Les brevets sur les logiciels et leur danger pour le shareware

Europe Shareware software patents newsletter #11
1st december 2003

Webpage: http://www.europe-shareware.org/pages/brevets/brevets.fr.html
PDF    : http://www.europe-shareware.org/pages/brevets/newsletter11.us.pdf
Archive: http://www.europe-shareware.org/pages/brevets/newsletter11.us.html


CONTENTS:

1. France asks for delay on the software patents directive

2. EU Council of Ministers delays the directive

3. Automatic form patented

4. News of the Eolas case

5. Method for identifying files on a P2P network

6. Patents on sale and download of digital music and video

7. ATT sues Paypal and eBay

8. Whiteboard function patented

9. MS patent restrictions on hardware vendors

10. French barrister raises objections to the EU directive

11. The coming software patent crisis




----
1. France asks for delay on the software patents directive

"Paris souhaite un délai sur la question des brevets de logiciels"
http://fr.news.yahoo.com/031119/85/3i6hl.html

The french government is asking for further consultations before taking a
final stand on the software patents directive.

According to the article, the gap between the Commission's position and
the EuroParliament's position is too wide.

This means that the second reading of the European Parliament on this
directive will only take place after the spring elections of the Members
of the European Parliament (MEP).

We will have then MEPs from 25 countries, particularly from Poland.




----
2. EU Council of Ministers delays the directive

"EU-Rat schiebt Entscheidung zu Softwarepatenten auf"
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/data/anw-27.11.03-008/

France and Sweden have asked for further consultations before taking a
stand on this directive. The EU Council of Ministers will take its
decision during the Irish presidency (1st January 2003 to 30th June 2003).


A few quotes:

  « Beobachter gehen davon aus, dass der 
    Ministerrat erst unter der kommenden 
    irischen Präsidentschaft entscheiden und 
    somit auch die Neuwahlen zum Europäischen 
    Parlament im Frühjahr erst abwarten 
    wird. Damit käme die zweite Lesung 
    frühestens im September 2004 in Frage. »




----
3. Automatic form patented

Patent: EP 1228451

Description of the patent:
http://l2.espacenet.com/espacenet/viewer?PN=EP1228451

EPO's decision to grant the patent:
http://ofi.epoline.org/view/GetDossier?dosnum=00970385&lang=en


Abstract:

  « A user accesses a data base of files, such as 
    form documents in standard formats, using a 
    local computer, via a network. The files are 
    associated with one or more recipient systems. 
    He then edits the downloaded files on-screen, 
    for example, by completing the form documents, 
    and submits them to a notary server via the 
    network. Each file is preferably submitted in 
    an encrypted format, and preferably includes 
    an appended digital signature. Public key 
    encryption is preferably used both to encrypt 
    the form and to implement the digital 
    signature. After processing in the notary 
    server such as decryption and user 
    identification, the notary server forwards 
    the submitted file to the proper recipient 
    system. »




----
4. News of the Eolas case

Patent: US 5,838,906

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?
Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=/netahtml/search-
bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=ptxt&s1=5,838,906.WKU.&OS=PN/
5,838,906&RS=PN/5,838,906


- USPTO will reexam Eolas' patent

"PTO Director Orders Re-Exam for '906 Patent"
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/3969

A few quotes:

  « [...] the Director of the US Patent and 
    Trademark Office has ordered a re-examination 
    of the '906 patent, which was the subject of 
    a patent infringement lawsuit this summer 
    brought by Eolas against Microsoft. »

  « On October 23, the World Wide Web Consortium 
    (W3C) filed a request for re-examination, 
    citing prior art that defined the early 
    HTML standard, written by Tim Berners-Lee 
    and Dave Raggett. »

  « Apparently, the PTO responded to this 
    request, saying "a substantial outcry from 
    a widespread segment of the affected 
    industry has essentially raised a question 
    of patentability." »



W3C's HTML Patent Advisory Group (PAG) held a short meeting on 7 November
2003.
According to the discussions, the re-examination of Eolas' plugin patent
by the USPTO might take a year.




