On CBSSports.com: Race for the chase: NASCAR’s heating up!
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet

By Graeme Wearden, News.com
Posted on ZDNet News: Oct 4, 2004 1:08:00 PM

Eastman Kodak has won a controversial lawsuit in which it claimed Sun Microsystems had infringed several of its patents with its Java programming language.

A federal jury on Friday ruled in favor of Kodak, and the photography giant is now seeking damages of $1 billion from Sun.

The case has outraged some opponents of software patents, who claim it is a textbook example of why software should not be patentable.

Kodak's case centered on three patents that it bought from Wang Laboratories in 1997, several years after Java was created. These patents--numbers 5,206,951, 5,421,012, and 5,226,161--referred to the integration of data between object managers, and between data managers, and to the integration of different programs that were manipulating data of different types.

The lawsuit was filed in February 2002 in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York.

Kodak argued in court that these patents covered the method where an application "asked for help" from another application--such as in Java's object-oriented programming language.

Kodak could not immediately be contacted for comment. According to a report in the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle on Friday, the company said it was "pleased that the court has validated Kodak's intellectual property rights."

Critics, though, have claimed that these patents should never have been granted, as they appear to cover one of the basic tenets of modern computing: the interaction between different programs.

Pamela Jones, who runs Groklaw--a Web site devoted to legal issues in the technology sector--has been flooded with comments since the decision was made, mostly from people opposing it. Jones herself believes the case could have disastrous consequences.

"Software patents will destroy the industry in the U.S.," wrote Jones on Sunday. "The rest of the world will out-innovate U.S. companies, because they won't be running with the patent ball-and-chain attached to their ankles, holding them back.

"Protect your software with copyright and trade secrets," she continued, "but using patents for software inevitably blocks progress. If you must have it, rope it off severely so it doesn't hurt anyone like this. At a minimum, patents that aren't actively being used by the patent holder in any way in any product shouldn't be available as a weapon against a company actively bringing an idea to fruition and use."

The European Union is currently moving towards bringing in a system that would allow some software patenting, although this has not yet been ratified.

Opponents of software patents have been lobbying for some patents to be revoked.

Last week, the U.S. Patent Office issued a preliminary rejection for a patent previously granted to Microsoft for its Windows FAT file format.

Graeme Wearden of ZDNet UK reported from London.

