IBM defines the US Patent Law

IBM DECLARES WHAT IT THINKS 35 USC 101 REALLY MEANS Much as I love bashing IBM - they are so nefarious - I have to tip my hat to their claim drafters, who always do fun things with claim language. Just this week IBM was awarded a crappy software patent (memory storage pool allocation citing no non-patent prior art), with some fun language - here's U.S. Patent No. 7487322:

1. An article of manufacture including program logic on a computer readable storage medium(...)

This claim is classic in its contempt for 101 caselaw, because it directly attacks the nonsense of 101 caselaw (nonsense that all flows from the legal sewage otherwise known as Gottschalk v. Benson): is an executable computer program on a media an "article of manufacture"? Anyone who knows anything about the computer science or commercial software (a group which excludes much of the CAFC and SCOTUS) would say - sure - software is manufactured and sold as an article. Nothing wrong with this language. Or not, if you ask the Bilski crowd. Such language helps emphasize that Congress has to address the fact that the fundamental statutes of IP law (35 USC 101, 103 and 17 USC 102) will remain constitutionally vague until Congress defines what it means by such terms as "article of manufacture"- a definitional problem NOT the role of the courts to do.

The War in Germany and WordLogic

According to CEO Evanshen, the people at Mercedes-Benz appreciated WordLogic's software superiority in assisting with driver operation of the GPS-based navigation system, and incorporated into their cars. But, they "forgot" to pay for it. So in 2005, WordLogic Corporation filed suit. Despite that, Benz continued using the software and eventually bundled it with a Harmon/Kardon Logic 7 sound system, Bluetooth cell-phone support (including a phone book), and made it a cabin-tech feature for all of its prestigious "S-Class" automobiles. In showrooms, the portion of the multimedia package that controls everything is known as the "COMMAND" system. Every component in the multimedia package is intuitively accessed using COMMAND's predictive software - software that Evanshen, the inventors and the attorneys steadfastly maintain is WordLogic's IP. Evanshen also told me that "... because the German car maker (actually he might have called it a "lawless beast") was made fully aware of the patent and ignored it anyway, treble (legalese for triple) damages are in order." The suit against Mercedes-Benz is "unspecified" as far as the dollar amount of damages being sought. If I understand my attorney correctly, an unspecified claim is a "tort claim", wherein the amount to be awarded is left to the Court to determine. This is usually the case when there are claims that don't have an exact value figure. "Plaintiff has been damaged in the amount to be proven or decided at trial," is an example of how the initial complaint might be phrased. Suits of this nature can also claim for "General Damages", which include future losses and cannot be decided - not today, anyway - by calculating receipts, etc.

Nigerian scams are getting into patents and academia

A patent holder's lonely way by Jonathan Hum and Dov Gold From the 26 January Barrons, page 18

Medical researchers at 12 major universities were shocked recently when they got letters from Nzedegwu Robert Olisa III, demanding $155,000 payment from each lab. Olisa alleged they had violated his patent and copyright with their activities in proteomics - a hot niche of biotechnology that studies the genetic recipes for proteins. Olisa filed infringement complaints with the FBI and the National Science Foundation. Note: a new twist to asserting a patent. The patent is U.S. patent 7,244,702, filed April 2003, and only cites three U.S. patents as prior art. "People are pirating my work.", Olisa said. "They are squishing me." He told Barron's his drug was the subject of 3,000 medical journal articles. Asked for citations,he then said it contained ingredients that have been mentioned in medical journals. His Web site (www.biologicalagents.com) suggests that the drug is useful against cancer, tuberculosis, malaria and HIV. Members of the Assocation of Biomolecular Research Facilities are puzzled by Olisa's bold claims. Olisa also says he owns the patent for detecting 12 of the 20 standard amino acids of which proteins are made. "We're not going to pay his demand.", said University of Minnesota legal counsel Brian Slovut. "We evaluated his claim and determined that there was no validity to it." Note: Brian - you are so wrong. Olisa's patent is one of Jon Dudas' many high quality issued patents. Christopher Viney, general counsel at Roswel Park Cancer Institute in Buffalo, New York, concluded that its lab practices didn't infringe Olisa's claims. Government patent examiners don't always understand the fast moving science of proteomics, noted Harvard University lab manager John Neveu. He said Harvard isn't paying. Olisa promised to call off the collection agents if the alleged infringers pay up. But they had better act fast. Olisa said he is a lieutenant commander in the U.S. Navy and is shipping off to Iraq in a few months.