----
5. Method for identifying files on a P2P network

Patents: US 5,978,791
         US 6,415,280

US 5,978,791
"Data processing system using substantially unique identifiers to
identify data items, whereby identical data items have the same identifiers"
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?
Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=/netahtml/search-
adv.htm&r=24&f=G&l=50&d=ptxt&S1=5978791&OS=5978791&RS=5978791

Abstract:

  « In a data processing system, a mechanism 
    identifies data items by substantially 
    unique identifiers which depend on all of 
    the data in the data items and only on the 
    data in the data items. The system also 
    determines whether a particular data item 
    is present in the database by examining the 
    identifiers of the plurality of data items. »


US 6,415,280
"Identifying and requesting data in network using identifiers which are
based on contents of data"
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?
Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=/netahtml/search-
adv.htm&r=3&f=G&l=50&d=ptxt&S1=6,415,280&OS=6,415,280&RS=6,415,280

Abstract:

  « In a system in which a set of data items 
    are distributed across a network of servers, 
    at least some of the data items being 
    cached versions of data items from a source 
    server, a content delivery method includes 
    determining a data identifier for a 
    particular data item, the data identifier 
    being determined using a given function of 
    the data comprising the particular data 
    item; and responsive to a request for the 
    particular data item, the request 
    including at least the data identifier of 
    the particular data item, providing the 
    particular data item from a given one of 
    the servers of the network of servers. The 
    request for the particular data item may 
    be resolved based on a measure of 
    availability of at least one of the 
    servers, where the measure of availability 
    may be a measurement of bandwidth to the 
    server; a measurement of a cost of a 
    connection to the server, and/or a 
    measurement of a reliability of a 
    connection to the server. The function 
    used to determine the identifier may be 
    a message digest function or a hash 
    function. »


"Altnet Issues Legal Notices for Patent Infringement Occurring on File
Sharing Networks"
http://biz.yahoo.com/pz/031111/48047.html>http://biz.yahoo.com/pz/
031111/48047.html

A few quotes:

  « Altnet [...] announced today that it has 
    issued notices to nine companies, including 
    BigChampagne, Ranger Online, MediaDefender, 
    Overpeer and MediaSentry, warning them to 
    cease engaging in activities that Altnet 
    believes constitute patent infringement. »

  « Altnet's TrueNames technology facilitates 
    the identification of unique files on a 
    massively distributed network by using a 
    unique file hash identifier that enables 
    one to track, retrieve, monitor and charge 
    for the distribution of content. TrueNames 
    is a method of identifying data based on 
    the actual content of a file, rather than 
    by the file name, origin, location, 
    address or other information that can be 
    easily changed. A unique identifier, or 
    hash, is assigned to the data using an 
    algorithm »




----
6. Patents on sale and download of digital music and video

Patents: US 5,191,573
         US 5,675,734


"Method for transmitting a desired digital video or audio signal"

US 5,191,573
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?
Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=/netahtml/search-
bool.html&r=48&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=ptxt&s1=5191573&OS=5191573&RS=5191573

Abstract:

  « The present invention is a method for 
    transmitting a desired digital video or 
    audio signal stored on a first memory of 
    a first party to a second memory of a 
    second party. The method comprises the 
    steps of transferring money via a 
    telecommunications line to the first party 
    from the second party. Additionally, the 
    method comprises the step of then 
    connecting electronically via a 
    telecommunications line the first memory 
    with the second memory such that the 
    desired signal can pass therebetween. 
    Next, there is the step of transmitting 
    the desired digital signal from the first 
    memory with a transmitter in control and 
    in possession of the first party to a 
    receiver having the second memory at a 
    location determined by the second party. 
    The receiver is in possession and in 
    control of the second party. There is also 
    the step of then storing the digital 
    signal in the second memory. »


"System for transmitting desired digital video or audio signals"

US 5,675,734
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?
Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=/netahtml/search-
bool.html&r=35&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=ptxt&s1=5675734&OS=5675734&RS=5675734

Abstract:

  « A method for transferring desired digital 
    video or digital audio signals.  The 
    method comprises the steps of forming a 
    connection through telecommunications 
    lines between a first memory of a first 
    party and a second memory of a second 
    party. The first memory has the desired 
    digital video or digital audio signals. 
    Then, there is the step of selling 
    electronically by the first party to the 
    second party through telecommunications 
    lines, the desired digital video or 
    digital audio signals in the first 
    memory. Then, there is the step of 
    transferring the desired digital video or 
    digital audio signals from the first 
    memory of the first party to the second 
    memory of the second party through the 
    telecommunications lines while the second 
    memory is in possession and control of 
    the second party. Additionally, there is 
    a system for transferring digital video 
    or digital audio signals. »


