(didn’t know where to post, but here goes)
Great, another silly patent just got enforced
http://www.democratandchronicle.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20041002/BUSINESS/410020333/1001
Basically Kodak can now sue anyone that violates this patents:
[quote]The patents describe a method by which a program can “ask for help” from another application to carry out certain computer-oriented functions. That’s generally similar to the way Java operates, according to Kodak and other experts.
[/quote]
Dumb ass patents…and greedy suits
The patents describe a method by which a program can “ask for help” from another application to carry out certain computer-oriented functions.
That’s like a batch file (or shell script), which starts one or more external programms to do some stuff. Wow. It’s like… the innovation… it has never been done before… :
Never buy anything from:
Creative
Kodak new
Is there anything other than drivers which doesn’t “ask for help” from some other bit of software?
Someone mentioned this on another forum…
What’s bout .net then? They can sue Microsoft, too.
Also:
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20041003041632172
I think the patents refer to object registries so perhaps the rmi stuff is the source of contention. I guess COBRA would be a problem as well then.
…and DCOM. And hell, why not even HTTP index pages?
Cas
Since the case was tried in Rochester (guess where Kodak is based), chances of getting a fair trial were between nil and nothing. Unfortunately this is eventually going to bite us all in the arse. As more and more software gets litigated, developing software will become more and more expensive, and in the end it means less money for thee and me.
I personally hope 2 things happen:
Sun wins in appeal. Not sure how the US legal system works, but I’ve got a vague feeling an appeal in a higher court won’t be held in the same city as the original trial (here’s hoping).
There is eventually industry backlash against companies that operate by litigation.
Actually was thinking about this the other day. What we need is a number of companies (large & small) to donate their patent portfolios (and money) to a non-profit organisation. Any company that is sued over patents can apply to the organisation (in doing so, must donate at least a percentage of their own patent portfolio) for protection. The org then searches for a patent which the suing company is infringing upon, and then either negotiates or sues that company into non-existence.
No idea if it would work in reality (probably not). In any case, chance of it happening? About the same probability of getting a fair trial in Rochester.
An organisation that contests bogus software patents:
http://www.eff.org
This is not too dissimilar to the ‘Eolas’ case last year (it was claimed they had patented anything that runs on a web page)
There is a lot of criticism regarding the ease that the US patent office gives software patents, but recently they have been overturning a LOT of them on appeal (like the Eolas one, and recently Microsoft for the FAT filesystem).
Its a type of business practice where you try to get ‘licensing’ for your ‘patent’, to basically screw big companies for money. Sun went into negotiations, which is the nice way to get them to be reasonable about the whole thing. It sounds like Kodak were gunning for a big pot of cash (maybe not doing so well in the camera biz anymore now everyones digital & not buying film) and rejected Suns offer (whatever it was).
Seeing as that failed, Sun will probably now aim to shoot down the patent as being ridiculous, prior art existed (CORBA etc.) and so on, thus killing Kodaks golden goose, much the same way as MS knocked down Eolas. Eventually companies will start to realise that this tactic doesn’t pay off now the US patent office is starting to get its act together.
The main thing for small businesses when dealing with these spurious patent claims is if you sign up to pay the ‘license’, you must get a refund clause added for when (not if) the software patent gets overruled.
[quote]…and DCOM. And hell, why not even HTTP index pages?
Cas
[/quote]
… and surely web services, which may screw over every company who develops them and the technology which is built upon the whole web services idea, .NET
Hell even applications for windows using any 3rd party code referenced by the registry (.dll’s).
I’m not sure why they specifically went Java as it seems they could sue so many companies.
Errr, heh. Software patents, eh? Tsk.
I used to work for a company that started dynamic websites before anyone else, wrote the first real application server in Europe, and managed to get a patent on CGI so broad that it basically covers any situation where a response from a server is tailored to the request. Whether or not the patent is valid, nobody knows. I know they intend to capitalise on it!
Oh, they also have a UK trademark on the phrase “Virtual Shopping Basket”…
It’s a funny old world, ain’t it? ;D
It’s a funny old world, ain’t it? ;D
Not at all.
Y’know in the worst case you would have to pay license fees for any version of Java. If that happens most of us will switch to another language.
…or they’ll remove RMI, which I think is the key patent issue at stake. But wot of C# and web services etc? The entire IT industry will be fux0red if they get away with the patent enforcement.
Which is why they won’t.
Cas
Anyone remember what Polaroid forced Kodak to do when they won a patent suit? Huge damages, plus they had to buy back many of the cameras they had sold.
In consequence, Kodak may well be minded to take everything the law allows.
Cas, well there is a little problem. The whole IT insdustry is already totally fuxx0red thanks to software patents. Any programm you write infringes hundrets of dozens of software patents… and just for the fun of it… you can never be sure if you infringe some patents or not. You would have to read all patents and interpret em in the most silly and most broad way.
Sure most of those patents are invalid in first place, but it will cost you (or your company) several hundret thousand dollars.
I’ve already seen several companys going down for that reason.
It’s one of those examples were democracy doesn’t work at all. It’s just not likely that the majority likes software patents… because everyone loses there (except lawyers and big coorporations which already build a big portfolio).
It’s just plain silly and that specific case which created software patents in first place was a mistake (and wrong interpreted by other courts).
It’s sorted now. Sun payed 92 million us dollar for the rights to use that stuff.
A sensible, but surprise, end to the conundrum.
Cas
isent it saga that own the 3d camera patent? they
where nice and said it would take to much time to
sue everyone whos ever made a 3d game so they
filed it away for a sunny day
yep sun splashed for it. they couldnt get out of it
kodak are atad harsh and someone should tell um to
chill out alittle bit. so whos next? Apple would be
massively in for the chop with OSX. and that nifty little
networking rondevus (however u spell it) thing…
i hope Java can weather this one- having to mess
around with M$ to then get pocked by kodak- M$ cash
easy come easy go a SUN
Kodak will have to sue M$ next, as the very same technology exists in .net.
Cas