Linked by Eugenia Loli on Thu 30th Oct 2003 19:05 UTC, submitted by JoŽl EHRET
Morphos On MorphOS-news.de, Genesi announced today that four patents owned by Raquel Velasco will be included in Genesi intellectual property portfolio. Read more here.
Order by: Score:
How
by Aaron Cohen on Thu 30th Oct 2003 19:15 UTC

How do these people get these patents?

How?
by bbrv on Thu 30th Oct 2003 19:28 UTC


We bought them from VisCorp after we left the Company in 1997. Actually, there are three more and we will be adding these to the portfolio soon.
R&B

Damn!
by Emil 'opi' Oppeln Bronikowski on Thu 30th Oct 2003 19:30 UTC

BBRV, You've beat me up by 16 secs! :-)

Patents
by bbrv on Thu 30th Oct 2003 19:40 UTC

We will have a detailed webpage up about this soon on the Genesi site.
R&B

In other news...
by SteveToth on Thu 30th Oct 2003 20:28 UTC

IBM filed for 4 new patents while you are reading this post.

IBM
by bbrv on Thu 30th Oct 2003 20:35 UTC


Hi Steve, we are happy to be working with IBM...;-)

http://www.genesi.lu/genesi_marketing.php

:-)

R&B

Patents...
by zeb on Thu 30th Oct 2003 22:08 UTC

US5561708 Method and apparatus for interactive television through use of menu windows
US5504519 Method and apparatus for printing coupons and the like


How so vague and so basic functions could be patented ? Do I violate the first patent because I use a cable TV through kwin or with MythTV ? And for the second one... Very soon there will be patents on printing flowers or landscapes...
Doesn't the copyright law sufficient in software ? Patents are really killing creation and competitivity.

re: Patents...
by Kon on Thu 30th Oct 2003 23:03 UTC

Did you read the patents, or understand them? They won't affect how MythTV works - since it doesn't do any audience measurement.

v addition
by Gary on Thu 30th Oct 2003 23:39 UTC
The Horror
by dpi on Fri 31st Oct 2003 00:58 UTC

Luckily, such patents don't mean anything here where i live. Though i feel sorry for US citizens. How liberal that one may not find a similair approach without you earning $ because of that. Is that ''freedom''?

I was considering buying MorphOS plus G4/5 to get away from the WIntel cruft. If competitors, like MorphOS, are gonna play exactly the same patent-power game, they become less attractive as alternative to the current patent-power players to me.

The difference i notice is the number of patents. Leaving that of line: you are nothing better, or worse.

RE: The Horror
by Bill Sykes on Fri 31st Oct 2003 04:15 UTC

"Luckily, such patents don't mean anything here where i live. Though i feel sorry for US citizens. How liberal that one may not find a similair approach without you earning $ because of that. Is that ''freedom''?"

Yes the freedom to profit from one's own ingenuity.

Genius
by dpi on Fri 31st Oct 2003 04:25 UTC

"Yes the freedom to profit from one's own ingenuity."

Which ingenuity? In which way is it ingenius when i invent a mouse wheel on my own and have to pay someone else because s/he was first, while i never knew about that?

That's earning money without doin' rats.

RE: Genius
by Bill Sykes on Fri 31st Oct 2003 04:35 UTC

"Which ingenuity? In which way is it ingenius when i invent a mouse wheel on my own and have to pay someone else because s/he was first, while i never knew about that?"

You didn't know there was such a thing as wheel mouse and you came up with it all on your own? All you have to do is find a way to improve on the design and you have a new patent.

Here I'll give you one. Add a horizontal wheel for the horizontal scroll bar. Place it just in front of the existing vertical one on your mouse and voila.

I am not promising that somenone else hasn't already beaten me to it though. Sometimes a person doesn't get the ticket and has to wait for the next show.

2-Way scrolling on the mouse
by HereSince00 on Fri 31st Oct 2003 05:00 UTC

I am not promising that somenone else hasn't already beaten me to it though. Sometimes a person doesn't get the ticket and has to wait for the next show.

I'm using one right now: a Starlogic 8D Scrolling Mouse (Optical Trackball)

RE: 2-Way scrolling on the mouse
by Bill Sykes on Fri 31st Oct 2003 05:06 UTC

Well it only took me about 10 seconds to think of it. No loss. I am not going to moan any "sour grapes" about it.

