Tandberg Attempts To Patent Open Source Code

An anonymous reader writes "As if the current situation with software patents wasn't bad enough, it appears a new phenomenon is emerging: companies are watching the commit logs of open source projects for ideas to patent. In this case, Tandberg filed a patent that was step-by-step identical to an algorithm developed by the x264 project — a mere two months after the original commit. The particular algorithm is a useful performance optimization in a wide variety of video encoders, including Theora."

Comments

First to Invent

[dgatwood]

The open source project should file their own patent. Because patents in the U.S. are on a first-to-invent basis, and because they can clearly demonstrate having invented it first, their patent will effectively invalidate the other patent. Then sue the other company for violating the patent, win, and use this to fund many decades of x264 development.

Re:First to Invent

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds like a great idea. That will be $10,000 (about the bare minimum to file a patent and prosecute it through issuance).

Re:First to Invent

[wierd_w]

In an environment where everyone is "looking for _their_ share", especially in modern america (if I had a nickel for every time I heard some slob demand "his" bailout when the fed bailed out the bank and loan sector, I'd be as rich as bill gates by now.), you end up with a situation where instead of just shaking hands and working together for a common future, you have all these players trying to screw each other and everyone else with exclusivity contracts, patents, copyrights, trademarks, and all that filth.

If it is even remotely valuable, there is an impetus to patent it, so you can hoard it like troll, then demand payment for its use.

For these people/this mindset, the idea of an open commons is an anathema; Cooperation is a sign of weakness in their eyes, and "giving away" something so obviously useful is something that only suckers do. They are used to "Dog eat dog" dealings, so the idea of "We dont mind if you fork our code, as long as you comply with the GPL" is uncomfortably alien to them. They operate on the model of exclusivity, and freedom is the exact opposite of that.

Naturally, if they can simply steal what you are making, and transform it into an exclusive (such as a patent), they WILL. They are more comfortable with exclusives that they own (legitimately or not, it doesn't matter) than they are with shared commodities that they do not. Why do you think there is such a push away from an open internet and toward a tiered one where everyone pays and charges tolls to route traffic by these people? Exclusivity. "Pay me or else."

For what it's worth, I agree with you-- Not everything should be patented, not everything should be lorded over by some troll with a sense of entitlement, and not everything should be divvied up and spoiled for profit. Sadly, as the saying goes, "Money talks, and bullshit walks". It would seem that the people stealing FOSS innovations like this feel the GPL is "bullshit", as evidenced by their actions. (Personally, I think the idea of the thing scares them. If FOSS groups started amassing patent portfolios, they would cry foul with every regulator you could think of.)

Re:First to Invent

[Elijah Lynn]

Sounds like a great idea. That will be $10,000 (about the bare minimum to file a patent and prosecute it through issuance).

Something that is much easier and much cheaper for open source projects/idea to do is to submit a Defensive Publication, I talked with Tom Tyson of the Open Invention Network (http://www.openinventionnetwork.com/) a while ago and he explained the beauty of Defensive Publications. Basically the patent offices scour defensive publications prior to issuing a patent and if they find anything then the patent gets rejected. Therefore making it unable to patent by anyone else. These are easy to write up and their lawyers review them and submit them. I will be submitting many of my idea this way so nobody can claim patents on them, it is free. The website is http://www.defensivepublications.org/

Re:Serious Accusation - Got Proof?

[Rogerborg]

You know how you ghouls are always "Consult a lawyer before doing anything!!!!ELEVEN!!!" ?

If you read the patent claim and compare it to the published assembly, it's identical.

Oh, you don't speak assembly? Then consult a coder before spouting off your Class A Federal Alpha Constitutional wankspeak.

Re:Ok im asking again, where are those fools

[unity100]

actually to the contrary, in this case you have no possibility of competing. they have a larger capital to buy stuff, larger capital to sue you, larger capital to pre-patent everything conceivable ahead of you.

at this state, we are at the dawn of intellectual feudalism age. in such an age, there cant be any small companies or inventors. anyone would have to be subservient to whomever has the biggest capital.

the parallels in between the current situation, and the early middle ages in which feudalism has formed, are uncanny.