IBM Aims to Patent Profiting off Patents - Linux

This is a discussion on IBM Aims to Patent Profiting off Patents - Linux ; Are they trying to break the system...or proving it's already broken? http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5i...ADvMEHLuvNCi0g BOSTON (AP) - IBM Corp. says it has dreamed up a new method for profiting from its vast storehouse of patents. And by the way, the company wants ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: IBM Aims to Patent Profiting off Patents

  1. IBM Aims to Patent Profiting off Patents

    Are they trying to break the system...or proving it's already broken?


    http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5i...ADvMEHLuvNCi0g

    BOSTON (AP) - IBM Corp. says it has dreamed up a new method for
    profiting from its vast storehouse of patents. And by the way, the
    company wants to patent the idea.

    Beyond the circularity of the concept, IBM's application is notable
    because the company - the world's top patent holder - has been
    campaigning to improve the quality of patent filings and reduce so-
    called "business method" patents.

    "I think this is absolutely a business method patent," said Barbara
    Fiacco, a patent attorney with Foley Hoag LLP.

    The new patent application was initially filed in April 2006, updated
    last April and published by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office last
    Thursday. It covers what IBM calls "a system and methods for
    extracting value from a portfolio of assets, for example a patent
    portfolio."


  2. Re: IBM Aims to Patent Profiting off Patents

    ____/ nrballard@gmail.com on Thursday 25 October 2007 12:05 : \____

    > Are they trying to break the system...or proving it's already broken?


    No, they are just IBM. They have some patent harassment history. Just like PJ,
    you just want to defend IBM here (can't blame you because your father works
    there).

    --
    ~~ Best of wishes

    Roy S. Schestowitz | "Hack to learn, don't learn to hack"
    http://Schestowitz.com | GNU/Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
    Mem: 515500k total, 444452k used, 71048k free, 680k buffers
    http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms

  3. Re: IBM Aims to Patent Profiting off Patents

    On Oct 25, 7:05 am, nrball...@gmail.com wrote:
    > Are they trying to break the system...or proving it's already broken?

    Hi Nick, good to hear from you - when are you getting married?
    Gimme a call.

    > http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5i...ADvMEHLuvNCi0g


    > BOSTON (AP) - IBM Corp. says it has dreamed up a new method for
    > profiting from its vast storehouse of patents. And by the way, the
    > company wants to patent the idea.


    It looks like an interesting concept. Keep in mind that IBM has a
    huge portfolio of defensive patents. Many other companies that have
    large patent portfolios cross-license each other's patents, including
    IBM's. This protects all of these companies from "whiplash lawyers"
    who represent "kitchen table companies" - usually someone with very
    little knowledge of the art, who thinks he has an original idea
    (because he has limited knowledge of the art) and contacts one of
    these ambulance chasers who deliberately files a minimal patent with
    minimal research - then attempts to sue large companies like
    Microsoft, IBM, HP, or Kodak for technology which they may have been
    using for years.

    Remember that patents are also cross-referenced as part of the patent
    search process. A common PC might have 5000 or more patents in force,
    and part of the cost of the PC is all of those patent royalties -
    which is usually part of the price of the chips, boards, connectors,
    and software installed. If you wanted to calculate cost for only the
    license to the patent - the royalties alone might only be worth a few
    tenths of a cent each, maybe $50 in actual patent royalties total.

    When some clown represented by a whiplash lawyer tries to sue
    Microsoft or IBM for $1 billion and the jury awards $300 million, it
    throws everything out of whack. A patent that would normally be worth
    3 cents in the common market values, is suddenly being awarded at 100
    times that price. If every other patent holder tried to demand the
    same price, you'd be paying $500,000 for a PC.

