman · · Score: 5, Informative

    From the Fscking Patent:

    One problem existing in the art is that there are no systems and methods to bridge the gap between the programming paradigm used for object-oriented systems and the programming paradigm used for relational systems.

    O RLY? They honestly want us to believe that they invented O/R mapping? Then what is this ACM paper from 1996?

    Object-relational mapping by Scott Amber

    Either somebody didn't do their homework and their patent is going to fall under a weight of prior art, or they're just plain patent trolls. Given that they waited until 2009 (9 years after the patent was issued!), I'm leaning toward the latter.

    --
    Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
    1. Re:Fishy by smallfries · · Score: 4, Informative

      ObjectStore came out in 1988. The version that we used back in 1998 definitely performed this mapping for C++ code. I don't know if it counts as prior art because I can't remember how it handled the schemata for the mapping.

      --
      Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
    2. Re:Fishy by ckaminski · · Score: 5, Informative

      Disclaimer: I worked for ObjectStore for a while and for Progress (owner of ObjectStore) today.

      ObjectStore is NOT ORM. It is an OODBMS. Probably not quite what you want for prior art.

  2. Yay for selective quoting! by Slothrup · · Score: 5, Informative

    "Software Tree's partners include Microsoft, IBM, Borland, and Sun"

    Fixed that for you.

    --
    The difference between theory and practice is that, in theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
    1. Re:Yay for selective quoting! by duplicate-nickname · · Score: 4, Informative

      Good catch. On top of that, as long as a company meets a few small requirements for developing on a Windows platform, they can become a Microsoft partner. It is not some secret club that goes around suing OSS companies on behalf of Microsoft.

      --

      ÕÕ

    2. Re:Yay for selective quoting! by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 4, Informative

      What was the intention of mentioning Microsoft and leaving out those partners? Is Microsoft a business partner at all?

      It's on the company info page:

      "Software Tree is an ISV partner with Microsoft."

      Of course, all you have to do to get that status is to write software that works on Windows, and most shops that develop Windows software and sell it are registered MS ISV partners.

      Of course, the guys are also:

      "Software Tree is an IBM Solution Developer Program partner."

      "Software Tree is a technology partner with Borland."

  3. Patent mentioned in article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    6,163,776

    Link to US PTO United States Patent: 6,163,776

  4. Prior art? BO vs. Cognos by H0p313ss · · Score: 4, Informative

    "exchanging data and commands between an object oriented system and a relational system."

    This sounds familiar... hmmm.... ah.

    Business Objects' United States patent number 5,555,403 entitled "Relational Database Access System Using Semantically Dynamic Objects."

    Fight fire with fire...

    --
    XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
  5. Re:Civil Procedure Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    They can, because RedHat is selling/offering their software in that state.

  6. Re:LOL marketing speak by Fozzyuw · · Score: 4, Informative

    Really? I was thinking it was from Idiocracy. Though, they were both written and directed by Mike Judge, I don't recall "electrolytes" being used in that film.

    In Idiocracy, the future is dumb and they replaced all forms of water (except the toilet) with Gateraid(tm) like product and frequently promote it as better because it has "electrolytes". Including watering plants with it. Which happens to be destroying the crop population and no one can figure out why... except Luke Wilson, smartest man in the world. =P

    Happily bought this film for $6 for my show of support. =)

    --
    "The past was erased, the erasure was forgotten, the lie became truth." ~1984 George Orwell
  7. Re:TopLink by Ninnle+Labs,+LLC · · Score: 5, Informative
    Actually this same company already filed suit against Oracle claiming that TopLink violated their patents. http://www.setexasrecord.com/news/210664-recent-patentcopyright-infringement-cases-filed-in-u.s.-district-courts

    Software Tree claims that Oracle has infringed the '776 Patent through products including the Oracle TopLink.

    "Defendant has actual knowledge of the '776 Patent, and actual knowledge that the Oracle product known as Oracle TopLink product, and all other Oracle products that include TopLink, infringe the '776 Patent," the original complaint states.