Comments on: Patent Trolls Attack OpenMoko Project http://www.csamuel.org/2008/11/14/patent-trolls-attack-openmoko-project The Thoughts and Feelings of a Melbourne Person Fri, 05 Mar 2010 20:34:51 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Boycott Novell » Latest Update on Microsoft’s Plans with Software Patents http://www.csamuel.org/2008/11/14/patent-trolls-attack-openmoko-project/comment-page-1#comment-51738 Boycott Novell » Latest Update on Microsoft’s Plans with Software Patents Sat, 22 Nov 2008 22:47:46 +0000 http://www.csamuel.org/?p=1418#comment-51738 [...] [1, 2], probably fails to identify the source of agitation and litigation. It’s not about the patent troll called Sisvel; trolls sometimes operate on behalf of larger companies that want competing products removed from [...] [...] [1, 2], probably fails to identify the source of agitation and litigation. It’s not about the patent troll called Sisvel; trolls sometimes operate on behalf of larger companies that want competing products removed from [...]

]]> By: Matthew http://www.csamuel.org/2008/11/14/patent-trolls-attack-openmoko-project/comment-page-1#comment-50966 Matthew Mon, 17 Nov 2008 16:15:19 +0000 http://www.csamuel.org/?p=1418#comment-50966 Jeff - perhaps you could explain your example further. After looking up the Rambus case, I found an article from 2006 entitled, "FTC Finds Rambus Unlawfully Obtained Monopoly Power". This example does not seem to support your argument that disclosure is insufficient. Also, to clarify on what I said earlier, Ogg Theora actually does use the VP3 codec patented technology, but there is also a license for free use provided. Jeff – perhaps you could explain your example further. After looking up the Rambus case, I found an article from 2006 entitled, “FTC Finds Rambus Unlawfully Obtained Monopoly Power”. This example does not seem to support your argument that disclosure is insufficient.

Also, to clarify on what I said earlier, Ogg Theora actually does use the VP3 codec patented technology, but there is also a license for free use provided.

]]> By: Jeff http://www.csamuel.org/2008/11/14/patent-trolls-attack-openmoko-project/comment-page-1#comment-50945 Jeff Mon, 17 Nov 2008 11:00:13 +0000 http://www.csamuel.org/?p=1418#comment-50945 "To those that say Xiph technologies may contain submarine patents, I would like to point out that the technology is maintained for the express purpose of being free from patents" And your point is? You and Xiph have no better idea what a submarine patent holder has filed than I do or you dog does. The whole point is that _nothing_ is safe from patent trolls, and today there is only one defense.. Defensive patents of your own. And even then, those patents do Nothing against a Patent Troll because he is (likely) not doing anything you can threaten with Mutually Assured Destruction. Submarine Patents can appear whenever and wherever money is _already_ being made in sufficient quantity to warrant it. Prior public disclosure is only a deterrent not a guarantee (See Rambus' behavior at the JEDEC). “To those that say Xiph technologies may contain submarine patents, I would like to point out that the technology is maintained for the express purpose of being free from patents”

And your point is? You and Xiph have no better idea what a submarine patent holder has filed than I do or you dog does. The whole point is that _nothing_ is safe from patent trolls, and today there is only one defense.. Defensive patents of your own. And even then, those patents do Nothing against a Patent Troll because he is (likely) not doing anything you can threaten with Mutually Assured Destruction.

Submarine Patents can appear whenever and wherever money is _already_ being made in sufficient quantity to warrant it. Prior public disclosure is only a deterrent not a guarantee (See Rambus’ behavior at the JEDEC).

]]> By: Chris Samuel http://www.csamuel.org/2008/11/14/patent-trolls-attack-openmoko-project/comment-page-1#comment-50818 Chris Samuel Mon, 17 Nov 2008 05:51:03 +0000 http://www.csamuel.org/?p=1418#comment-50818 @Matthew: to be clear the OpenMoko phones contain no MPEG playback capability, you have to modify them yourself if you want that (and then the MPEG issue is your own to deal with). @Matthew: to be clear the OpenMoko phones contain no MPEG playback capability, you have to modify them yourself if you want that (and then the MPEG issue is your own to deal with).

]]> By: WallPhone http://www.csamuel.org/2008/11/14/patent-trolls-attack-openmoko-project/comment-page-1#comment-50792 WallPhone Mon, 17 Nov 2008 04:16:23 +0000 http://www.csamuel.org/?p=1418#comment-50792 GIF was patented, and has now expired. If it wasn't for GIF, PNG wouldn't exist and we'd still be looking at 256-color webpage graphics. GIF was patented, and has now expired. If it wasn’t for GIF, PNG wouldn’t exist and we’d still be looking at 256-color webpage graphics.

