|
Patent Office Orders Re-Examination of Blackboard Patent |
|
Thursday, January 25 2007 @ 08:20 PM EST
|
The US Patent and
Trademark Office today ordered re-examination of the
e-learning patent owned by Blackboard Inc. Once again, we have the Software Freedom Law Center to thank for filing the request. Their press release tells us this: 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....A re-examination of this type usually takes one or two years to
complete. Roughly 70% of re-examinations are successful in having a
patent narrowed or completely revoked. All 44 claims. Here's the press release.
**************************
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Patent Office Orders Re-Examination of Blackboard Patent
NEW YORK, January 25, 2007 -- In response to a formal request filed by
the Software Freedom Law Center (SFLC), the United States Patent and
Trademark Office (USPTO) today ordered re-examination of the
e-learning patent owned by Blackboard Inc.
SFLC, provider of pro-bono legal services to protect and advance Free
and Open Source Software, had filed the request in November on behalf
of Sakai, Moodle, and ATutor, three open source educational software
projects. 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 patent in question, "Internet-based education support system and
methods" (U.S. 6988138), grants Blackboard a monopoly on most
educational software that differentiates between the roles of teacher
and student until the year 2022. In July, Blackboard filed a lawsuit
against Desire2Learn, a competing educational software maker, alleging
infringement of its e-learning patent.
Although Desire2Learn's software is not open source, the open source
and educational software communities responded with concern to the
possibility of an additional lawsuit that targets them.
"We filed this re-examination request to help free software developers
create and distribute their original software without having to fear
being sued over this patent, a patent that should never have been
awarded in the first place," said Richard Fontana, the SFLC attorney
who filed the re-examination request. "We are now a step closer to
keeping everyone safe from this patent."
A re-examination of this type usually takes one or two years to
complete. Roughly 70% of re-examinations are successful in having a
patent narrowed or completely revoked.
Shortly after SFLC filed its request for re-examination, Desire2Learn
filed its own separate re-examination request. The USPTO has not yet
acted on that request.
About the Software Freedom Law Center
The Software Freedom Law Center -- chaired by Eben Moglen, one of the
world's leading experts on intellectual property law as applied to
software -- provides legal representation and other law-related
services to protect and advance Free and Open Source Software. The Law
Center is dedicated to assisting non-profit open source developers and
projects. For criteria on eligibility and to apply for assistance,
please contact the Law Center directly or visit the Web at
http://www.softwarefreedom.org.
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, January 25 2007 @ 08:32 PM EST |
. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, January 25 2007 @ 08:36 PM EST |
The examiner should be fired for gross incompetence. NO kidding. GROSS
INCOMPETENCE.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Thursday, January 25 2007 @ 08:50 PM EST |
Please make any links clickable.
---
You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- OT here norway declares itunes drm illegal - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, January 25 2007 @ 09:26 PM EST
- OT Thoughts on the patent issues - Authored by: giskard on Thursday, January 25 2007 @ 09:36 PM EST
- John Hancock - link to blog post - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, January 25 2007 @ 10:38 PM EST
- OT here -- Stopping SPAM -Easy way - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, January 26 2007 @ 12:05 AM EST
- The problem - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, January 26 2007 @ 12:45 AM EST
- Money and Paper - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, January 26 2007 @ 01:33 AM EST
- Stopping spam - Authored by: klog on Friday, January 26 2007 @ 03:55 AM EST
- OT here -- Stopping SPAM -Easy way - Authored by: troll on Friday, January 26 2007 @ 04:23 AM EST
- SPAM is a registered trademark of Hormel Foods, LLC - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, January 26 2007 @ 07:24 AM EST
- OT here -- Stopping SPAM -Easy way - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, January 26 2007 @ 09:29 AM EST
- The simplest solution; email == cell phone - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, January 26 2007 @ 09:57 AM EST
- Whose bank account? - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, January 26 2007 @ 10:42 AM EST
- Real solution for SPAM - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, January 26 2007 @ 07:01 PM EST
- OT here -- Stopping SPAM -Easy way - Authored by: cybervegan on Saturday, January 27 2007 @ 10:31 AM EST
- Forbes steals Creative Commons licensed photos - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, January 26 2007 @ 10:43 AM EST
- Keys to open Diebold voting machines copied and cut from photograph on Diebold's website - Authored by: Brian S. on Friday, January 26 2007 @ 11:19 AM EST
- MS rivals call Vista in Europe "illegal" - Authored by: lordshipmayhem on Friday, January 26 2007 @ 01:51 PM EST
- the encryption game - Authored by: stites on Friday, January 26 2007 @ 04:45 PM EST
- OT - Dilbert strip on Linux - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, January 26 2007 @ 05:04 PM EST
- SCOX 10K is in - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, January 26 2007 @ 05:48 PM EST
- computer hardware question - Authored by: brooker on Friday, January 26 2007 @ 08:04 PM EST
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, January 25 2007 @ 08:53 PM EST |
http://tinyurl.com/3bb7pn
(Fina
ncial Times Article)
"... Norway’s powerful consumer ombudsman ruled
that its iTunes online music store was illegal because it did not allow
downloaded songs to be played on rival technology companies’
devices."
