IPcentral Weblog: May 2006 Archives

May 2006 Archives

(previous | next)

05.31.2006

Third World Piracy

IP Blog says: "For those who think that piracy and counterfeiting are wonderful tools for economic development . . . artists and creators in Swaziland disagree with you." The story:

IN an attempt to clamp down on piracy, top gospel musician Pastor Elias Shongwe of Shongwe and Khuphuka Saved Group yesterday embarked on a lone crusade and seized fake CDs and cassettes from street vendors. . . . Piracy is bad practice and slowly but surely killing music,” Shongwe said, adding that the creativity of all the people involved is being taken for granted. He said the worst part of this was that most people in the music industry lived and breathed music. This means if the projects they worked on do not do well in the market, their profit decreases, creating a situation whereby they have nothing to support themselves and those who depend on them.

Swaziland as a nation is in sad shape, but it will not improve by making productive activity impossible.

posted by James DeLong @ 4:47 PM | International

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly | Email a Comment | TrackBacks (0)| Post a Comment (0)

Benkler and the New World Order

I stopped by the Center for American Progress this morning to hear Yale Law Professor Yochai Benkler give a speech based on his book The Wealth of Networks. I'm about halfway through the book. Usually I'm a pretty fast reader (a skill I developed as a reporter) but this one is taking me awhile because I keep putting it down out of frustration. I don't particularly care for writers who cite one small but legitimate anecdote, and then magnify it beyond comprehension in order to make a sweeping generalization. Well, if you think anecdotes are magnified disproportionately in a 400-page book, imagine what happens to them when the author has to condense his presentation to an hour-long discussion.

Continue reading Benkler and the New World Order . . .

posted by Patrick Ross @ 3:15 PM | Academia

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly | Email a Comment | TrackBacks (0)| Post a Comment (0)

Patents for the Business

In the recent Supreme Court eBay ruling, four Justices said in a concurring opinion that "an industry has developed in which firms use patents not for producing and selling goods but, instead, primarily for obtaining licensing fees." The Justices continued disapprovingly: "For these firms, an injunction . . . can be employed as a bargaining tool to charge exorbitant fees to companies that seek to buy licenses to practice the patent."

The concurring Justices' disdain for licensing is behind the curve of marketplace reality. Tech companies, increasingly, treat their creativity as independent assets, and leverage intellectual property (IP) assets into comprehensive business strategies. They no longer use patents only for the familiar purpose of excluding competitors from copying a product made by the patent holder.

Continue reading Patents for the Business . . .

posted by Noel Le @ 3:01 PM | Patents

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly | Email a Comment | TrackBacks (0)| Post a Comment (0)

The Sun Also Rises (Unless Someone Shoots It Down)

Speaking of intellectual property and the underdeveloped world, Meme Therapy (Life From a Science Fiction Point of View) asked SF writers "to pick a technology that exsists today that has the most underrated potential."

The most interesting answer was MT's own -- solar power:

Continue reading The Sun Also Rises (Unless Someone Shoots It Down) . . .

posted by James DeLong @ 1:45 PM | International

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly | Email a Comment | TrackBacks (0)| Post a Comment (0)

Illustrators and Orphan Works

Recently I gave lukewarm support to orphan works legislation in the House, while acknowledging it had the potential to harm small artists. Illustrators are among the most upset at the legislation, and I just received a grassroots e-mail from the Illustrators Partnership:

Continue reading Illustrators and Orphan Works . . .

posted by Patrick Ross @ 12:20 PM | Access: Commons, Fair Use, Orphan Works, Public Domain

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly | Email a Comment | TrackBacks (0)| Post a Comment (0)

Tree Frog Controversy Rages On: Comments and Responses

A couple thoughtful comments on my "tree frog" post yesterday. From Dennis Hamilton:

Iinteresting.
I think the objection is specifically to foreign patents on natural products.

The easy example is a US company telling Asian farmers that they can't continue to grow seed crops for a local staple because there is a US patent on that plant and cultivating fertile ones found in nature is an alleged infringement. I don't know how apocryphal the story is, but it is something that would certainly piss me off if I was a local and its government.

Without more details of the tree-frog case, it is hard to know whether and where that crosses the line. If foreign patents are used to penalize a traditional medicinal use as an infringement, I think we are in exactly the same case.

I'm not sure about the theft angle, unless a company's people start smuggling tree frogs. As for tit-for-tat, that sounds like a good idea.Have local researchers patent the dickens out of all the local folk medicine and uses of critters from native habitats. Protect indigenous use. Cross-license for favorable availability of non-native biologicals and pharmaceuticals. Form cartels. By all means.