  • Talkback
  • Most Recent of 145 Talkback(s)
Sounds good but ...
doesn't address the problem that patented IP has become so extensive that no one can seem to keep track of it. Even Sun, with all of their resources, was apparently unaware for all these years that t... (Read the rest)
Posted by: George Mitchell Posted on: 10/05/04 You are currently: Logged In | Log out
Do the right thing Tim Patterson   | 10/04/04
No problem here! dg mh   | 10/04/04
*lol* eLurker   | 10/04/04
Can somebody help me about patents? Kamakazii   | 10/04/04
Against Software Patents and full rational David Mohring   | 10/04/04
Good post until... Anton Philidor   | 10/04/04
Not altruistic but realistic David Mohring   | 10/04/04
Yes, patents are good. Anton Philidor   | 10/04/04
Challenge: Show me a "good" Software patent. David Mohring   | 10/04/04
Only patent attornies need apply Anton Philidor   | 10/04/04
Exactly! No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
Not so Tim Patterson   | 10/04/04
Patent things that are meant to be patented voska   | 10/04/04
Are you suggesting... No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
A Challenge Thrice: Then point out a "good" software patent David Mohring   | 10/04/04
Are you ready for surgery yet? No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
Please point to an argument that I have not addressed David Mohring   | 10/04/04
I notice NemesisNL   | 10/04/04
Yes, exactly voska   | 10/04/04
But I am a developer and your answering a question with a question David Mohring   | 10/04/04
Not that easy Anton Philidor   | 10/04/04
So there are no "good" software patents, only "good" Patent attornies? David Mohring   | 10/04/04
Yeah, just like a programmer can make bad open source. No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
Yes. And patents will continue... Anton Philidor   | 10/04/04
"... patent / free competition balance to be dialectical, not static" David Mohring   | 10/04/04
And patents actually do some good... Anton Philidor   | 10/04/04
While patents in general my be beneficial, Software patents are not David Mohring   | 10/04/04
David, that is one groups opinion, I can show you others. No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
No_Ax_to_Grind, Then please provide links. David Mohring   | 10/04/04
If I were making a theoretical argument for software patents... Anton Philidor   | 10/04/04
Re: Yes. And patents will continue... none none   | 10/04/04
Software patents are wrong! Simple voska   | 10/04/04
Not at all... No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
Unlike Linux, your company researches? Anton Philidor   | 10/04/04
Exactly, the problem is open source can't. No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
Re: Unlike Linux, your company researches? none none   | 10/04/04
Not their domain IT_User   | 10/04/04
Nonsense NemesisNL   | 10/04/04
A couple reasons here. voska   | 10/04/04
Software Patents charliech   | 10/04/04
I got a few. doe_z   | 10/04/04
But does not the copyright protect you? voska   | 10/04/04
Re: Can somebody help me about patents? P. Douglas   | 10/04/04
LOL, Sun, wearing the other shoe this time FilledOut   | 10/04/04
Yeah, come easy, go easy. Anton Philidor   | 10/04/04
exactly NemesisNL   | 10/04/04
Against Software Patents and full rational David Mohring   | 10/04/04
Thanks 4 the info Kamakazii   | 10/04/04
Problems with your "game theory" argument Anton Philidor   | 10/04/04
Counter... doe_z   | 10/04/04
Check the attic for valuable antiques. Anton Philidor   | 10/04/04
So... doe_z   | 10/04/04
The sky is falling.... No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
Challenge: Show me a "good" Software patent. David Mohring   | 10/04/04
Sorry, patent searchs cost money. No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
You said it more briefly than I. (NT) Anton Philidor   | 10/04/04
Sorry, you liar, the USPTO provide a free web based search David Mohring   | 10/04/04
Yeah, and I can look at... No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
Well??? Would you? No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
David, I am point you to the above post. No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
But if a doctor showed you an Xray of a dog. David Mohring   | 10/04/04
Sorry, wrong. No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
Axe actually is right NemesisNL   | 10/04/04
If youhire a patent lawyer, it costs to do the search! B.O.F.H.   | 10/04/04
They can't.... el1jones   | 10/04/04
They can't ... disprove the existance of Unicorns either David Mohring   | 10/04/04
oh come on david... NemesisNL   | 10/04/04
I was mostly agreeing with you....(and unicorns do exist) el1jones   | 10/04/04
After some quick research, I've concluded that... el1jones   | 10/04/04
Microsoft Next tero_t_vaananen@...   | 10/04/04
You forget who is partners with MS. No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
Microsoft is parterned with Kodak? voska   | 10/04/04
You bet they are. No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
why? V Sanders   | 10/04/04
Ah, so you prefer ignorance. No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
Not so sure about that voska   | 10/04/04
Nope NemesisNL   | 10/04/04
Great news! George Mitchell   | 10/04/04
Frankly, your dead wrong. No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
ms is losing teir monopoly V Sanders   | 10/04/04
Gee, I can't tell. No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
No one else thinks so? IT_User   | 10/04/04
Sure NemesisNL   | 10/04/04
Hogwash and you know it. No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
Not directly NemesisNL   | 10/04/04
Sorry, Kodak started this long ago. No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
I am up to speed NemesisNL   | 10/04/04
No, Kodak filed the patent long ago. No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
So who's not up to speed NemesisNL   | 10/04/04
patents yes NemesisNL   | 10/04/04
You are right, it's a very old patent. No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
No, but they have tried to extort money using them Taz_z   | 10/04/04
Offering a license is extortion? Hmmm, can you say GPL? No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
Please tell me what patents and GPL have in common. Taz_z   | 10/04/04
They both restrict and limit what may be done. No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
Only if you redistribute it or sell it Taz_z   | 10/04/04
Yup, same as a patent. No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
Please show me this Taz_z   | 10/04/04
Sorry, you are wrong. No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
Speaking of getting a clue, Taz_z   | 10/04/04
Extort? rapson   | 10/04/04
Going a little overboard there, aren't you? Taz_z   | 10/04/04
Taz, this isn't about Microsoft... No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
I agree. Taz_z   | 10/04/04
Taz, stop reaching for straws. K? (nt) No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
Can you say "BayStar"? George Mitchell   | 10/04/04
What's Next? coffeenite   | 10/04/04
has anyone patented painting pictures of dogs or anything like that V Sanders   | 10/04/04
David Morphing: You asked... No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
yep... NemesisNL   | 10/04/04
Simply isn't true... No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
We are just at the beginning of this ordeal NemesisNL   | 10/04/04
I've heard that for 30 years. Hasn't happened yet. No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
software patents are fairly new NemesisNL   | 10/04/04
Pardon me... Take a look at IBM's patent holdings. No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
Nobody has "been at it" for 30 years IT_User   | 10/04/04
Not true IT_User   | 10/04/04
Meaning of innovation Anton Philidor   | 10/04/04
You hit the nail on the head. No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
Yeah, the sky is falling IT_User   | 10/04/04
Re: David Morphing: You asked... none none   | 10/04/04
Notice who is against patents in the talkbacks. No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
Notice who is getting Sued,not open source but Microsoft's customers David Mohring   | 10/04/04
Never happened. No MS user has been sued. No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
Man get your facts straigt NemesisNL   | 10/04/04
Point being, NO MS use has been sued. No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
*user* No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
No need to draw NemesisNL   | 10/04/04
Nice rant, have anything of value to contribute? No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
What is wrong with you people? none none   | 10/04/04
Let's see if I get this right IT_User   | 10/04/04
The history of blood letting. Accounting and actual software patent returns David Mohring   | 10/04/04
Again, the only ones complaining is the have nots. No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
You mean Enron was innocent of accounting fraud? David Mohring   | 10/04/04
Man, you really are reaching for any straw. No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
David, you can relax now. You got him. Taz_z   | 10/04/04
It you think ranting about Enron is On Topic. OK. No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
She is absolutely right... BitTwiddler   | 10/04/04
Not true. No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
It's not as if Americans want to compete! B.O.F.H.   | 10/04/04
What has your post to do with anything in this story? No_Ax_to_Grind   | 10/04/04
What are you whining about now? B.O.F.H.   | 10/04/04
After looking at all the posts CobraA1   | 10/04/04
Patents - The First and Ultimate Open Source Project secureplay_z   | 10/05/04
Sounds good but ... George Mitchell   | 10/05/04

What do you think?

advertisement