![]() |
Against Monopolydefending the right to innovate |
Monopoly corrupts. Absolute monopoly corrupts absolutely. |
||
|
Copyright Notice: We don't think much of copyright, so you can do what you want with the content on this blog. Of course we are hungry for publicity, so we would be pleased if you avoided plagiarism and gave us credit for what we have written. We encourage you not to impose copyright restrictions on your "derivative" works, but we won't try to stop you. For the legally or statist minded, you can consider yourself subject to a Creative Commons Attribution License. |
|
current posts | more recent posts | earlier posts Korea digitizes its schoolbooks Korea's eduction ministry announced plans to greatly expand its use of digital textbooks in public schools, going from the current 14, all in math for grades 5 and 6, to 100 by 2011 in all subjects link here. "Digital textbooks have many advantages, like multi-media functions such as videos instead of printed illustrations," a ministry official said. Studies there show that students pay more attention to lessons when they use digital textbooks, he added.
[Posted at 03/08/2007 07:30 AM by John Bennett on IP in the News Hyper-light-speed antenna If you want to amuse yourself, go check out patent 6,025,810 [Posted at 03/07/2007 02:35 PM by David K. Levine on Ease of Imitation Good Discussion of IP on Volokh A long post at Volokh. Note the lottery ticket angle. Shades of Plant on copyright.
Then we have Libertarian lawyer Randy Barnett pointing out the contradictions of IP as property In the Progress Clause, the Constitution refers to "exclusive right" for "limited times" not to IP, which has nothing to do with property. Hunter McDaniel adds in the comments that IP was used to create a false metaphor, and that any government-granted monopoly has value for the grantee but that that does not make it property. Thanks to Mark Brady for the link. [Posted at 03/07/2007 05:00 AM by William Stepp on Is IP Property Anatomy of a Patent Thicket: MP3 Here you see how all the overlapping claims make intellectual property unmanageable.
Heingartner, Douglas. 2007. "Patent Fights Are a Legacy of MP3's Tangled Origins." New York Times (5 March). "The confusion stems from the number of companies and institutions -- including Thomson, Royal Philips Electronics and AT&T (through Bell Labs, now part of Alcatel-Lucent) -- that worked to create the MP3 standard almost two decades ago. The patent claims of those and others are increasingly being backed up by aggressive enforcement efforts, including lawsuits and even seizures of music players by customs authorities." "Until now, the most prominent holder of MP3 patents has been the Fraunhofer Society of Germany, which was founded in 1949 and has become Europe's largest applied research organization. The division that helped develop MP3, the Fraunhofer Institute for Integrated Circuits, earns millions of dollars a year in licensing fees from software makers like Microsoft, which incorporates the format into its Windows Media Player, and from music player manufacturers like Apple. The payments -- typically $2,500 for a video game, or $2 a unit for music players -- are administered for Fraunhofer by the French electronics firm Thomson, which also played a role in the early development of MP3." The Web site of the Fraunhofer: "Its detailed online history of MP3 portrays the format as an outgrowth of German university research in the 1970s, when German engineers began working on audio compression. One of Fraunhofer's leading audio engineers, Karlheinz Brandenburg, is frequently referred to in the German media as the father of MP3, a title he dismisses." "But Alcatel-Lucent, which won the court judgment against Microsoft last month, has its own version of that history. It says Bell Labs (whose patent rights Alcatel acquired when it bought Lucent Technologies last year) was the main creative engine behind what went on to become the MP3 standard. 'A common misunderstanding is that Fraunhofer invented MP3,' said John M. Desmarais, the lead lawyer in the Microsoft case for Alcatel-Lucent, which is based in Paris. Though Fraunhofer was involved in the research that led to the MP3 standard issued in 1993, he said, 'Bell Labs had already developed the fundamental technology' in the mid-1980s, 'before Fraunhofer even came on the scene' .... 'MP3 has a lot of parts to it,' and 'two of the key parts are owned by Bell Laboratories,' he said, but 'that doesn't mean that other people don't have an ownership interest'". "The group that made the MP3 standard official is the International Organization for Standardization, or ISO, a nongovernmental group based in Geneva that sets specifications for items as diverse as shipping containers and dashboard indicators. One of its many internal bodies is the Moving Picture Experts Group, or MPEG, a team of industry specialists established in 1988 to standardize digital multimedia formats." "Many proposals were submitted for the first standard for audio and video compression, called MPEG-1, which was completed in 1992 and formally published in several parts in 1993. The chosen proposals included Musicam (also known as MPEG-1 Audio Layer 2, a format used in digital broadcasting) and Aspec, which went on to become the basis for MPEG-1 Audio Layer 3, now called MP3." "Several companies -- including the Dutch electronics giant Philips -- claim patent rights to Musicam, and by extension, to a piece of MP3. 'In the case of MP3, it is very clear that this was not developed only by AT&T, Fraunhofer and Thomson, because it was based upon Musicam,' said Leon van de Kerkhof, a program manager at Philips Applied Technologies who was also a crucial member of the MPEG group at its inception." "A spokeswoman for Thomson, Martine Esquirou, acknowledged that Fraunhofer and Thomson were not the only holders of MP3-related patents. 'We're not involved in this patent dispute between Microsoft and Alcatel-Lucent,' she said by e-mail. 'Thomson has not and does not license the patents in question'." "Thomson's licensing program, she said, is based on 20 separate patent families that 'cover at least part of' the MPEG specifications. Thomson licenses these patents to more than 400 hardware and software companies." "Muddling matters more, many of the companies on Thomson's list of licensees, including Apple, Microsoft, Motorola, Nokia and Samsung, also pay for additional MP3 licenses from Sisvel, an Italian company whose American subsidiary is called Audio MPEG." "According to Sisvel, the MP3 patents it represents (on behalf of companies including Philips and France Telecom) are “compulsory for complying with the ISO standard.” Sisvel has aggressively enforced these patents -- for example, by having German customs authorities confiscate SanDisk MP3 players from the SanDisk booth at a German trade fair last September. In 2005, Sisvel sued Thomson over licensing fees for MP3 patents that Sisvel said Thompson had stopped paying; they quickly settled." "In February, a little-known company called Texas MP3 Technologies also entered the fray, suing Apple, Samsung and SanDisk for infringement of what it said were its rightful MP3 patents." [Posted at 03/05/2007 06:36 PM by Michael Perelman on IP in the News PTO may open up to public comment Alan Sipress at the Washington Post link here reports that the Patent Office will begin opening some of its applications to public comment and that the process, initially experimental, may evolve and become Wiki-like. This is not new news as Slashdot reports link here and link here, but seems to promise more change, as the PTO is overwhelmed and increasingly criticized for its decisions.
