One of the criticisms frequently leveled against inter partes reviews (IPRs) is that people file multiple IPRs; they file two, three, four IPR petitions in order to harass a patent owner. Complaints notwithstanding, the data shows just how infrequent a practice this is. The data also shows that the blame for the occasions when this…
Tag Archive for software patent
CustomPlay, Annotated
by Josh Landau • • 2 Comments
Near the end of July, CustomPlay sued Apple and Amazon. CustomPlay is owned by Max Abecassis, who also owns Nissim Corp. (Nissim has a long history of involvement with the DVD standard and nearly as long of a history of forcing companies to license its DVD patents; this is hardly Abecassis’ first go at patent…
Should Abstract Ideas Be Unpatentable? The Answer Is A Snap
by Josh Landau • • 3 Comments
Tuesday, Kaldren LLC sued Snap. (According to RPX, Kaldren is affiliated with IP Edge, a notorious patent troll.) Kaldren sued over a set of expired patents on such wonderful ideas as: Printing out a machine readable symbol; Reading a machine readable symbol; Using an address in a machine readable symbol to retrieve information from that…
ContentGuard: Arguendo
by Josh Landau • • 1 Comment
Today, we watched as a man stood in front of a panel and explained how the other side had behaved improperly and how the decisions they made were incorrect and contrary to applicable legal standards. I’m speaking, of course, of the ContentGuard oral arguments. What did you think I was talking about? Oral Argument at the…
ContentGuard: Validity and Privilege
by Josh Landau • • 0 Comments
Monday I summarized the history of the ContentGuard cases, and yesterday I described the process of claim interpretation. Today, we’ll turn to an issue that we’ve focused on recently, patent validity. ContentGuard convinced the jury that the ContentGuard patents were valid—can they convince the Federal Circuit? Abstract Ideas We’ve written a lot about patents on…
ContentGuard: Defining A Patent Case
by Josh Landau • • 1 Comment
Yesterday, I went through the history of the ContentGuard v. Apple and ContentGuard v. Google cases. I talked briefly about the Markman process; today, I’d like to go into more detail on what Markman is, how it works, how Markman affected the ContentGuard cases, and why it’s such an important issue in patent litigation in…
Previewing ContentGuard v. Apple and Google at the Federal Circuit
by Josh Landau • • 2 Comments
This Thursday, June 8, the Federal Circuit will hold oral argument in ContentGuard Holdings, Inc. v. Apple, Inc. and in ContentGuard Holdings, Inc. v Google, Inc. (The Google case also includes a number of major Android phone manufacturers, such as Samsung, HTC, and Motorola.) Both cases have roughly similar histories, and both appeals deal with…
Guest Post: Are Copyright and Patent Overlapping or Mutually Exclusive in Protecting Software Innovations?
by Pamela Samuelson • • 0 Comments
Prof. Pamela Samuelson is the Richard M. Sherman Distinguished Professor of Law and Information at the University of California, Berkeley. She is recognized as a pioneer in digital copyright law, intellectual property, cyberlaw and information policy. We’re pleased to be able to republish this post, which first appeared on Patently-O. “Neither the Copyright Statute nor…
Why IPO Is Wrong About Section 101
by Matt Levy • • 4 Comments
It certainly seems that the technology industry is producing better and more exciting products than ever. Virtual reality is becoming, well, a reality; we have drones, self-driving cars, better artificial intelligence, amazing new games, and smarter smartphones. These innovations are all driven by software, even though the landscape for software patents has changed over the…
Software Patents Will Survive: How Section 101 Law Is Settling Down
by Matt Levy • • 1 Comment
(This article first appeared at IPWatchdog.) Software patents have been controversial for decades. The discussion generally centers around whether software is patent-eligible subject matter. Since the Supreme Court’s decisions in Bilski v. Kappos, 130 S.Ct. 3218 (2010); Mayo Collaborative Servs. v. Prometheus Labs, 132 S.Ct. 1289 (2012); Ass’n for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc.,…