·:[ frepa.blog ]:·
• • • • •

Hittade denna artikel i Computer Sweden :

Microsoft samlar på sig patent för existerande teknik. Det gör att småföretag tvingas skriva på avtal som föreslås av Microsoft. Det blir för jobbigt och dyrt att bestrida de tveksamma patenten.

Jag behövde visserligen inte fler argument mot mjukvarapatent , men här kom just ytterligare ett. Det är dessutom ytterligare en orsak till att det är högst olämpligt att ha Microsofts VD Peter Kopelman i Umeå universitets styrelse! Här ägnar de sig uppenbarligen åt att systematiskt patentera andras arbete.

In a statement from the Boards of Directors of EDUCAUSE and The Sakai Foundation, they state that:

"The boards of directors of the Sakai Foundation and of EDUCAUSE recognize the patent pledge
announced on February 1, 2007, by Blackboard as a step in a more positive direction for the community, to
the extent that it offers some comfort to a portion of the academic community that uses open source or
homegrown systems. In the pledge, Blackboard states that it will not assert certain patents against open
source or home grown systems bundled with no proprietary software. We particularly welcome the
inclusion of pending patents, the clarification on the commercial support, customization, hosting or
maintenance of open source systems, and the worldwide nature of Blackboard’s pledge. We also appreciate
the willingness of Blackboard to continue with frank and direct dialogue with our two organizations and
with other higher education representatives and groups to work toward addressing these problems of
community concern.

Although Blackboard has included in the pledge many named open source initiatives, regardless of whether
they incorporate proprietary elements in their applications, Blackboard has also reserved rights to assert its
patents against other providers of such systems that are "bundled" with proprietary code. We remain
concerned that this bundling language introduces legal and technical complexity and uncertainty which will
be inhibitive in this arena of development…"

Read the complete statement here.

Technorati Tags: Software patent LMS Virtual Learning Environment e-learning Sakai

From Groklaw: The Blackboard Patent Pledge - Novell II?

Some additonal comments on the Blackboard’s nonassertion patent pledge from Droklaw.

The next chapter in this strange patent matter seems to be started…

From Groklaw: Patent Office Orders Re-Examination of Blackboard Patent:

The US Patent and Trademark Office today ordered re-examination of the e-learning patent owned by Blackboard Inc. Once again, we have the Software Freedom Law Center to thank for filing the request.

Their press release tells us this: "The Patent Office found that prior art cited in SFLC’s request raises "a substantial new question of patentability" regarding all 44 claims of Blackboard’s patent…. A re-examination of this type usually takes one or two years to complete. Roughly 70% of re-examinations are successful in having a patent narrowed or completely revoked."

From Groklaw:

The Software Freedom Law Center has filed a reexamination request with the USPTO regarding Blackboard’s eLearning patent. I told you about this patent and mentioned I had written about this it for LWN back in August, shortly after Blackboard sued Desire2Learn, another educational software maker.

Read the whole storry at http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20061130104032942

Idag, en vecka innan omröstningen i EU-parlamentet, publicerade Dagens Industri min debattartikel om hur mjukvarupatent hotar e-lärande. Artikeln är publicerat i något redigerad form, men annars identisk med den som jag publicerat här på bloggen. Tyvärr så har jag inte kunnat hitta den i digital form på DI så det blir till att läsa den här istället.

From cNet: "Europe’s software patent war ignites again "

Last year, the Parliament derailed a proposed directive that, critics argued, would have legitimized software patents in Europe. On Thursday the PES, Greens/EFA and GUE/NGL parliamentary groups said that a measure facing a parliamentary vote on Oct. 11 or 12 could take up where the failed software patent directive left off.

An article that is worth reading. Gives an update on where Europe are on the software patent matter right now. A very worrying situation though…

See also my earlier posts on the patent matter:

• Debattartikel: Mjukvarupatent är ett hot mot e-lärande (in Swedish)
• More reactions on BB-patent applications
• Blackboard is patenting the VLE?!
• Don’t allow software patents to threaten technology enhanced learning in Europe! (Our petition!)  