    What about smaller companies that don't have huge patent portfolios?
    They would like to have an "umbrella" similar to IBM's, but don't have
    the portfolio to make the trade with all of the other companies.
    Could patent portfolios be brokered like hedge funds? Patent
    portfolio owners pool their patents and then have offer the package as
    a "broker" for the full portfolio that covers hundreds of thousands of
    patents. Rather than having to figure out which patents you need, you
    pay a royalty of $10 per PC for the "umbrella" and you can be
    protected from any lawsuits that could be nullified by pointing out
    the license to the umbrella.

    Ironically, the biggest winner here could be Linux distributors and
    OSS distributors and OSS users. By consolidating a huge portfolio and
    then charging a nominal fee - roughly the equivalent of 1 hour's pay
    at median wage, you can avoid months worth of costs and hassles
    related to patent issues not to mention legal costs that could include
    a settlement for 10% of your remaining lifetime income.

    The irony is that the approach actually nullifies most of the problems
    of Software Patents. The subscriber or "insured" doesn't have to know
    about the patents, which means that if he intuitively derives
    something - the umbrella could use the combination of the umbrella and
    the intuitively derived technology to nullify the plaintiff's patent.

    It's possible that companies would just purchase the umbrella patent
    policy as part of their insurance policy, or as part of their
    software.

    I don't have any official word on this, just what I can guess based on
    my reading of the patent application.



  4. Re: IBM Aims to Patent Profiting off Patents


    "Rex Ballard" wrote in message
    news:1193319647.800982.319070@v3g2000hsg.googlegro ups.com...
    > On Oct 25, 7:05 am, nrball...@gmail.com wrote:
    >> Are they trying to break the system...or proving it's already broken?

    > Hi Nick, good to hear from you - when are you getting married?
    > Gimme a call.
    >
    >> http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5i...ADvMEHLuvNCi0g

    >
    >> BOSTON (AP) - IBM Corp. says it has dreamed up a new method for
    >> profiting from its vast storehouse of patents. And by the way, the
    >> company wants to patent the idea.

    >
    > It looks like an interesting concept. Keep in mind that IBM has a
    > huge portfolio of defensive patents.



    Enough with the bull**** Rex. IBM and their "defensive patents" - Tell that
    to Amazon who IBM attacked with their so called "defensive patents" over
    some vague ecommerse patents:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/24/te.../24amazon.html


    I.B.M. Sues Amazon.com Over Patents

    By STEVE LOHR
    Published: October 24, 2006

    But I.B.M. became the aggressor yesterday when it filed two lawsuits against
    Amazon.com, contending that the company has built its big online retail
    business on technology developed by I.B.M.



    --
    Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


  5. Re: IBM Aims to Patent Profiting off Patents

    On Oct 25, 9:55 am, "Zumwalt Humphry" wrote:
    > "Rex Ballard" wrote in message


    > http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/24/te.../24amazon.html
    >
    > I.B.M. Sues Amazon.com Over Patents
    >
    > By STEVE LOHR
    > Published: October 24, 2006
    >
    > But I.B.M. became the aggressor yesterday when it filed two lawsuits against
    > Amazon.com, contending that the company has built its big online retail
    > business on technology developed by I.B.M.


    Just out of curiousity, how did that turn out? Was it settled? Was
    there an agreement in principle?

    Patent lawsuits are occasionally filed when other attempts at a
    negotiated arrangement or patent swap or or mutual non-persuit
    agreements have been ignored or were unsuccessful. Often, there is a
    legitimate dispute over whether a specific patent is enforcable - the
    judge makes a preliminary ruling, and the case is settled or the
    patent is nullified.

    > Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com


    Keep in mind that when you know a patent can be nullified - because
    you know where the prior art exists, you WANT to be sued, so that you
    can nullify the patent. I'm not saying that's what happened to
    Amazon, but remember, Amazon has been agressively going after other
    companies for it's on-click patent which is remarkably similar to the
    technology used for managing CICS identities and transactions.

    Let me know how the suit turned out. I'm curious what the arguments
    were on both sides, and how the judge might have ruled or how the
    settlement was worded.


+ Reply to Thread