User: thedocwat

Demise of Rambus -- more on Patents

On: Rambus Found Guilty of Fraud

M-CAM's Patently Obvious report on Rambus discusses a lot of the patent issues going on with Rambus and their intellectual property position (or lack thereof):

http://www.m-cam.com/patentlyobvious/20010223_ramb us.pdf

An interesting thing is that this report was issued back on February 23rd. Rather interesting reading it now, in light of what has happened recently.

M-CAM also has other reports that they have posted (for free) on high profile patent cases. There's a list at:

http://www.m-cam.com/patentlyobvious/contents.html

Companies discussed include: IBM, Qualcomm, Amazon.com, Microsoft, Priceline.com, and British Telecom.

Some of these reports are favorable for the companies/patents involved. However, a lot of them question the validity of specific patents, and suggest potental prior art problems which could be used to challenge the patents involved.

Re:A $10,000 prize is chump-change in cost

On: Amazon 1-Click Patent Shenanigans Continue

Excellent point. These companies are paying their lawyers tremendous amounts of cash to handle this patent suit.

Bounty Quest's Timing

On: Amazon 1-Click Patent Shenanigans Continue

I find it terribly interesting to look at the timing of this whole thing.

On March 2, 2001 a company called MCAM issues an analysis on the Amazon 1-click patent. The report makes available several instances of prior art -- exactly the stuff Bounty Quest is looking for.

A week later, Bounty Quest makes its announcement. There is prior art, but nobody submitted it. (Right) ;-)

On March 14, 2001 Internetnews.com reports on this whole fiasco and draws into question some of the motives behind Bounty Quest.

Interesting this comes out now

On: One-Click Reprise

I find it very interesting that Bountyquest posts this a week after M-CAM publically posted it's report on the '411 patent.

Coincidence?