Den senaste tidens turbulens kring Blackboards mjukvarupatent gör att det är svårt att låta bli att skriva en debattartikel om saken. Förhoppningsvis kommer den att publiceras i Computer Sweden inom kort. Till dess finns den att läsa nedan:

Mjukvarupatent är ett hot mot e-lärande
Under flera års tid har möjligheten att ta patent på mjukvara diskuterats i Europa. Frågan om mjukvarupatent är en av de mest ”lobbade” frågorna i EU:s historia. I Sverige har debatten dock i det närmaste uteblivit. Detta trots att såväl svensk forskning som de flesta företag i den svenska IT-branschen har mycket att förlora på införandet av mjukvarupatent i Europa. I en tidigare debattartikel i CS var vi ett antal skribenter som pekade på flera av de risker som mjukvarupatent medför. Flera undersökningar visar att mjukvarupatent inte leder till någon ökad tillväxt, utan snarare gynnar stora aktörer som redan befinner sig i en monopolliknande ställning, samtidigt som det hämmar innovation. Mjukvarupatent är dessutom ett direkt hot mot program med öppen källkod, samtidigt som det begränsar den fria (och öppna) forskningen. Draget till sin spets är mjukvarupatent ett hot mot själva Internet genom det sätt på vilket det riskerar att underminera den öppenhet och den filosofi som ligger till grund för Internets utveckling. Mjukvarupatent gynnar sällan den som är upphovsperson till en innovation, utan snarare de som skrupellöst exploaterar och utnyttja andras idéer och arbete. För detta är mjukvarupatent ett mycket effektivt verktyg!

E-lärande är ett av de områden som riskerar att drabbas hårt av de absurda och orimliga effekter som mjukvarupatent medför. Den pressrelease som kom från Blackboard (ett företag som för övrigt knappast är kända för sina innovationer) i juli visar detta med all önskvärd tydlighet. I sin pressrelease förkunnas att BB beviljats patent i USA för ”technology used for internet-based education support systems and methods”. Patentet täcker i princip de flesta grundläggande teknologier och metoder för nätbaserad utbildning och e-lärande, inklusive så kallade Learning Management Systems (LMS: er). Allt som allt gör man anspråk på 44 olika grundläggande funktioner och teknologier. Patent har även beviljats i Australien, Nya Zeeland och Singapore. Samtidigt har man lämnat in motsvarande patentansökningar i en rad andra länder, däribland Europa och Canada.

BB:s agerande är motbjudande, en känsla som bara blir starkare när man läser i patentdokumentet där de i princip hävdar att de (förutom att vara marknadens mest innovativa företag) uppfann konceptet virtuella lärmiljöer så sent som 1999. I själva verket står ursprunget till det som BB tillskriver sig snarare att finna i öppna miljöer i den akademiska världen och inom öppen källkodsrörelsen. Det är där man finner många av de innovationer och det nytänkande som leder utvecklingen framåt. Projekt som Moodle, Sakai, e-learning Framework (ELF) och LAMS m.fl. är goda exempel på detta. Uppenbarligen har berörda patentmyndigheter valt att helt bortse från detta - det som i patentsammanhang brukar kalla för ”prior art”. Om detta beror på okunnighet, ren dumhet eller något ännu mer suspekt får var och en själva spekulera i.

Som om själva patentet inte vore magstarkt nog har BB även börjat agera i enlighet med sitt nyvunna patent. I ett första steg genom att stämma konkurrenten Desire2Learn för patentintrång. Tyvärr är det som vi nu ser sannolikt bara början på en mycket oroande utveckling – vars förutsättningar har skapas av orimliga patentlagar i kombination med (om möjligt) ännu orimligare tolkningar.

Frågan om mjukvarupatent är angelägen för alla som på något sätt arbetar med, eller intresserar sig för, IT och lärande. Den senaste tidens utveckling borde vara tillräcklig oroande för att fungera som en (mycket högljudd) väckarklocka - inte minst för de svenska politiker som genom sitt agerande varit med om att skapa förutsättningarna för europeiska mjukvarupatent!

The BB-patent application is causing a lot of (rightfully) strong reactions. Stephen Downes has made a small survey of some of the reactions in his comment to the BB-patent application . I general the reactions are everything else than positive… Stephens post is good reading if you are interested in the different reactions to the BB-patent application

However, Scott Wilson turns it around and says in a good and a bit incisive wording that:

“I hope we can use this as an opportunity…perhaps Tony Karrer is correct and that we are at the point of technology disruption, and we’ll see the LMS displaced by simpler technologies with different non-functional characteristics (following the typical technology pattern).”

