I apologize if someone provides already posted specifics of this – I did search first prior to posting and would not find anything.
Anyway – At your workplace today I appeared to be told to modify a roll more than function on our web site because we obtained a letter by Webvention LLC claiming i was infringing on the patient. Apparently the theory for roll about menu’s was patented instruction online the early nineties, and so if you want to use a move over menu on your site – you will need to pay a license fee.
Who else thinks that is outrageous
Here’s a link discussing the issue:
Javascript/CSS rollover selections are patented and susceptible to licensing – Heap Overflow
This type of thing should be all over the major news networks – the freakin patent office web site is in violation!!
Webvention LLC maintain Google and Apple have paid any licence fee – if that’s the case, shame on these individuals.
Has one else read anything relating to this
: devious:
I’ve never aware of this, but the actual discussion on Heap Overflow has mentioned
the public domain apply on 10-05-2010. If that information is usually correct or not,
I’m unclear. This whole point sounds suspicious to my advice (The Onion).
Maybe you may make the changes right now, but don’t power up it until 10-06-2010
Webvention LLC — Home – This is certainly there site.
MY SPOUSE AND I read the patent (United States Patent: 4656603
Some important facts to consider:
- I think according to the wording that it only applies to be able to iconographic navigation – text-only navigation doesn’t often apply.
- His design record is largely centered on thick-client applications : he specifically states in a single part that your icon assets reside around the PC implementing the actual rules. This could serve as being a work-around for net apps, though temporary storage from the browser could wear his design design.
- He very plainly states that he ripped off his idea from old CAD techniques. I used to utilize these in that 80s – they had digitizer capsules with an iconographic menus of toolsets within them. His patent is a system for re-creating these panels in a credit card applicatoin – how they are able to be created, and how they might work.
An extremely clear parallel regarding his design can be an Adobe toolbar.
- Autodesk and Adobe – the two leading early implementers of this type of graphical navigation, are not on his licensee list – seems they will often have prior paintings to void their claim against these folks. Worth looking in case law.
- Per reviews on Stack Overflow, seems the patent expires October 5, 2010.
- If they ever writes me a threatening e mail, I’ll tell him or her to suck the item.
- None from the above constitutes lawful advice. Speak with a lawyer if you’re contacted by this company.
Oops… seems I read a bad patent! LOL Here’s the correct one: US Patent #5, 251, 294
FINE!!! So I simply just perused through patent ‘294 : my unprofessional judgment (not legal advice) is always that it’s ridiculous in case he thinks this applies INSIDE THE LEAST to web-based drop-down menus. His patent is perfect for a very distinct 2- or 3-panel computer-system context-menu. He goes into the maximum amount detail as to define all the elements in your menu and just how they interact. The patent (in my non-legal opnion) is Way to specific to affect website drop-down choices.
Legitimately, I’m surprised he is not claiming of which any menu falls under his patent.
Exciting… Webvention bought that patent from the patent aggregator late this past year:
Here’s an interesting article on the subject: What’s Cooking at Intellectual Ventures
It seems almost all of the companies listed about Webventions’ licensee page were probably carryovers from IV.
ADDITIONAL INTERESTING INFO!!!!
http: //www. setexasrecord. com/news/2… -cases-filed-in-the-eastern-district-of-texas
SCHWEEEEEEEEEET!!!! LOL
Here’s so history: http: //www. rfcexpress. com/lawsuit. aspid=61288
Might appear to be the summons just went out the following past week. I’m interested to view what happens!!!
Fine… so I ordered the complaint document which they filed. It essentially says that these companies’ web pages are all in violation in their patent without giving details of how – the thing they all have in common… drop-down choices.
They are big companies. Issues been contacted simply by webvention, I would watch carefully how a case goes versus their first circular of big boys.
Thanks for investigating this further. Shocking really.. It will probably be interesting to notice how this performs out. I’m hopeful this patent will get reviewed and then made invalid. Or one or most of these companies being sued will counter and hide these scam performers.
So the business plan is actually:
Search all the patents that are about to expire (so theyll end up being inexpensive to buy) pertaining to claims that good remotely like something that’s ubiquitous and send out a wheelbarrow-full with letters to companies that may rather pay than fight. Then sue a couple of to up this ante.
The sad portion of this is that by allowing patents about ideas for software package the burden falls to developers to know when they usually are incorporating patented ideas of their code. When was a final time any of us looked to determine if a nifty, new widget had been patented before most of us put it in your code How does one even find them
These kinds of businesses in general are generally known as Patent Vultures. I spoke to your patent attorney relating to this case… he said they’ll typically sue several hundred businesses considering the expectation of living for damages. Vultures usually go after smaller businesses, file suit for millions with damages, and accept $5-20k, because the little biz owner will want to settle than invest $50k on security attorneys. Doesn’t look like a typical patent vulture event, though, because they’re going after just a few larger businesses. Who knows, maybe these are establishing precedent
This pursuit can continue for quite awhile. Even if that patent expires these days, as some have suggested, they have six years whereby they can always bring suit pertaining to damages occurring before the patent’s expiration.
Same company is usually trying this bs ag