We critics of the PTO and the evolution of IP law need to follow this closely to make sure that its decisions reflect appropriate attention to such things as prior art and non-obviousness. Is this the time to begin to organize to make our influence felt? [Posted at 03/05/2007 05:32 AM by John Bennett on IP in the News Sound the Drums Via Konstantini Kiousis - a YouTube video explaining the world's most important 6 second drum loop: and how and why it is copyrighted.
[Posted at 03/03/2007 07:41 AM by David K. Levine on The Music Police Is DRM the Right Business Model? A nice essay by author Eric Flint on DRM. Flint is affiliated with Baen Press; Baen is a science fiction publishing house that has been a pioneer in selling e-books, and has always offered them free of DRM. (I count myself among their satisfied customers; I've probably spent as much money on Baen e-books the last five years as on paper books.) To Flint's essay I will simply add: I have from time to time been curious as to whether anyone bothers to "share" Baen unencrypted e-books over peer-to-peer networks. The only ones I've ever found are books from the "free lending library" which are the books you are encouraged to redistribute over peer-to-peer. [Posted at 02/24/2007 02:59 PM by David K. Levine on DRM The Degradation of Science: From Bell Labs to Pate Here is my take on what Michele just wrote:
Bell Labs was once a jewel of American science. After the Justice Department broke up the Bell System, AT&T let Bell Labs deteriorate until it spun them off as part of Lucent. Lucent, in turn, deteriorated until it was bought up by Alcatel, which seems to be now behaving as a patent troll. Alcatel just won an enormous patent suit against Microsoft -- $1.52 billion for using Bell Labs work on the MP3 format. The suit manner may or may not hold up, but I presume that Alcatel is now preparing suits against others, finally figuring out how it can commoditize the work of Bell Labs. [Posted at 02/24/2007 01:40 PM by Michael Perelman on Against Monopoly Open Source at the Freeman If you are interested in how open source produces great software without the benefit of copyright/patent protection, Michele and my article on the Freeman is now available. [Posted at 02/24/2007 09:55 AM by David K. Levine on Software Who lives by the sword ... may get seriously hurt by the sword. Today, a California court ruled that Microsoft infringed a couple of Alcatel-Lucent patents on compression of MP3 files and awarded a $1.52 billion damage payment from MS to A-L.
This will not kill MS, but is may teach it a lesson or two. Maybe Bill will wake up from his monopolist's sleep rediscover the value of competing by inventing. Maybe he will recall his earlier statements about the software industry that would have never happened if copyrights and patents had been enforced back then, and he will donate a nice billion to a new Foundation working to free the world of one of the most dangerous man-made viruses, IP. While we wait for the miracle to happen, let's smile at MS misfortunes and laugh at the following statement by the A-L's lawyer "We invented it, and everybody else is making money off of it." Yup, someone invented reading and writing, my dear, and we are all making money out of it. It is called progress. [Posted at 02/23/2007 11:50 AM by Michele Boldrin on Software |
|
Most Recent Comments at 07/29/2026 08:18 AM by Anonymous
at 07/29/2026 08:18 AM by Anonymous
at 07/29/2026 08:18 AM by Anonymous
at 07/29/2026 08:18 AM by Anonymous
at 07/29/2026 08:18 AM by Anonymous
at 07/29/2026 08:18 AM by Anonymous
at 07/29/2026 08:18 AM by Anonymous
at 07/29/2026 08:18 AM by Anonymous
at 07/29/2026 04:57 AM by Anonymous
at 07/29/2026 04:57 AM by Anonymous
at 07/29/2026 04:57 AM by Anonymous
at 07/29/2026 04:57 AM by Anonymous
at 07/29/2026 04:57 AM by Anonymous
at 07/29/2026 04:57 AM by Anonymous
at 07/29/2026 04:57 AM by Anonymous
at 07/29/2026 04:57 AM by Anonymous
at 07/29/2026 03:02 AM by Anonymous
at 07/29/2026 03:02 AM by Anonymous
at 07/29/2026 03:02 AM by Anonymous
at 07/29/2026 03:02 AM by Anonymous
|