I fully agree with him, but there is an impending risk that the BB-patent(s) also will cower some of those ”simpler” technologies. Besides, people have to learn to think differently and in a more modularized, systemic way if such modularized view on the VLE (which I am a strong believer in) will be more that just another LMS that is modularized. However, in a couple of years so…

Elliott Masie comment on the patent issue in his latest “Learning TRENDS” newsletter and says that:

“The MASIE Center is concerned about the patent award process for e-Learning and we have testified as unpaid witnesses in a recent suit, to counter the claims. We believe that there is substantial "prior art" in this arena, though the strategy is often to drive up the cost of litigation until the case is settled.”

The "blogsphere" is loaded with analysis and concern about the impact of these e-Learning patents. Here are a few resources that you might want to review:
Blackboard’s View: http://www.blackboard.com/patent

Analysis from Other Sources:
http://www.technorati.com/search/blackboard%20patent
http://mfeldstein.com/images/uploads/Blackboard_Patent_Claims.pdf

The Masie Center will be hosting a special set of sessions on Patents & Learning at Learning 2006 (Orlando, Florida on November 5 to 8th. http://www.learning2006.com/blog/ )

The best way to show our opinion about the BB-patent would probably be a massive boycott of Blackboard – if everybody just stopped using their products, but I guess that that will not happen… However, in a comment to my previous post (August 1st) Al Harris suggests that:

we all use our del.icio.us account to record any relevant prior art found online, using the tag ” vle/prior-art ” followed by ” 19** ” will allow anyone to search and find your finds.

This is a good idea that will make it easier for everyone to contribute in pointing out the absurdity of the BB-patent – as well as illustrating the absurdity of this kind of ”impossible” software patents in general!

Sean Mehan (who is the head of e-Frameworks) is blogging about Bb:s insane patent application , in which they are obviously trying to patent the whole concept of the virtual learning environment! This is a very disturbing development and it is very hard (impossible) to predict its implications. One thing is for certain however - this will not benefit e-learning or the level of innovation within e-learning and learning technology. In my opinion such patents (as well as the twisted minds of the EU patents office) are a threat to innovation and the evolution of learning technology. It is also a threat to all the Open Source VLE:s out there. OSS implementations of VLE:s such as Moodle, Sakai and others are in many respects in the front line and they are functioning as a driving force in the ongoing evolution of e-learning. So, where will this lead in the long run…?

Sean (and others that he refers to) presents many interesting thoughts; so, instead of doing my own analysis (which will be quite similar in many respects) I recommend a read through of his posts at:

• Bb has finally admitted that they inveted VLEs….and CMS, and ….
• Some people are calling for institutions to embrace change

… and the Bb patent application: "Software Patent: Internet-based education support system and methods"

This is a good example of why we wrote the petition agains software patents in Europe!

As some may have noticed, the http://www.noelearningpatents.net/ had some DNS-related problems. It worked for some people, while some people just saw a blank page, and some people have even reported that they where redirected to Microsofts website. It should work now and there is also an alternative URL @ http://flosse.dicole.org/redirect.html

As we believe that European software patents is a serious threat to the use of ICT for learning as well as to the right to free access to information and knowledge, we have written a petition at FLOSSE Posse.

This petition aims to alert European authorities and policy-makers to the dangers of software patents, and particularly to the negative impact they will have on education. The use of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) to support and enhance teaching and learning, including e-learning, is now recognised as a key element in providing education which meets the needs and abilities of students, and prepares Europe to participate creatively, technologically and economically on a global level.

Read and sign the full petition at http://www.noelearningpatents.net/

Please spread this! 

Join!

Riina Vuorikari Writes about software patents at the FLOSSE Posse blog.

Let’s let them hear what we think about software patents - FLOSSE Posse - a public consultation round on patents in EC - As expected, the Commission is most likely trying to sneak in the issue of software patents into the Community Patent. A general discussion has now been opened about the Community Patent and the future EC patent policy in general, nothing mentioned about software patents, though. The Commission says that the Community Patent remains a priority for them, but they are also seeking views on what measures could be taken in the near future to improve the patent system in Europe.

They are also planing a position paper on the issue, under the parole: “No learning patents!“. A good initiative!

Read the full article at the FLOSSE Posse blog

See also:

• The “No learning patents!” web site
• the Commission’s call for comments on software patents
• My previous contribution to the subject:

• Statliga pirater stjäl av oss (nåja) [In Swedish]
• Our contribution to the debate (published in several swedish papers) [in Swedish]
• Our report to the Swedish Net-university: “EN PUBLIK E-LÄRANDEPLATTFORM BYGGD PÅ KUNSKAPSMÅNGFALDER, ÖPPEN KÄLLKOD OCH ÖPPNA IT-STANDARDER” [In Swedish]