EVIL patent TROLLS poised to attack OpenStack, says Linux protection squad A group established to shield Linux from patent trolls has warned OpenStack will be the next big target for intellectual property hoarders. The Open Invention Network (OIN) reckons the open-source cloud is ripe for the plucking by trolls, who would easily be able to box off and claim core technologies as their own. That would …
It should, but the minutes would probably need to be published immediately after the meeting (so as to establish a priority date), including a list of attendees (so as to establish that the troll had a presence there).
And you're assuming that the patent-invalidation court / hearing would actually pay the slightest mind to these minutes when faced with the moneyed interests of the patent troll (or other grasping interest).
I don't think you could claim prior art because someone said 'it would be cool if X' when someone later patents the most natural method of achieving X.
They might be even further ahead of the game and think, 'if they want X then they'll need to Y', or 'once they've got X, the natural next step is Z' and then patent Y or Z.
Unfortunately it's become standard practice with software patents to go as vague as you can, since the various patent offices generally don't have anyone with sufficient understanding of coding to catch you out if it's got enough jargon
"We must kill them. We must incinerate them. Pig after pig. Cow after cow. Village after village. Troll after troll. And they call me a pirate. What do you call it when the pirates accuse the pirate? They lie ... they lie and we have to be merciful to those who lie. Those nabobs. I hate them."
FTFA: "OIN had 10 licensees in its first year, which climbed to 30-40 licensees per quarter and Bergelt reckons that has more than doubled to just over 100 per quarter"
So an entity in a rapid expansion phase issues a press release about risks to a 9 year old software group that haven't materialised yet.
....and here we all are. Pavlov's Dogs, Fish on hooks etc. Well done with the clickbait, El Reg.
I dislike patent trolls for the same reason that everyone else does, but that doesn't mean throwing out the idea of intellectual property protection wholesale - it means changing the litigation landscape that gives these people a business model.
Finally, US caselaw is changing to reduce the scope for trolls to sue without the risk of paying for their own fees (something that is unique to the US and daft, and the primary basis for the Troll business model) - it's not flawless, unfortunately, but should help a bit to ease these people out.
/Prepares for flaming for crime of pointing stuff out
The SCO versus IBM case was over copyrights, not patents. It then turned out that SCO didn't own the copyrights they were suing over, they belonged to Novel. So, SCO sued Novel and demanded that Novel turn over the copyrights to them, on the grounds that SCO couldn't go around suing everyone without them (seriously).
They also sued a bunch of small companies who were just users of Linux and extracted money from some of them because it was cheaper to pay them off than it was to fight them in court. None of the cases against larger companies (IBM, Novel, Chrysler, etc.) had any success. The original case against IBM is still in court due to stalling by SCO.
I don't suppose that I need to mention that SCO got the massive amounts of money to pay for the high priced lawyers (one of the top legal firms in the US) from a certain very large and well known software company who had their own proprietary (non-unix) OS. Without that big injection of cash SCO would not have had the money to threaten nearly everyone in the industry and a large chunk of the user base. Oh how we laughed when the email laying it out was leaked when one of the middlemen arranging the deal threw his toys out of the pram when his commission didn't meet up with his expectations.
Patents trolling Openstack? Oh yes. Patent trolls can certainly learn their history. With copyrights you actually need some evidence - like some actual copied source code that you own. With patents you can wave some vague bullshit around and claim that you own fire, the wheel, and oxygen. The point of trolling isn't to win, it's either to make such an expensive nuisance of yourself that people will pay you off to get rid of you, or it's to act on behalf of a competitor to block a company's product from reaching the market.
This sort of problem is a genuine concern. The root of the problem is the American legal system, but that's probably broken beyond repair. Since the patent and legal industry seem to be unwilling or unable to reform themselves, most people who just want to create and use software feel the only solution is to abolish software patents. Recent rulings in the higher US courts seem to point the judges starting to gradually come to that conclusion themselves.
at a meeting at Glasgow last week where he was excellent.
I would be inclined to listen to anything that he says and take it p seriously.
If he is warning that openStack is potentially at risk then it kinda is.
He didn't strike me as me the type that would waste his time trying to drum up publicity, the OIN is a bit too busy being the only good guys in a patently (ha!) broken system for that.
It's long overdue that patent reform preclude people from hoarding patents. You're welcome to patent something, put it in your products and receive protection to the fullest extent of the law for the normal number of years. But, if you don't actually use the patent in your own products, or sell the patent very quickly to someone who does, the patent becomes null and void--and unpatentable by anyone else. Just that simple.
The usage "expiration date" should be something like, say, two years. Use it or lose it. What we have now is just dumb. We should put the patent troll scum out of business.
Without wanting to start a flame war, I would point out that the major weakness of the Apache, BSD and various similar licenses is that anyone can take the code and make private modifications to it, with no obligation to contribute anything back to the original developers or the wider community. The GPL prevents that very effectively, and GPLv3 effectively deals with the patent problem.
There are reasons why some people would prefer not to choose the GPL, however sometimes these reasons are based on misunderstandings or dis-information. All I can suggest is that everyone should take great care in picking the licence that best suits YOUR requirements, and if necessary get legal or economic advice about the impact of that choice. You may feel that giving your entire work available freely, for others to take private again, and do with as they wish, is bad business. I would not do that, why should I work as an unpaid developer for M$ or Oracle or whoever? But the dominating need for YOUR particular code to go EVERYWHERE may over-ride such concerns in certain cases.
Or, you may feel that you want others to help fix and improve YOUR work, so that YOU can benefit from their contribution. If you don't mind them benefitting too, then GPL is the way for you.
If you want no-one else to benefit, then you need a totally restrictive license. You may or may not (at your option) allow access to source code, but you can forbid it to be used, or modified, or insist on all contributions being fed back to yourself, who will have final say on what is done, and whether the software is sold, leased or given away. If so, get your lawyer to write a restrictive license, but don't expect much help from others.
There is no such thing as a one size fits all license. My personal preference is for GPL in all but the most exceptional circumstances, but that is what is appropriate in my circumstances. I can't force that choice on YOU, whoever you are, but I can strongly recommend it because it usually makes sense.
It was inevitable that Patent Trolls would go after OpenStack organization itself, and not after IBM, Oracle, RedHat, HP, Dell or any other of the very large and wealthy commercial users and strong supporters of OpenStack technologies, that are overwhelming the Microsoft Azure Cloud Computing effort, with far superior features, functionality and efficiencies of cost.
This type action bespeaks the very devious and sinister characteristics of Patent Trolls, especially the draconian "Rockstar group", started by Microsoft with Apple, Sony and other heavy Free/Open Source Software (FOSS) users litigating, most likely illegally and unethically, against their own interest and economic benefit.
Such is the nature of excessive greed in the unscrupulous and sick capitalism that permeates every level of business in USA.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
