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.