[governance] Two outrageous stories of so-called

Sat Aug 23 07:24:45 EDT 2008

Parminder and all,

  I believe one of the patents to which George kindly provided as
examples,
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PTXT&s1=7,415,666&OS=7,415,666&RS=7,415,666

is certainly reasonably challangeble with some reasonable possibility of
success.

  The larger point in respect to IPR, is one that is a far more
debatable, and often
legally challanged one vis a vi for example, RIAA and MPAA.  MS also
have
been on a rampage to get as many patents filed and approved with as
little
notice as possible.  The one in George'es example is an especially
egregious
one and seems to make some rather outlandish claims to a broad spectrum
of technology.  FWIW, I believe it begs to be challanged...  MS has been
beat
before regarding other patents it has filed.  It can be beat again.  But
we all
should take some stock that each and every time such highly suspicious
that are filed and later challanged is a very costly affair.

  In respect to some countries patent systems, calling for reform is
often
warrented, and in the case of the US, has been done, but may need to be
done again.  My wonder is where was the IGC two years agon regarding
this issue?

Parminder wrote:

> > The two patents APPROVED this month are described below..
>
> Thanks George for this information.
>
> > Then take action to demand a complete overhaul of the patent system.
>
> Indeed, for overhaul of the complete intellectual property right
> system.
>
> This fits into the rights debate we are having. In fact, after
> discussing education as a positive right and cultural rights and
> right to development as collective rights, the next issue I wanted
> to engage Milton was on the basis and meaning of property rights

>
> He seems to classify it as a basic and real right. To quote him 

> an extension of other basic rights, such as property rights

>
> I dont think the way the notion of property today is legally and
> systemically constructed can be seen from within the framework of
> negative rights. I mean a kind of this is my pile of stones I
> collected, and is in my space, and you stick to your pile in your
> space kind of formulation. So that mere non-incursion assures
> achieving of rights which is the definition of negative rights.
> Property rights are increasingly a framework of social and political
> distribution of resources, attuned to some extent (and some extent
> only) with individuals productive efforts, and need for incentive for
> productive work.
>
> IPRs look even lesser like negative rights. In fact the right of
> anyone to do whatever one wants with an idea one picks up  without
> anyone else loosing that idea  looks more of a negative right.. That
> would be some form of right to access knowledge. Strong institutional
> structures preventing people from using ideas, which are needed to
> safeguard IPR, looks quite a positive act.
>
> It is not enough to assert (if one does) that CS doesnt give IPR the
> status of a right. IPR is becoming the basic organizing principle of
> new economic relationships/ order and thereby social and political
> ones. Its claims are often taken to supersede many other social and
> political priorities/ rights  like the three strikes rule for IPR
> violation  whereby there is a move to allow even private parties 
> ISPs  to unilaterally act in defense of such a right. Even if such
> an action of safeguarding IPR is to the detriment of other rights that
> access to Internet enables (whereby a right to the Internet itself
> may be valid).
>
> IPR definition and enforcement is becoming such an over-arching
> political priority that it can definitely be considered as a strong
> form of a right in practice..  Fighting this needs assertion of
> right to access knowledge as a stronger right. And in terms of the
> digital environment, also an assertion of a right to the Internet.
>
> CS cant remain blind to these powerful forces, and claims of rights
> that underpin fundamental information society changes, and keep
> sticking to some essentialist notions of rights.
>
> Parminder
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> From: George Sadowsky [mailto:george.sadowsky at attglobal.net]
>
> Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 7:51 PM
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
> Subject: [governance] Two outrageous stories of so-called
> "intellectual property protection"
> The two patents APPROVED this month are described below below.
> It's truly remarkable that such giants of of the information industry
> can make such unbelievable leaps into the future.
> I first thought that these were clever jokes.  They are not.  If you
> don't believe them, check them in:
>
> http://patft.uspto.gov/
>
> ttp://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-adv.htm&r=1&p=1&f=G&l=50&d=PTXT&S1=7,407,089&OS=7,407,089&RS=7,407,089
> http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PTXT&s1=7,415,666&OS=7,415,666&RS=7,415,666
> or just Google the patent numbers for some interesting commentary.
> Then take action to demand a complete overhaul of the patent system.
> George
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> AWARDED TO IBM!
> On Tuesday, IBM was granted US Patent No. 7,407,089
> for storing a preference for paper or plastic grocery bags on customer
> cards and displaying a picture of said preference after a card is
> scanned. The invention, Big Blue explains, eliminates the 'unnecessary
> inconvenience for both the customer and the cashier' that results when
> 'Paper or Plastic?' must be asked. The patent claims also cover
> affixing a cute sticker of a paper or plastic bag to a customer card
> to indicate packaging preferences.
> AWARDED TO MICROSOFT!
> United States Patent 7,415,666
>
> Sellers ,   et al.August 19, 2008
> Method and system for navigating paginated content in page-based
> increments
>
> Abstract
> A method and system in a document viewer for scrolling a substantially
> exact increment in a document, such as one page, regardless of whether
> the zoom is such that some, all or one page is currently being viewed.
> In one implementation, pressing a Page Down or Page Up keyboard
> key/button allows a user to begin at any starting vertical location
> within a page, and navigate to that same location on the next or
> previous page. For example, if a user is viewing a page starting in a
> viewing area from the middle of that page and ending at the bottom, a
> Page Down command will cause the next page to be shown in the viewing
> area starting at the middle of the next page and ending at the bottom
> of the next page. Similar behavior occurs when there is more than one
> column of pages being displayed in a row.
>
> --
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> George Sadowsky                              george.sadowsky at gmail.com
> 2182 Birch Way                           george.sadowsky at attglobal.net
> Woodstock, VT  05091-8155               http://www.georgesadowsky.org/
> tel: +1.802.457.3370                       GSM mobile: +1.202.415.1933
> Voice mail & fax: +1.203.547.6020       Grand Central:
> +1.202.370.7734
> SKYPE: sadowsky
>
>    ----------------------------------------------------------------
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.cpsr.org
> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
>      governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>
> For all list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
>

Regards,

Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is
very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS.
div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail
jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
My Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance