« Fall of the American Empire |
Main
| Headlines Lie: No One Is Protected »
March 04, 2005
Abuse by the Little Guys
Posted by Dana Blankenhorn
I’ve seen it and seen it. A big company works its butt off to prove a market, and some little guy comes along claiming patent rights.
Here we go again. This time the victim is Apple Computer. A guy named Peter Chung, backed by a lawyer named Joseph Zito, claims Apple’s DRM infringes on their patent for limited sharing of files . They want 12% of everything Apple has made from iTunes.
Even the tone of their press release is, in my opinion, abusive.
Everyone knows that iTunes allows a user to play purchased music tracks to up to 5 computers, without repaying the money, under the condition that the computers are registered. The computer registration involves a process of identity verification in which a user is required to key in into the computer the correct Apple ID and password he used to purchase the song.
This is certainly a patentable technology. If iTunes does not patent it, there must be a very good reason for them not to do so- someone else has patented this.
The whole case points to what should be a major reform in the patent laws.
What would such reform consist of?
- Time limits on infringement notice.
- More money for investigating patents before they’re given.
- Limits on the scope of patents.
- An end to patents on mathematical algorithms (software) and business methods.
I’d love to hear your ideas, too. Bring ‘em on.
Comments (4)
+ TrackBacks (0) | Category: Consumer Electronics | Copyright | computer interfaces | personal
- RELATED ENTRIES
- › The Legend of Dennis Hayes
- › Evolution Changes Its Mind (Again)
- › Welcome to 1966
- › What Must Craigslist Do?
- › No Such Thing as Free WiFi
- › The Internet As A Political Issue
- › Google Images Ruled Illegal
- › Fall of Radio Shack
Dana Blankenhorn has been a business journalist for over 25 years and has covered the online world professionally since 1985. He founded the "Interactive Age Daily" for CMP Media, and has written for the Chicago Tribune, Advertising Age, and dozens of other publications over the years.
1. Robert T Childers on March 4, 2005 12:27 PM writes...
Not only must we put an end to mathematical, software and business method patents in the US we also need to ensure that they are stopped around the world. There must not be one haven for these abomonations.
Trent.
Permalink to Comment2. Brad Hutchings on March 4, 2005 03:23 PM writes...
When there is a semi-obvious enigma, best to just throw out the system, right? I have a different proposal that I've never seen discussed in the anti-patent screeds. What if enforceability of a patent relied on the patent holder taking steps to productize the idea? Once a patent is granted, the patent holder would have time frames to demonstrate that a product based on the idea in the patent was being developed and brought to market or licensed to others who would develop and bring the product to market. They would have to document such progress with the patent office, in effect publicizing how the public can benefit from the monopoly granted by the patent.
Read the press release Dana links to, then go read the patent. It applies to computer software, with a vague reference to multimedia software. My guess is that Apple's legitimate beef with this is that it doesn't once mention music or other mutltimedia content. After a cursory reading, I wonder if Amazon's one-click patent might be prior art. At any rate, it seems a bit premature to call for the end of software and business patents because some screwball is demanding 12% from Apple. Maybe the system will work and he can go back to pounding sand.
Permalink to Comment3. Richard Bennett on March 4, 2005 08:24 PM writes...
Having read the patent, I believe Apple is in the wrong here. This isn't the first time they've tried to erect a business on stolen intellectual property, of course: the Macintosh user interface was stolen from Xerox, and even this week I've seen claims that the late Jef Raskin of Apple invented it.
While I appreciate the opinion that Apple is, like, all cool and stuff, they don't *really* have the right to steal from legitimate inventors and profit by it, no matter how hard the Apple minions work their butts off to pull off the scam.
That argument, actually, is like saying I'm entitled to keep you car if I had to work real hard to steal it. Sorry, but that's not reality.
Permalink to Comment4. Dana Blankenhorn on March 6, 2005 10:31 AM writes...
In related news, an appeals court has reversed part of Eolas' $521 million patent award against Microsoft and ordered a new trial. Eolas claims Michael Doyle invented and patented the idea of plug-ins in 1994, placing them in the Viola browser. More at http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/apbiz_story.asp?category=1310&slug=Microsoft%20Eolas
Permalink to Comment