Not quite...
by Jace on Fri 31st Oct 2003 06:44 UTC

"Yes the freedom to profit from one's own ingenuity. "

Having an idea and patenting it is hugely different from profiting from that idea. It is the corporate entity or established business that is most often able to profit from patents. Therefore, these things are bought and sold just like any other "intellectual property."

Being the first to patent an idea is hugely different from being the first person to have the idea. First come, first serve.

Re : Patents
by zeb on Fri 31st Oct 2003 10:35 UTC

Did you read the patents, or understand them? They won't affect how MythTV works - since it doesn't do any audience measurement.

So what, if one day, MythTV wants to implement a similar function, why shouldn't it be allowed with its own code ? Software is not an industrial application. Patents should not be allowed in software, because they are still too restrictive for competition.
Just the title of the other patent "coupons and the like"... "the like" : what a very precise definition. Maybe the body of the patent is more precise, but the title emphisizes the danger of patents in software.

Hey!
by bbrv on Fri 31st Oct 2003 11:51 UTC

Hi Guys!

1. These are hardware patents.

2. They have no value until they are enforced.

3. They a US Patents (only).

R&B
bbrv@genesi.lu

Patent Portfolio
by bbrv on Fri 31st Oct 2003 14:00 UTC

You can see the Genesi Patent Portfolio here:

http://www.genesi.lu/press_20031030.php

There are seven patent in total.

R&B

Impatence
by dpi on Fri 31st Oct 2003 14:33 UTC

"You didn't know there was such a thing as wheel mouse and you came up with it all on your own?"

Such situations are entirely possible, yes. Inventor's don't necessary read the newest top-notch everyday, you know.

Nobody with a imo healthy mind is going to check the US Patent Office if something was ''invented'' already.

The patent system doesn't work on an international basis either, as it isn't worldwide. The USA would love to have it this way. They tried in Europe, but alas, the USA's secret lobby got intercepted, got in public, protests were going on and it failed *huge smile c:*.

How is it justified that an inventor in country X has to be Y to a previous inventor, while an inventor in country Z has to pay nada?

Solution: move out of USA to *fill in any country here*. Invent something. Get back to the USA. There, oops().

The thought-control system just doesn't work... it only obstructs those who did not known about the invention. Those who know about it can easily reinvent it in any non-USA country.

"They have no value until they are enforced."

Thus, they are of value, because you can enforce them. Will you enforce them? What are the stakes?

May i ask you *why* exactly you patented them bbrv? Is it a so-called ''defensive patent''? If so, will it stay a ''defensive patent''? Perhaps a reader can agree with your motivation and future regarding this issue...

"Being the first to patent an idea is hugely different from being the first person to have the idea."

Duh? Ofcourse that is different. Because the rules are different. Now if you can argument how it is according to you justified..? Btw it is generally more than a mere ''idea'', it is generally worked out already; an idea put in practise.

Oops typo
by dpi on Fri 31st Oct 2003 14:35 UTC

"has to be" -> "has to pay"

next steps...
by bbrv on Fri 31st Oct 2003 15:13 UTC

As we have said on other forums:

1) The patents give us some leverage against much bigger companies who have infringed on them (again, these are HARDWARE patents). We may be able to force the payment of license fees where infringement can be shown and we may enter an agreement with a law firm specialized to do that sort of thing in the weeks ahead.

2) They could also give us leverage in a cross-licensing situation, and in this case what we are getting might have nothing to do with a STB.

3) They can protect us from bigger companies that might want to slow/stop us.

4) Finally they can give us credibility with institutions and/or investors (particularly as we prepare to go "public").

Roger Remillard was the designer of the ED (Electronic Device) for which the patents were developed. Roger and his patents became part of VisCorp in 1993. We built VisCorp around this device. The ED was a STB that was designed ultimately to run on the AmigaOS. Escom was to be the distributor of the ED in Europe and VisCorp paid a license fee to Escom after Escom acquired Amiga from the CBM bankruptcy. A year later Escom was bankrupt (after nearly $2 billion in revenue in 1995). Then VisCorp tried to buy Amiga from the Escom bankruptcy (we had little choice as we needed the AmigaOS to exist as planned), but without ultimate success (Gateway bought Amiga). When VisCorp abandoned the Amiga acquisition they also abandoned the ED. The Board of Directors felt that without a major distributor the ED was dead. We disagreed with the Board and resigned from VisCorp. They partnered with Iridium. We bought the patents. We know what happened to them. We are still trying...;-) Raquel has been the "Assignee" or owner since 1998.

R&B
bbrv@genesi.lu