"Patent ruling tugs at Net downloads"
http://news.com.com/2100-1025-5101490.html


A few quotes:

  « SightSound Technologies, a digital media 
    company, has won a ruling in its patent case 
    against Bertelsmann subsidiaries that could 
    have wide- reaching effects on the business 
    of Net music and video downloads. »

  « [...] a federal judge in the Western 
    District Court of Pennsylvania and 
    Pittsburgh granted SightSound's motion for 
    summary judgment against Bertelsmann's 
    divisions, paving the road for the 5-year 
    dispute to go to jury trial. »

  « If a jury decides that SightSound has a 
    right to enforce the patents, it could 
    affect almost any business that sells 
    downloadable music or video online, 
    including the major record labels and 
    music studios. »

  « Read in a business environment 10 years 
    after the patents were granted, the 
    language is broad. They don't cover a 
    specific technology for encoding or 
    transmitting data; instead, they outline 
    a basic model for sending a digital audio 
    or video signal from one place to another 
    over telecommunications lines, in which a 
    copy of the audio or video is stored on a 
    consumer's computer and a credit card is 
    used for payment. »




----
7. ATT sues Paypal and eBay

Patents: US 5,329,589
         EP 0501697

"Mediation of transactions by a communications system"

US 5,329,589
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?
Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/
srchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=5,329,589.WKU.&OS=PN/5,329,589&RS=PN/5,329,589

EP 0501697
http://l2.espacenet.com/espacenet/viewer?PN=EP0501697


Abstract:

  « Methods and apparatus for employing a 
    communications system with actively 
    connects communicating entities to mediate 
    transactions. Disclosed are general 
    methods and apparatus for mediating 
    transactions, methods and apparatus 
    permitting information from one 
    transaction to be used in other 
    transactions, and methods and apparatus 
    for performing credit card transactions 
    in which the vendee need not disclose his 
    credit card to the vendor. An 
    implementation of a system for performing 
    credit card transactions in a stored 
    program-controlled telephone switching 
    network is also disclosed. »



ATT's press release:
http://www.att.com/news/item/0,1847,12548,00.html

A few quotes:

  « AT&T alleges that, through the use of 
    their online payment systems, PayPal and 
    eBay have infringed AT&T's U.S. patent 
    that covers transactions in which a 
    trusted intermediary securely processes 
    payments over a communications system such 
    as the Internet.  The use of a trusted 
    intermediary ensures that one party will 
    not have to disclose sensitive 
    information, such as a credit card number 
    or bank account number, to the other party 
    to the transaction.  AT&T's lawsuit seeks 
    compensation for PayPal's and eBay's 
    unauthorized use of the patented 
    technology. »

AT&T says its patent covers transactions in which an intermediary
securely processes payments over a communications system such as the Internet.
According to experts, the ATT patent covers also services such as 
e-Voting, e-Auctions, e-Gifts, e-Donations, e-Wishlists and e-Referrals.
 

"AT&T verklagt eBay und PayPal"
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/data/wst-21.11.03-001/

"AT&T Sues EBay in Patent Dispute"
http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,61321,00.html




----
8. Whiteboard function patented

"Microsoft muss wegen Patentverletzung Schadensersatz zahlen"
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/data/anw-17.11.03-006/

Microsoft was found guilt of infringing a patent on whiteboard functions
from software firm SPX. The software behemoth must now pay 62,3 million
USD to SPX and will remove the whiteboard function from its Netmeeting
software.

A few quotes:

  « Microsoft hat laut der Entscheidung 
    unerlaubterweise eine Technik von 
    Imagexpo für die so genannte 
    Whiteboard-Funktion, eine Art von den 
    miteinander verbundenen 
    Netmeeting-Anwendern gemeinsam nutzbare 
    Zeichentafel, in seiner Konferenz-Software 
    NetMeeting eingesetzt. »




----
9. MS patent restrictions on hardware vendors

"Commission quizzes hardware vendors about restrictions in Windows licenses"
http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,113198,00.asp

Microsoft included patent restrictions in its Windows license so that it
can use patented technologies free of charge from hardware manufacturer
without having to ask for a license. Thanks to such a license Microsoft
creates a "patent free zone" for its operating system.
The EU Commission is currently investigating this new chapter of the huge
Microsoft antitrust dossier.

