My Bots Weblog

«Too many patents are just as bad for society as too few. There are those who view the patent system as the seedbed of capitalism--the place where ideas and new technologies are nurtured. This is a romantic myth. In reality, patents are enormously powerful competitive weapons that are proliferating dangerously, and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has all the trappings of a revenue-driven, institutionalized arms merchant. My own introduction to the realities of the patent system came in the 1980s, when my client, Sun Microsystems--then a small company--was accused by IBM of patent infringement. Threatening a massive lawsuit, IBM demanded a meeting to present its claims. Fourteen IBM lawyers and their assistants, all clad in the requisite dark blue suits, crowded into the largest conference room Sun had. The chief blue suit orchestrated the presentation of the seven patents IBM claimed were infringed, the most prominent of which was IBM's notorious "fat lines" patent: To turn a thin line on a computer screen into a broad line, you go up and down an equal distance from the ends of the thin line and then connect the four points. You probably learned this technique for turning a line into a rectangle in seventh-grade geometry, and, doubtless, you believe it was devised by Euclid or some such 3,000-year-old thinker. Not according to the examiners of the USPTO, who awarded IBM a patent on the process. After IBM's presentation, our turn came. As the Big Blue crew looked on (without a flicker of emotion), my colleagues--all of whom had both engineering and law degrees--took to the whiteboard with markers, methodically illustrating, dissecting, and demolishing IBM's claims. We used phrases like: "You must be kidding," and "You ought to be ashamed." But the IBM team showed no emotion, save outright indifference. Confidently, we proclaimed our conclusion: Only one of the seven IBM patents would be deemed valid by a court, and no rational court would find that Sun's technology infringed even that one. An awkward silence ensued. The blue suits did not even confer among themselves. They just sat there, stonelike. Finally, the chief suit responded. "OK," he said, "maybe you don't infringe these seven patents. But we have 10,000 U.S. patents. Do you really want us to go back to Armonk [IBM headquarters in New York] and find seven patents you do infringe? Or do you want to make this easy and just pay us $20 million?" After a modest bit of negotiation, Sun cut IBM a check, and the blue suits went to the next company on their hit list.»...
Source: http://www.forbes.com | Source Status Category: Brevets Logiciels

«A la fin de ce mois, l'Autorite de regulation des telecommunications devrait annoncer plusieurs decisions concernant la boucle locale radio (BLR). Le regulateur a du pain sur la planche tant le dossier, depuis son origine, ne tourne pas rond. Des operateurs - Landtel, Broadnet et XTS Networks - viennent d'etre mis en demeure de respecter leurs engagements de deploiement. D'autres ont ete absorbes par leurs concurrents. Et ce mouvement de concentration, qui ne semble pas termine, a entraine le retour de plusieurs licences dans les mains de l'ART. Pourtant, en juillet 2000, au moment de l'attribution des licences aux operateurs, la boucle locale radio faisait figure de bonne fee pour la concurrence dans les telecoms. Les operateurs se pressaient alors au portillon pour ce concept seduisant : apporter aux entreprises et aux particuliers les bienfaits du haut debit par la voie hertzienne, en s'affranchissant totalement du reseau filaire de l'operateur historique. De ce cote-la, rien n'a change.» [...] «Il est vrai que des critiques bruissent sur les choix de l'ART d'attribuer les licences à des opérateurs nouveaux venus. " Les opérateurs "classiques" qui ont été écartés avaient promis beaucoup, mais ils étaient demeurés réalistes. D'autres ont promis l'impossible. Le dossier d'un Fortel, par exemple, était ahurissant " , explique un consultant. Cette profession elle-même n'échappe pas toujours aux critiques, puisqu'elle a parfois conseillé les opérateurs dans la constitution de leur candidature. L'un d'eux se défend : " Nous savions que cela tomberait à l'eau. Mais personne ne pouvait se permettre de ne pas suivre la pensée unique. " Sur la polémique, l'ART se défend en affirmant avoir tenu une procédure transparente, et renvoie également à la crise du secteur. »...
Source: http://www.01net.com | Source Status Category: Haut Débit