...
"The ombudsman has set a deadline of October 1 for
the Apple to make its codes available to other technology companies so that it
abides by Norwegian law. If it fails to do so, it will be taken to court, fined
and eventually closed down."
(Sorry about the OT in the wrong place. No
OT started yet, and I didn't want to start it as an anonymous
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, January 25 2007 @ 09:29 PM EST |
Roughly 70% of re-examinations are successful in having a patent narrowed or
completely revoked.
This right here demonstrates quite well that
the patent system is fundamentally flawed, and needs a serious re-work. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, January 25 2007 @ 09:59 PM EST |
As a daily user of BlackBoard who teaches programming techniques, I fail to see
anything at all that can remotely be considered as patentable in BB.
You can upload files and messages to a central server! That surely deserves a
patent! And even email to a distribution list! Big deal!
The sooner the patent is revoked, the sooner we can get a *functional* academic
solution. People who have not used this system have no idea what a
user-unfriendly kludge the whole system is.
If there's ever an argument about why software should not be patented, BB is the
poster-boy of user-unfriendly recycled bad programming. Gee! They can put stuff
up on a screen! Surely that deserves a patent![ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, January 25 2007 @ 10:06 PM EST |
Desire2learn didn't ask for help. Help was thrust upon them because it was felt
that they didn't have the resources to properly defend themselves. Their noses
are slightly out of joint. Blackboard's nose is probably out of joint too.
Sidebar story: 'John Hancock should have read the constitution' ... I thought he
wrote it.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, January 25 2007 @ 10:58 PM EST |
I first realized it when I saw a display in a large US Post Office of some old
patents--a "quaint old technology" exhibit. One was a patent on
molding chocolate candy in the shape of animals. The date was ~1910 as I recall.
Not only was a patent on this "invention" granted, it was upheld in
court against competitors who copied the idea and made chocolates as
differently-shaped animals.
It's not just software and business methods that have flaws: US businesses and
the PTO have been playing this silly, greedy game for a long, long time. The
recent problems are simply a result of scaling up the same old circus act.
I don't know, maybe the triviality is just my perception, colored by the
availability of chocolate in any shape you can imagine. But people have been
shaping stuff like animals ever since there were people, as far as I know. It
doesn't seem like a real un-obvious concept.
I say there should be a indefinite moratorium on awarding any patents until some
genius invents the obviousness detector.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: gopherbyrd on Friday, January 26 2007 @ 01:54 AM EST |
If you find anything, point it out to help PJ get it corrected. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, January 26 2007 @ 08:29 AM EST |
Is when you smack yourself on the forehead and say; "Why didn't I think of
that?"[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Obviousness - Authored by: sgtrock on Friday, January 26 2007 @ 08:50 AM EST
- Obviousness - Authored by: tinkerghost on Friday, January 26 2007 @ 09:22 AM EST
- Obviousness - Authored by: Winter on Friday, January 26 2007 @ 09:34 AM EST
- Obviousness - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, January 26 2007 @ 10:01 AM EST
- History of paperclips - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, January 26 2007 @ 10:07 AM EST
- Obviousness - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, January 26 2007 @ 10:37 AM EST
- Obviousness - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, January 26 2007 @ 10:47 AM EST
- Obviousness - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, January 26 2007 @ 11:38 AM EST
- Obviousness - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, January 26 2007 @ 12:25 PM EST
- Obviousness - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, January 26 2007 @ 01:00 PM EST
- Obviousness Test - Authored by: Wardo on Friday, January 26 2007 @ 02:55 PM EST
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, January 26 2007 @ 02:31 PM EST |
This book has an interesting take on technology, Including patents. It uses
cases from history about who was credited with an invention and in some cases
has some interesting perspectives.
Anyhow the book is...
The Evolution of Technology, by George Basalla, Cambridge University Press, 1988
Isbn: 978-0521296816[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Wardo on Friday, January 26 2007 @ 03:04 PM EST |
For your convenience, go here and search
for patent number 6988138. I couldn't get the URL to work from the result, but
you're a step closer to the patent...
Wardo [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Patent link - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, January 26 2007 @ 07:11 PM EST
- Patent link - Authored by: Wardo on Friday, January 26 2007 @ 07:52 PM EST
- Patent link - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, January 27 2007 @ 11:37 AM EST
- Patent link - Authored by: PJ on Saturday, January 27 2007 @ 11:41 AM EST
|
Authored by: zr on Friday, January 26 2007 @ 05:58 PM EST |
If a patent is found invalid, it would make sense to place any other patents
issued by the responsible examiner on hold until these too can be investigated
for validity. Of course expecting good sense and the patent system to ever go
together has little historical precedent. --- Don't follow leaders,
watch the parkin' meters. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
|
|