In-so-far as the theory of bio-piracy is a defensive response to overbroad foreign patents being used to attack locals from doing what they have done for generations, it sounds perfectly reasonable to me. But my understanding

Continue reading Tree Frog Controversy Rages On: Comments and Responses . . .

posted by Solveig Singleton @ 10:56 AM | Comments from Readers , International , Pharma

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly | Email a Comment | TrackBacks (0)| Post a Comment (0)

A Foray Into Trademark Law--the "Got Milk" wars

Last year I bought a top for breastfeeding at a Mimi Maternity store, a black tank top with the "got milk!" logo. Mimi Maternity is still selling the tank tops, at a hefty $30 a pop. There is a thriving market for used nursing tops on eBay. My stint as a practicing mammal being over, I posted my top on eBay to resell it. It attracted a lot of bidders.

Today the auction was pulled as a trademark violation along with all the others. "Got Milk" tank tops have vanished from eBay as if they never were. I am curious, surely Mimi Maternity is producing the tops under a license from the Milk Board? Otherwise one thinks they would have gotten themselves sued by now. In which case does the license prohibit resale? If so, it is supposed to bind me? Privity! Privity! The top then would surely need a special label... : ) Does anyone have any experience with this? Drop me a note... I'm interested in pursuing this dispute, to see what knowledge may be gleaned from the experience.

An update: Apparently Mimi Maternity does NOT have a license. Interesting. I must look up to see if there has been litigation.

posted by Solveig Singleton @ 9:19 AM | Counterfeit , Internet: P2P, Search Engines...

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly | Email a Comment | TrackBacks (0)| Post a Comment (0)

Patent Search Software

Here is an email that just came in. Interesting idea; appraisal of the quality should be done by more competent patent heads than mine. Nor do I know what competing products are out there. (And if Patently-O and I/P Updates can't take that hint, they are pretty slow on the uptake.)

The interesting issue is the impact that the availability of such tools (depending on their quality) should have on patent legal doctrines concerning practically everything -- non-obviousness; due diligience; willfulness; injunction standards; name it.

Dear,

We are proud to announce the launch of the new Matheo Software Websites.

3 new websites, Matheo Patent, Matheo Analyzer and the corporate site, provide a gateway to our innovative software in:

- industrial property / - Espacenet and USPTO patents processing / - information retrivial and analysis / - innovation / - competitive intelligence / - technology and competitors monitoring

including:

- Complete features descriptions / - User profiles and testimonials / - Online demonstration / - Evaluation version direct / download / - Access to Online community and support / - Our local sales representative partnership program / - Our beta test program

Connect now: http://www.matheo-software.com / - http://www.matheo-patent.com / - http://www.matheo-analyzer.com

Let us know what you think !

If you have any suggestions for material you would like to see on this site, we would love to hear from you. Please send your comments to:

info@matheo-software.com

Sincerely

Jean-Marie Dou / General Manager / jmdou@matheo-software.com / +33 491 082 882

posted by James DeLong @ 8:15 AM | Patents

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly | Email a Comment | TrackBacks (0)| Post a Comment (0)

Patent Quality Index (PQI)

U. of Penn. Prof. R. Polk Wagner is overseeing the development of a Patent Quality Index designed to "provide[] information about the quality of patents (and patent applications) quickly, cheaply, and transparently."

Overview is here. The target is to have an initial program in place by early 2007.

Potential uses:

* A prospective patent applicant could use aspects of the PQI to evaluate the relative quality of the drafted application.
* The PTO could use the PQI to triage or otherwise allocate resources to patent applications depending on their PQI scores.
* Competitors could use the PQI to quickly and cheaply evaluate the quality of relevant patents in their field.
* Patent-holders could use the PQI to evaluate the quality of patents in their portfolio, identifying weak or strong examples.
* Researchers can use the PQI in aggregate to track and evaluate patent quality issues, such as overall trends, industry differences, etc.

posted by James DeLong @ 8:08 AM | Patents

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly | Email a Comment | TrackBacks (0)| Post a Comment (0)

KSR Comments

Patently-O discusses KSR and non-obviousness, such as the vexed question: If the Federal Circuit formulation of the standard is trashed, then what is the new standard? What does the Court tell the PTO to start doing?

The Comments, which include some from patent examiners, are interesting, too.

posted by James DeLong @ 7:01 AM | Patents

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly | Email a Comment | TrackBacks (0)| Post a Comment (0)

05.31.2006

EU & Microsoft

posted by James DeLong @ 6:47 AM | International

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly | Email a Comment | TrackBacks (0)| Post a Comment (0)

05.30.2006

Long Tail in Action

posted by James DeLong @ 6:32 PM | Markets: Business, Investment & Innovation

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly | Email a Comment | TrackBacks (0)| Post a Comment (0)