-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Google Sued For Patent Infringement Over AdSense, Again

,----[ Quote ]
| Profy reports that a Russian company is suing Google for $3 billion over
| Google’s contextual ad program, AdSense.
`----

http://searchengineland.com/google-s...gain-15395.php

Google Faces Patent Extortion From Russia

,----[ Quote ]
| The concept of contextual advertising was hardly a new idea. In fact, from
| the early days of web advertising, it was always a target. Plenty of other
| companies tried to do it, but what made Google so successful was that it
| actually implemented the process in a way that worked. It was about putting
| it into practice, not the grand scheme that ended up in a patent somewhere.
| This seems like nothing more than a company trying to shakedown Google.
`----

http://techdirt.com/articles/20081107/0103592764.shtml

Bilski to the rescue?

In re Bilski and Business Method Patents

,----[ Quote ]
| Under the new standard, a process must either be tied to the use of a machine
| or be a transformation of something physical to be patentable, which would
| include a transformation of data that represents something physical.
`----

http://www.infringementupdates.com/2...?cid=138176688


Recent:

Software Patents: More on Stop Software Patents Initiative

,----[ Quote ]
| Initiatives like the world day Against software patents, *or the stop
| software patent initiative, are definitely a good thing. Not the ultimate
| answer to the problem though, I am afraid.
|
| Keith Bergelt, Open Innovation Network’s new appointed CEO, was clear telling
| me that OIN won’t collaborate with FFII or similar organizations to fight
| against software patents in Europe. OIN cares just about Linux, so far. That
| is a pity, considering that they are lobbying around Europe now.
`----

http://robertogaloppini.net/2008/10/...ts-initiative/


Bilski: Be prepared for huge lobbying in Congress?

,----[ Quote ]
| The outcome of the Bilski case, which should be published in October, might
| invalidate software patents in the United States:
|
| * * Plager said he regretted the unintended consequences of the decisions in
| * * State Street Bank and AT&T. Those rulings led to a flood of applications
| * * for software and business method patents, he noted. If we “rethink the
| * * breadth of patentable subject matter,” he said, we should ask whether
| * * these categories should be excluded from patent protection.
|
| If the CAFC are clever enough to follow the Supreme Court and kick software
| patents out, you might see the desperate large corporations and their patent
| department rushing to Congress. Especially if tomorrow the banks value their
| patent portfolio as void, and not useful to get any credit.
`----

http://stopsoftwarepatents.org/forum...ng-in-congress


Latha Jishnu: The mouse that bit Microsoft
PATENTLY ABSURD

,----[ Quote ]
| Here’s what Gates wrote in an office memorandum in 1991. “If people had
| understood how patents would be granted when most of today’s ideas were
| invented, and had taken out patents, the industry would be at a complete
| standstill today. . . I feel certain that some large company will patent some
| obvious thing related to interface, object orientation, algorithm,
| application extension or other crucial technique.”
|
| This was the year after Microsoft launched Windows 3.0, the first of its new
| operating systems that would become hugely popular across the world. Yet,
| three years down the line, Microsoft had changed from a kitten that was
| content with copyright protection to an aggressive patents tiger. In 1991,
| Microsoft had filed fewer than 50 patent applications whereas last year it
| was awarded 1,637 patents, almost a 12 per cent increase in the number of
| patents it received in 2006. According to IFI Patent Intelligence, the rise
| in Microsoft’s patents portfolio bucked the general trend in 2007 when the
| number of patents issued by the US Patents and Trademark Office dipped by 10
| per cent. Apparently several thousand of the company’s filings are still
| pending.
|
| All this may prompt the reader to conclude that there is indeed a direct
| correlation between IPR and growth — and wealth — as the company claims. Not
| true, says Mark H Webbink, a US Supreme Court lawyer who is a recognised
| voice on IT issues. Charting the company’s revenues, R&D spending and patent
| filings from 1985 onwards, he shows that the spike in patent filings occurred
| long after the Microsoft “had become well established and was being
| investigated for its monopolistic practices”. Webbink contends that patents
| did not spur the launch and rapid growth of the mass market software
| industry. On the other hand, patents have become a threat to software
| innovation, he warns.
`----

http://www.business-standard.com/ind...?autono=330566
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkkWRmgACgkQU4xAY3RXLo6AKACfcyZIpAiZKT MqYkKNxmoZBS8G
WMsAoKUNzGBr5Ln1U7kXaxMGF/ZGPP29
=lXHH
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----