Tim Marman's Loosely Coupled

Browse by Tags

• AJAX
• Copyright
• Microsoft
• Patent
• Programming
• Technology
• Things that amuse me
• Things that bother me
• Trademark

• Managing IP Issues with Software

  Black Duck's software sounds like an interesting product. As John explains it , protextIP "analyzes your source code, determines where every line of it came from, identifies and summarizes licensing issues affecting every scrap, and identifies areas of potential exposure." They also recently introduced exportIP, which "scans your code and comes back instantly with a list of areas affected by crypto compliance regs . . . [and] streamlines the process of filling out government notification documents." On a slight tangent - when we have well-defined licenses, we can respect licenses with little effort. Instead, we can rely on software to enforce any restrictions - so Scoble can continue his link blog without worrying . I see this as a superior model to DRM - under the assumption that the good guys will respect the published limitations if it doesn't take too much effort, and the bad guys are going to find ways to do what they want regardless of what technical measures are put into place. Let... Posted Jan 18 2007, 09:37 AM by Tim with | with no comments Filed under: Intellectual Property, Software Development, Programming

• Licensing the Office 2007 UI - what is Microsoft's IP strategy?

  Jensen Harris announced that the Office 2007 Ribbon UI can be licensed . For the last year or so, one of the questions I've been asked again and again has been: "Can I use the new Office user interface in my own product?" I have to be honest - I'm a bit baffled at this whole thing. Note, they are not providing any common controls for the Ribbon. Rather, they are "licensing ... intellectual property rights in the UI (which cover both design and functionality) and offering a comprehensive Design Guidelines document that is a roadmap for developers implementing the UI." The license is free as long as you follow the guidelines, and is intended "[f]or those that want to build their own UI that takes advantage of our design guidelines." The reason, as Jensen describes, is that "the new Office user interface was a huge investment by Microsoft and the resulting intellectual property belongs to Microsoft." The next question, of course, are what rights does Microsoft actually have with the Ribbon... Posted Nov 27 2006, 07:24 AM by Tim with | with 1 comment(s) Filed under: Technology, Intellectual Property, Software Development, Things that bother me, Things that amuse me, Copyright, Patent, Microsoft

• More on the Web 2.0 Trademark

  Marty illustrates (quite literally) the problem with the Web 2.0 trademark. Marty argues, as I did before, that the mark is generic and thus unprotectable. He points out though that this was not just genericide, but "self-induced genericide". Before all of this happened, Alex realized the unifying theory of Web 2.0 is harnessing collective intelligence. This suggests to me that 1) the collective intelligence here is that Web 2.0 should not be protected, and 2) any brand / buzzword / etc which needs countless posts trying to figure out what it really means isn't really marketed and positioned too well. Tags: web 2.0 , web2.0 , web20 , Trademark , Law , Intellectual Property Posted Jun 16 2006, 10:53 AM by Tim with | with no comments Filed under: Technology, Intellectual Property, Software Development, AJAX, Trademark

• Russian Software Developer Beats Pirate in Boxing Ring

  Apparently not content with legal remedies (after all, Russia is not known for it's anti-piracy efforts), a Russian software developer took matters into his own hands . In February, Smirnov saw the dealer selling CDs with his company’s software at a computer market without a license. Smirnov demanded that the dealer stop the illegal sale. A scuffle broke out, but they were stopped by the guard. After that, the pirate expressed a wish to continue the fight in the street, but Smirnov suggested a fitness center. The software development manager won 24-16 in 3 rounds. Posted Mar 31 2006, 03:49 AM by Tim with | with no comments Filed under: Technology, Intellectual Property, Software Development, Things that amuse me, Copyright