A few quotes:

  « the Commission says it is responding to 
    companies that are expressing concern 
    about certain licensing conditions 
    Microsoft attaches to its Windows 
    operating system. »

  « These so-called nonassert obligations 
    prevent hardware manufacturers from 
    enforcing hardware patents they hold 
    that may have implications for software. »

  « A number of hardware manufacturers, 
    including IBM, Dell, Hitachi, and Toshiba, 
    have signed these nonassert clauses. They 
    can't afford to offer PCs without Windows, 
    says Thomas Vinje, an outspoken critic of 
    Microsoft and a partner in the Brussels 
    office of law firm Morrison & Foerster LLP. 
    Vinje's clients include Dell and Fujitsu. »

  « The software giant started inserting the 
    nonassert obligations into contracts with 
    hardware manufacturers four or five years 
    ago, according to Vinje. »




----
10. French barrister raises objections to the EU directive

"Brevet de logiciel: l'autre voix qui dit non"
http://www.zdnet.fr/actualites/opinions/0,39020797,39131487,00.htm

A few quotes:

  « Dès la brevetabilité du logiciel admise, 
    tout auteur de logiciel, individu, PME ou 
    grande entreprise, ne pourra développer 
    de nouveaux logiciels sans s'enquérir au 
    préalable de l'existence ou non d'un 
    brevet qui pourrait lui être opposé. Il 
    s'adressera alors à un professionnel, 
    conseil ou avocat, pour lui demander 
    d'établir une recherche d'antériorité 
    dans la liste des brevets existant. »

  « La réponse du professionnel sera à tout 
    coup évasive ou assortie de réserves. 
    Pour des raisons de responsabilité, aucun 
    conseil ne se risquera en effet à écrire 
    que tel logiciel est disponible, pour être 
    ensuite contredit par un tribunal. [...] 
    Où est dans ces conditions la sécurité 
    juridique? »

  « On nous dit que le droit d'auteur et le 
    droit des brevets devraient coexister. 
    Cependant, ces deux techniques juridiques 
    ont des réponses différentes sur un même 
    sujet. Selon que l'on applique l'une ou 
    l'autre, on peut arriver à une solution 
    opposée pour savoir, par exemple, à qui 
    appartient l'invention ou la création du 
    salarié en entreprise: à l'employeur ou 
    au salarié? De même, en cas d'action 
    judiciaire, chacun des deux régimes 
    possède sa saisie contrefaçon propre et 
    ses tribunaux compétents. »

  « Oui, la seule façon de permettre "un 
    environnement favorable à l'innovation et 
    à l'investissement", est le retrait pur 
    et simple de cette proposition de 
    directive, et l'affirmation selon 
    laquelle le logiciel n'est pas 
    brevetable. Le droit d'auteur applicable 
    au logiciel pourrait quant à lui évoluer 
    et mieux s'adapter aux besoins de 
    l'industrie. C'est là une question de 
    pragmatisme [...] »




----
11. The coming software patent crisis

"The coming software patent crisis"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,4790387-110837,00.html

The Gardian ran an article about the patent quality problem, related to
the granting of patents on software, that undermines the software sector. 

A few quotes:

  « Anyone who has watched the astonishing 
    stupidity of American intellectual 
    property developments will not be surprised 
    to hear that it concerns a patent case. »

  « [...] there is plenty of evidence that the 
    USPTO is granting patents in an area it is 
    not equipped to handle [...] »

  « In theory, you can fight stupid patents in 
    the courts. However, as Intel's Andy Grove 
    pointed out last month, in the US, the 
    cost of intellectual property litigation 
    rose from $5m a year in 1982 to $4bn in 
    1998. With an average case costing about 
    $500,000 per side, there's no point in 
    most software houses trying to fight them, 
    even if in the right. »

  « Nor can programmers easily avoid 
    infringing software patents. First, there 
    is no simple or affordable way to find out 
    what software patents have been applied 
    for or granted. Second, even if the 
    filings were readily available, it would 
    be far more work trying to figure out what 
    they meant and whether they applied than 
    just writing the code. »

  « This isn't so bad for industry giants such 
    as Microsoft and that most assiduous user 
    of the patent office, IBM. Their logical 
    response to patent stupidity has been to 
    take out as many patents as they can and 
    use them as bargaining counters: cross 
    licensing patents thereby helps protect 
    the rich. »

 

software patents page