Hace mucho que no hablamos del caso Blackboard y de las patentes…en fin, traemos nuevos posts…en este caso de nuestros más querido gurús Stephen Downes y de e-literate, o lo que es lo mismo Michael Feldstein y finalmente de Alfred H. Essa. La cosa va por el camino…como decía la canción por el camino verde que va …a la ermita:
1) February 23, 2008 Jury Supports Blackboard Patent
This is a special issue of OLDaily to wrap up coverage of the Blackboard patent trial jury verdict. The East Texas jury managed to wra up deliberations in an afternoon and get away for the weekend with a judgement of $3.1 million in favour of Blackboard. The reaction across the web was generally one of dismay, though there were some mitigating factors: first, the settlement was much less than Blackboard as wasking, second, the verdict did not include an injunction against sales of Desire2Learn software, and third, the patent is still under review by the U.S. patent office.
Still, Michael Feldstein probably summed up the views of most observers: “I’m speechless.” Feldstein provides ongoing coverage of the reaction, including a post linking to Desire2Learn’s letter to their customers, coverage of the Campus Technology article on the case, and a summary of the Waterloo Record article.
2) Blackboard Vs Desire2Learn Patent Suit – Update In the Blackboard patent case, “the jury handed down its verdict that the patent is valid and that Blackboard should be awarded damages of approximately $3 million.” John Baker, Desire2Learn, February 22, 2008.
I am writing to update you on the current status of the Blackboard v. Desire2Learn Patent Infringement lawsuit. Earlier today the jury handed down its verdict that the patent is valid and that Blackboard should be awarded damages of approximately $3 million.
A Texas jury has found Kitchener software company Desire2Learn Inc. guilty of infringing on an American competitor’s patent.
The verdict, announced this afternoon, allows Blackboard Inc. to demand a ban on sales of Desire2Learn’s products in the United States.
5) Blackboard’s Use and Abuse of Standards Bodies enThe NOSE: Information Technology in Higher Educationde Alfred H. Essa , en último lugar….
One of the interesting twists in the Blackboard Inc v Desire2Learn Patent Case is the potential abuse by Blackboard of the standards process. Michael Feldstein (eLiterate blog) posed the issue last year. Let’s revive it because it’s one of the subtexts in the current trial. Furthermore, it raises a disturbing challenge to the integrity of the standards process.
First, let’s state the facts. Before Blackboard filed the ‘138 patent a number of prominent Blackboard people, including some of the purported patent “inventors” worked as consultants to the IMS standards body during the late 1990s. The list includes prominent people such as Michael Chasen and Mathew Pittinsky, both Blackboard co-founders. Some of them were paid consultants to IMS.
On April 29, 1998 IMS published a document entitled “EDUCOM/NLII Instructional Management Systems Specifications Document Version 0.5”. Bob Alcorn, Mike Petit, and Udo Schuermann from Blackboard are listed as contributors to the specification document. (Alcorn is listed as one of the “inventors” of the ‘138 patent).
Por supuesto hay otros mundos…pero están en Obama (perdón, pero están en Este).