]]> By: Matthew http://www.csamuel.org/2008/11/14/patent-trolls-attack-openmoko-project/comment-page-1#comment-50688 Matthew Sun, 16 Nov 2008 22:35:57 +0000 http://www.csamuel.org/?p=1418#comment-50688 Mpeg is a patented technology requiring a license to distribute and to use, in many countries. No surprise that including MP3 playback functionality prompts litigation. This is a very serious issue (see my link above for additional lawsuits by the Mpeg consortium), but thankfully there is the Xiph.org Foundation, as an alternative. To those that say Xiph technologies may contain submarine patents, I would like to point out that the technology is maintained for the express purpose of being free from patents. Furthermore, the Xiph technologies are all open source, so people are perfectly able to point out any patented technology inside - and have not. Speex, FLAC, Vorbis, and Theora should all be used for truly open media distribution, while Flash and Mpeg are likewise shunned by web developers. We would never accept license and patent restrictions for text media, and so it should be the same with our other ways of communication. Mpeg is a patented technology requiring a license to distribute and to use, in many countries. No surprise that including MP3 playback functionality prompts litigation. This is a very serious issue (see my link above for additional lawsuits by the Mpeg consortium), but thankfully there is the Xiph.org Foundation, as an alternative. To those that say Xiph technologies may contain submarine patents, I would like to point out that the technology is maintained for the express purpose of being free from patents. Furthermore, the Xiph technologies are all open source, so people are perfectly able to point out any patented technology inside – and have not. Speex, FLAC, Vorbis, and Theora should all be used for truly open media distribution, while Flash and Mpeg are likewise shunned by web developers. We would never accept license and patent restrictions for text media, and so it should be the same with our other ways of communication.

]]> By: Leif http://www.csamuel.org/2008/11/14/patent-trolls-attack-openmoko-project/comment-page-1#comment-50670 Leif Sun, 16 Nov 2008 20:33:28 +0000 http://www.csamuel.org/?p=1418#comment-50670 Lots of MP3 players (many of which have sold far more units than OpenMoko) have Ogg-playing abilities. Where are the submarines? Lots of MP3 players (many of which have sold far more units than OpenMoko) have Ogg-playing abilities. Where are the submarines?

]]> By: Nosredna http://www.csamuel.org/2008/11/14/patent-trolls-attack-openmoko-project/comment-page-1#comment-50639 Nosredna Sun, 16 Nov 2008 18:21:41 +0000 http://www.csamuel.org/?p=1418#comment-50639 FLAC is lossless. I'd be surprised if MPEG patents collided with it in any way. Ogg? Maybe. FLAC is lossless. I’d be surprised if MPEG patents collided with it in any way. Ogg? Maybe.

]]> By: Chris Samuel http://www.csamuel.org/2008/11/14/patent-trolls-attack-openmoko-project/comment-page-1#comment-50633 Chris Samuel Sun, 16 Nov 2008 18:11:26 +0000 http://www.csamuel.org/?p=1418#comment-50633 @capnrob: I am under no illusions about that, the only way to be safe from software patent trolls on something you've invented is to not have software patents in the first place. :-( @Foo: a fair point, I'm not clear on how much longer they do have to run. I wouldn't mind guessing it's likely to be for longer than most lines of consumer electronics devices get manufactured for. @capnrob: I am under no illusions about that, the only way to be safe from software patent trolls on something you’ve invented is to not have software patents in the first place. :-(

@Foo: a fair point, I’m not clear on how much longer they do have to run. I wouldn’t mind guessing it’s likely to be for longer than most lines of consumer electronics devices get manufactured for.

]]> By: Foo http://www.csamuel.org/2008/11/14/patent-trolls-attack-openmoko-project/comment-page-1#comment-50617 Foo Sun, 16 Nov 2008 17:38:51 +0000 http://www.csamuel.org/?p=1418#comment-50617 "and that things like Ogg-Vorbis and FLAC are far better (and safer!) choices in the long run." Um... in the *long run*, MPEG-related patents will have expired. MPEG-related patents are only really a problem in the *short run*. “and that things like Ogg-Vorbis and FLAC are far better (and safer!) choices in the long run.”

Um… in the *long run*, MPEG-related patents will have expired. MPEG-related patents are only really a problem in the *short run*.

]]>