Software Patents Consistently Withstand Opposition.

See my article on the latest activities in software patents at the UNH Law Patent Law Forum.

Those That Can't Do, Troll

Righhaven tracks internet traffic to search out copyright infringement. In this case, bought rights so they could have proper standing to sue political candidate Sharron Angle. So why doesn't this fall under the fair use exception? Elements for analyzing fair use include purpose of the use, nature of the work, the amount used compared to the amount copyrighted, and the affect on the copyrighted market. It must be that in this case, a political candidate's use of news articles is closer to commercial than non-profit use because she is campaigning for the political seat.

Evil Divided Against Itself

Three adult entertainment companies are suing over illegal distribution of their copyrighted material. Immoral creativity is just as protected under the law as useful creativity. I already hate to see an awesome technology such as Bittorrent, which has revolutionized data distribution, because of copyright infringement, but how much more tainted does it look in this case. There are relevant uses out there for Bittorent technology, for example, Blizzard's update downloader.

Patent Police w/ Benefits

Patent trolls are organizations that only own patents and do no business for themselves; therefore, the only source of possible income is to search out and sue infringers (which may not be such a good income source). For example, see this post though its not a great example.A new spin on patent trolls is to find products that are improperly labeled as patents. This form is more like being a USPTO hall monitor, but hey, who doesn't want to be a free-lance patent Bounty Hunter? Though I think it is important to protect the public, I don't think you should be paid for it. I would like to see this sort of thing as an IP pro bono gig instead.

The Business of Invention

Paul Allen, co-founder of Microsoft, is suing as many top tech companies as he can think of. Paul Allen's firm Interval Licensing is “trolling” (if you don't mind the pun”) through deep waters, ironically including Microsoft. Interval Licensing claims that four patents about improving user's online experience are allegedly being violated. Facebook's response is that Interval Licensing is “trying to compete in the courtroom instead of the marketplace.” Though his view is likely correct from a business perspective, Facebook wants to have its cake and eat it too. By which I mean utilize protections for itself but deny it to others. If Facebook is an infringer, then we can infer that competing in the marketplace means undercutting law and no different then committing fraud or anti-trust violations. It is more likely the case that Interval Licensing is betting that the accused companies will rather settle then pay the cost of litigation. So, in regards to Facebook's response, I would say Interval Licensing IS competing in the marketplace and not the courtroom, or in the least we can see that avoiding the courtroom is a "market" where we can find a lot of money transferring hands.

Microsoft SDL and the CC license

Microsoft has decided to use Creative Commons licensing for SDL, security development lifecycle.This will promote good coding as SDL focuses on security throughout the software development cycle. Also, who doesn't love seeing Microsoft migrating towards open source ideals. However, if someone uses the SDL system with a CC license, doesn't that assistance infect the overall program with a CC license?

La Libertad Electronica

Chile has decided to implement net neutrality. Has Chile really thought this through? Any person allowed any content? Though the restrictions in China a super extreme, I think there is a balance for society that needs to happen here. I would like to be able to freely access the plethora of information on the web, especially without ISP restrictions, however, as a parent, I can see the necessity to set up some boundaries in such a widely available medium. I would need to see Chile's plan to support this idea before I could make a final decision.


Lo que sera, ojala que funcione muy bien para la gente de Chile aunque yo creo que no lo funcione en EEUU. Por ejemplo, el gobierna quiere pasar una ley en que los ISPs no dejan que los usarios ven algunos websitios. Pero ves este articulo.

Berating the Little Guy

  Facebook.com is suing Teachbook.com a social media start-up of 2 employes that provides a forum for teachers, currently 20 users. Seems almost immoral, right? This is not about competition, my friends. Its about maintaining trademark quality. The same suit would (and needs to) happen if a larger company tried a similar stunt. Simply because the company is small doesn't mean the rules get relaxed for them. Facebook.com is legally doing what is required to keep the quality of their trademark. This is already tough because they combined two generic words for their mark. Generic words are the weakest mark where as a strong mark is unique or fanciful. The only other way to create a strong mark is by hard work; the mark must be widely known. Facebook.com provides a popular service and deserves to protect that interest. Teachbook.com is trying to take the goodwill and fame of Facebook.com and add it to themselves, which is similar to misappropriation.
  The Slashdot article takes an overly simplistic view of the situation. "Book" is the commonality, but "book" could never be a good mark by itself. Teachbook.com says "book" is simply related to teachers and school, however, the effect and goal is obviously to refer to Facebook. That reference is the relationship Facebook.com has created with social media, that Teachbook.com is trying to ride without putting in time and effort to obtain the same mark effect. Like parodies, the goal and effect is based on the between-the-lines reference. If Facebook.com didn't exist Teachbook.com would bring to mind a textbook trading site, not a social forum for teachers. Facebook.com is appropriately taking action to protect the quality of their mark, the same would have to be done with any sized business trying to do the same.

Press Start To Begin

Dear bored reader,

I have had enough of entertaining myself with thoughts about IP as I glance at the latest news or hear retorts in the law classroom. I'm tired of telling myself I have little to contribute or not enough time to really look into things. I let the commentary go without even a chance of being a conversation catalyst and I feel that should change. So I have started this blog with the hope that I will be able to think through my thoughts and start conversations. Here it is; I leave a trail of my perspective somewhere in the deep crevices of the web, feel free to follow along and change my course. I welcome commentary and additional facts, especially if my view is not well thought out or just plain wrong. Also I want my friends who don't know about IP to be able to follow along as well so let me know when something doesn't make sense. IPpeep refers not only to my chirping remarks, but also to the glance at headlines, articles, status updates, etc. that catch my eye. Almost nothing will be thoroughly processed over. More importantly, as a 2L, I'm still learning most of this stuff. With that disclaimer in mind, I hope you enjoy some of what you read.

Hoping to hear from you,

-Austin