• Balthesar's "Rich-Media Application" patent

  Interesting article in Information Week about another broad patent which may lead to a RIM-like showdown. Another big patent fight may be looming. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has granted a broad patent that could force tens of thousands of businesses to pay royalties for processes that have become standard at many companies. The patent awarded to Neil Balthaser and his tiny San Francisco Web-site development company, Balthaser Online, covers the use of rich-media applications over the Internet. The patent--issued on Valentine's Day--covers all rich-media technology implementations, including those that employ tools such as Flash, Flex, Java, Ajax, and XAML, when the rich-media application is accessed by any device over the Internet. Balthaser doesn't claim his patent covers the tools themselves, only the rich-media Internet apps they help create. Examples range from interior decorating software to Google Earth to streaming audio. Read the issued patent . According to the article... Posted Mar 07 2006, 04:00 AM by Tim with | with 1 comment(s) Filed under: Technology, Intellectual Property, Software Development, AJAX, Patent

• Rethinking the Exclusive Reproduction Right in the Digital Context

  In the past, I had small disagreement with Robert Scoble in terms of republishing content. Robert said that "by publishing RSS as full text you're buying into a system where your words will be republished in a variety of ways." I disagreed with him, of course. The medium in which you publish does not affect your rights. I'm writing a paper now on copyright in the digital context, and I'm starting to rethink this assertion - at least in terms of one particular right. Fred recently made the point that, "perhaps more than ever before, a large portion of the technology sector today implicitly depends on fair use to shield its customers . . . from accusations of copyright infringement." In most of these cases, the shield of fair use is needed due to an otherwise unlawful reproduction. Everything in the digital world implicates the reproduction right; even consumption creates a copy for the purposes of infringement. (See, e.g., MAI Systems v. Peak Computer). Then... Posted Dec 05 2005, 08:53 AM by Tim with | with 2 comment(s) Filed under: Technology, Intellectual Property, Software Development, Copyright

• Should we apply product liability to software?

  Rob points out an article that suggests that software developers should be held liable for security and (presumbly) other bugs. While I may not agree in the article's entirety I do agree in part. That is, software manufacturers should assume liability for poorly constructed products just as "real" manufacturers do. (Of course, this means the corporate entity should be responsible, not the indvidual, which I think is Rob's real objection). Software is increasingly becoming an important product in and cornerstone of modern commerce. When software fails, it can lead to real losses (especially when you consider that software controls more and more physical devices now). Thus, it seems more than reasonable that we demand the same degree of care that we require from physical manufacturers. After all, it's not like software manufacturers are making guns . Posted Nov 01 2005, 06:19 AM by Tim with | with 2 comment(s) Filed under: Technology, Intellectual Property, Software Development

• Innovation in the Post-Grokster Era

  Many, including myself , initially thought the unanimous Grokster decision was a disaster for innovation. Some still claim it will significantly chill innovation as nuances of the inducement test are fleshed out in litigation, but it's not the clear disaster that we once thought. As I mentioned briefly in that latter post , I don't think it dramatically affects the landscape for real innovators. In fact, it just might be the best decision they could have reached. The fact is, the bad actors are going to be punished, whether by a Court-created rule or legislation. If the Supreme Court decision let Grokster and StreamCast off, Congress would have stepped in with what would certainly have been much broader than the active inducement test. More significantly, the decision decouples the underlying technology from the intentions and actions of the creators. The decision is not an indictment on peer-to-peer software itself. The way I see it, it just means that bad actors can't hide behind the... Posted Jul 11 2005, 12:14 PM by Tim with | with no comments Filed under: Technology, Intellectual Property, Software Development, Copyright

• A quick rant on H1-B Visas

  On a related note, I agree with Faisal's criticism of Wally's H1-B rant . I don't purport to be an expert here (quite the opposite), but we need to remember that outsourcing is different than the work visa issue. In the former, work is exported from the country because those in places like India or Brazil are willing to work for less. On the contrary, "insourcing" entails bringing workers into the country. These workers will make the same as you (if not more, because they are presumably "specialists"), pay taxes like you, and spend money in our economy like you. Indeed, this is not done because it is cheaper - in fact, the immigration hurdles actually make it more expensive . Price is not the driving factor, but rather quality - companies are willing to pay more because they feel they are getting quality they couldn't get otherwise. In other words, it's more analogous to importing an expensive foreign car not otherwise sold here - it costs more but there is no reasonable substitute. (Note... Posted May 03 2005, 12:03 PM by Tim with | with 1 comment(s) Filed under: Technology, Intellectual Property, Software Development, Things that bother me