Re: Freedom Scientific's Lawyers Strike Again

Took a while to find the article but this is interesting.
I wonder what the reasoning behind the change was--to simplify things for 
lawyers, or open up more competitive arenas for future innovations.
Doesn't seem to impact the FS lawsuit as far as I can tell, but I only 
skimmed the article.
--le

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jared Wright" <wright.jaredm@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 8:08 AM
Subject: Re: Freedom Scientific's Lawyers Strike Again


I thought this article which I came across yesterday seemed quite well
timed. Note that it reflects only the Patint and Trademark Office's new
position and not any legally binding decision, but they are obviously a
very powerful voice in these proceedings. Additionally, who knows what
impact, if any, these developments could have on this particular
litigation that has already gone forward. Still, misguided patent law
regarding software development is obviously a hot topic 'round these
parts today. *grin*

The Death of Google's Patents?
http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2008/07/the-death-of-go.html

Octavian Rasnita wrote:
> I think most of the patents are in the same situation.
> Very few of them are very intelligent things that others couldn't think 
> about.
>
> So the one who's faster and registers the patent is the winner.
> Is it ok? Of course it isn't. This is a protection invented by the 
> powerful companies in their favour.
>
> The registrar of patents should register only and only if much intelectual 
> work or imagination was involved for doing something. If in the moment of 
> the registration, or any time later, if someone proves that patent is a 
> simple thing that doesn't imply a big intellectual effort, that patent 
> should be revoked.
>
> Why isn't so? Because as it is now, it is in favour of bigger and powerful 
> companies.
>
> Octavian
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Jamal Mazrui" <empower@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: <programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 2:21 PM
> Subject: RE: Freedom Scientific's Lawyers Strike Again
>
>
>
>> Hi Ken,
>> I suspect you were being tongue in cheeck (and I love your sense of
>> humor!).  Although legal fights can be entertaining, I don't see how this
>> is in the interest of blind people, forcing a company to spend money on
>> defending against litigation rather than on R&D to improve access to
>> mainstream software.
>>
>> FYI -- the patent FS claims was violated is described at
>> http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PTXT&s1=%226,993,707+B2%22&OS=
>>
>> I'm amazed that FS thought its placemarker feature was innovative enough
>> to patent.  This seems like an example of taking advantage of the magical
>> nature of assistive technology to the uninformed, and then trying to
>> leverage it in questionable trade practices for corporate gain.  The fact
>> that GW was never notified of the concern while its product has been in
>> beta with public demos strongly suggests that the aim is to damage GW
>> economically, not actually to protect intellectual property.
>>
>> What do others think?
>>
>> Jamal
>> On
>> Fri, 25 Jul
>> 2008, Ken Perry wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 00:43:30 -0700
>>> From: Ken Perry <whistler@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Reply-To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Subject: RE: Freedom Scientific's Lawyers Strike Again
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I say let them fight and while they are fighting I hope Saratek is 
>>> coding.
>>>
>>> Ken
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jared Wright
>>> Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2008 6:58 PM
>>> To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Subject: Re: Freedom Scientific's Lawyers Strike Again
>>>
>>> Hi James, Worked here just now, so I'm not sure what's at fault. The 
>>> long
>>> and short is that Freedom claims GW Micro's implementation of webpage
>>> placemarkers in Window Eyes 7 violates their patint on, I guess, being 
>>> able
>>> to have placemarkers on a webpage. They  filed litigation today.
>>>
>>> Jared
>>>
>>>
>>> Jared
>>>
>>> James Panes wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Guys,
>>>>
>>>> Just thought I would let you know that this page is not available.
>>>>
>>>> Did FS lawyers have something to do with this?
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Jim
>>>> jimpanes@xxxxxxxxx
>>>> jimpanes@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> "Everything is easy when you know how."
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "Jared Wright" <wright.jaredm@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>> To: <programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2008 12:53 PM
>>>> Subject: Freedom Scientific's Lawyers Strike Again
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://www.gwmicro.com/blog/index.php/all/2008/07/24/do_companies_real
>>>> ly_compete_on_who_has_t
>>>>
>>>> Read it and weep, at least if seeing screen readers compete on their
>>>> functionality for all our general betterment is at all appealing to 
>>>> you.
>>>> Jared
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> __________
>>>> View the list's information and change your settings at
>>>> http://www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
>>>>
>>>> __________
>>>> View the list's information and change your settings at
>>>> http://www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> __________
>>> View the list's information and change your settings at
>>> http://www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
>>>
>>> __________
>>> View the list's information and change your settings at
>>> http://www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
>>>
>>>
>> __________
>> View the list's information and change your settings at
>> http://www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
>>
>>
> __________
> View the list's information and change your settings at
> http://www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
>
>
>

__________
View the list's information and change your settings at
http://www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind

__________
View the list's information and change your settings at 
http://www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind

Other related posts: