Author: Eric Waltmire

Eric Waltmire is a registered patent attorney at the Erickson Law Group, PC. He can be contacted at blog@waltmire.com.
Posted on

Software Patent News for January 19th

Software Patent News for January 19th:

  • Patent suit on method of using Icons that look like the content of the files they represent [Patently-O] –
    In 1998 three central-Indiana inventors filed for patent protection iconic software. The claims – finally issued in 2008 – cover a method of using icons that look like the content of the files they represent. The first named inventor – Greg Swartz – moved to Arizona and has recently filed an infringement complaint in that state. Defendants include Google (Chrome Browser), Microsoft (Vista), and Apple (iPhone). (U.S. Patent No. 7,346,850; ArsTechnica).
  • IBM garners most patents — again [InfoWorld]–
    2008 is the 16th straight year that Big Blue led the race, pulling in 4,186 patents throughout 2008. Samsung ranked second with 3,515 patents, Canon third at 2,114, while Microsoft was fourth with 2,030, and Intel took the fifth spot with 1,776. Hewlett-Packard, meanwhile, came in at number 10 with 1,424.
  • IBM tops patent leadership in 2008 too [Business Standard] –
    IBM plans to increase by 50 per cent, to more than 3,000, the number of technical inventions it publishes annually instead of seeking patent protection”. He, however, highlighted IBM’s pledge not to assert certain software patents against the open source community; and not to assert any patent against 150 software interoperability standards.
  • Liveblog: TACD IP: Patent Reform [Gavin Baker] –
    Live Blog of Trans Atlantic Consumer Dialogue (TACD) Workship on Patents, Copyrights and Knowledge Governance: The Next Four Years (Workshophttp://www.tacd-ip.org/blog/?page_id=5); Panel 5 – Patent Reform
  • Wegner’s Top Ten Patent Cases in 2009 [Patent Baristas] –
    Including: “4) Bilski v. Doll:. . . since the claims in Bilski were not tied to particular hardware, the court did not consider the viability of patenting specific functions carried out by a computer. Now, how the phrase “tied to a particular machine” will be applied to software patents.”
  • ABA on the USPTO to president-elect Obama [IAM] –
    The IP section of the Amercan Bar Association suggests a number of reforms which it believes will enhance the USPTO’s operation.
Posted on

Software Patent News for October 13th through October 31st

Software Patent Bits for October 13th through October 31st:

Posted on

Software Patent News for October 10th

Software Patent Bits for September 23rd through October 10th:

  • Facebook Dismissed from Search Patent Suit [The Prior Art] — – Facebook was dismissed from a lawsuit based on U.S. Patent No. 6,199,067, which claims the use of user profiles in Internet search. PA Advisors asserted the patent in a suit against Google, Yahoo, Facebook, and several other smaller players in November 2007. Facebook spokesman said that no payment was made in exchange for the dismissal.
  • Intellectual Property Rights and Software Protection – A Programmer’s View [eNewsMediaMagazine] — – This article is provided by Leigh Ellis, a UK based software solicitor and qualified software engineer who providing legal advice to technology businesses in the UK and worldwide. Liegh provides that the foundations for software protection lay directly and indirectly by contract, copyright, designs law, patent law, trade marks, passing off, law of confidence and trade secrets.
Posted on

IP Audit Links

IP Audit Links:

  • Conducting an IP Audit – IP Toolbox [Australian Government] — – The Australian Government provides a comprehensive step-by-step guide to performing an IP Audit. An IP audit is a systematic review of the IP owned, used or acquired by a company. An audit’s principal goal is to identify all the IP your company may have.
  • Don’t leave money on the table: Run an IP audit [Massachusetts Biotech and Technology News] — – An IP audit is a periodic and systematic review of the IP owned, used or acquired by a business. Its purpose is to inventory all IP owned, licensed or acquired by the company, to project the future cost and value associated with each piece of IP, to mine underused corporate assets, to identify any threats to a company’s bottom line, and to enable business executives to devise informed strategies that will maintain and improve the company’s market position.
  • An IP Audit Of Spongebob Squarepants [Erik J. Heels] — – Erik performs an informative comprehensive IP audit based on the pretext that Spongebob’s creator Stephen Hillenburg has contacted Erick for advice about protecting his IP related to Spongebob Squarepants.
  • Top 5 IP audit mistakes [IP Thinktank Blog] — – #4 “Too much focus on protecting new IP and too little on exploiting or killing what you have.”
  • The IP Management Audit: Start Top-down, Then Across [IP Frontline] — – A checklist that every IP audit manager needs as a starting point – the what, where, who and how of initiating a company-wide intellectual property management audit.
  • IP Audit – A “How to” Guide. [ WIPO] — – “An IP Audit is defined as a systematic review of the IP assets owned, used or acquired by a business. Its purpose is to uncover under-utilized IP assets, to identify any threats to a company’s bottom line, and to enable business planners to devise informed strategies that will maintain and improve the company’s market position.”
Posted on

Software Patent Links for 2008-09-20

  • Chief Judge: Balski will be Very Significant [Patently-O] Chief Judge Michel is quoted: “One of the most important cases pending with the [Federal Circuit] today is In re Bilski…. ‘It’s a very interesting case and I thought all the judges worked very hard on it,’ says [Chief Judge] Michel. He adds: ‘I think it will be a very significant decision. It probably will have broader scope than either In re Comiskey or In re Nuijten”(tags: Patent Software)
  • Take patent policy away from lawyers, says Australian government report [IAM] The courts in Australia, conclude the authors of “Venturous Australia – Building Strength in Innovation” (Chapter 7, pages 83 to 87), have “overturned important ‘gatekeeping’ principles of the patent system that existed until the early 1980s”. In particular, they identify software and business methods as an issue, and state that large companies are using the patent system to build thickets that effectively keep competitors out of markets. Jeff Wild states, “The report may be specific to one country, but there is a lot in it that decision makers in other parts of the world could find attractive and persuasive. All patent owners should think through the implications of that very carefully.” (tags: Software Patents)