M·CAM | All Post
22144
blog,paged,paged-45,ajax_fade,page_not_loaded,,select-theme-ver-4.1,wpb-js-composer js-comp-ver-7.9,vc_responsive
February 12, 2007 In News Archive

PUBPAT News: Opsware Remote Computer Management Patent Challenged by PUBPAT

Date:  Mon, 2007-02-12

Dr. David E. Martin February 12, 2007

OPSWARE REMOTE COMPUTER MANAGEMENT PATENT CHALLENGED BY PUBPAT: U.S.P.T.O. Asked to Review and Revoke Patent That Was Preempted by Open Source Projects

New York, NY — February 12, 2007 — The Public Patent Foundation (“PUBPAT”) announced today that it has filed a formal request with the United States Patent and Trademark Office to review a patent held by Opsware Inc. (NASDAQ: OPSW) related to remote computer management that was preempted by the work of open source projects. In its filing, PUBPAT submitted prior art that the Patent Office was not aware of when reviewing the application that led to the issuance of the patent (U.S. Patent No. 7,124,289), described in detail how the prior art invalidates the patent and asked that the patent be revoked.

The challenged Opsware patent claims methods for automatically configuring or installing software on a plurality of computing devices having different respective sets of software and/or configurations of operating parameters. When Opsware announced the issuance of their patent, Ben Horowitz, CEO of Opsware, was quoted as commenting, with respect to the ”˜289 patent: “This patent solidifies and protects the work we’ve done to greatly advance the automation of data centers.”

The work that Opsware claims to have done, however, may be found in publicly available references, including open source software projects that are directed to configuring and installing software on computers, and that were available and in public use in the United States more than a year before the filing date of the ”˜289 patent. Moreover, the ”˜289 patent may impact the developers and users of open source projects, including Cfengine, LCFG, Quattor, and BCFG.

“Individuals, non-profit organizations, educational institutions, and businesses throughout the United States rely on these open source software tools to manage their computers,” said PUBPAT’s Executive Director Dan Ravicher. “The technology claimed in the ”˜289 is not the work of the inventor named in the ”˜289 patent, but rather, is the work of open source developers, who have provided their code for the benefit of the public good, which must be protected.”

The Request for Reexamination filed by PUBPAT against the Opsware remote computer management patent can be found below this post:

February 9, 2007 In News Archive

Ten Years Hence 2007 Speech “Emergence of the Fusion Economy” By: Dr. David Martin

Date:  Fri, 2007-02-09

From the birth of modern treasury-based economies in the 15th century until today, global power and wealth have been centered around, and measured by, manipulation of supply and demand. Seeds and land generate traded crops. Extracted minerals are refined into weapons, tools, machines, and infrastructure. Complex materials using proprietary formulae generate technology. Knowledge guilds create data and information to share with selected networks. However, the systems and metrics developed over the past half millennium have strained – many, to the breaking point. Global financial and knowledge fulcrum are being transported by economies and cultures that have been excluded from the seats of power at the world’s table since the “Age of Enlightenment”. Beginning with a modern-day parable of a Jesuit-trained Egyptian Muslim, Dr. Martin will explore the applications of the new levers upon which the world finds itself being moved and discuss the implications of Archimedes’ paradigm in the Next Ten Years.

January 29, 2007 In News Archive

PUBPAT News: Patent Office Grants PUBPAT Requests to Reexamine EpicRealm Dynamic Website Patents

Date:  Mon, 2007-01-29

Dr. David E. Martin January 29, 2007

PATENT OFFICE GRANTS PUBPAT REQUESTS TO REEXAMINE EPICREALM DYNAMIC WEBSITE PATENTS: Government Finds PUBPAT Raised ‘Substantial Questions’ Regarding Patent Licensing Company’s Widely Asserted Patents

New York, NY — January 29, 2007 — The U.S. Patent & Trademark Office has granted each of the Public Patent Foundation’s (“PUBPAT”) formal requests to review two patents held by EpicRealm Licensing Inc. that the patent licensing company is widely asserting against providers of dynamic websites, i.e. websites that can produce custom responses to individual visitors or users. In its filings, PUBPAT had submitted prior art that the Patent Office was not aware of when reviewing the applications that led to the two patents and described in detail how the prior art invalidates the patents. The Patent Office found that PUBPAT’s filings indeed raised “substantial questions” regarding the validity of the EpicRealm patents.

Despite no longer making any product or service itself, EpicRealm is asserting the patents against those that provide information and services to the public over the internet, a group which includes many private citizens, public service organizations and even the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office itself. EpicRealm’s assertion of the patents has included the filing of infringement lawsuits against more than a dozen mere end users of allegedly infringing web site systems. PUBPAT challenged the patents because EpicRealm’s aggressive assertion of them is causing substantial public harm by threatening the way in which much of the most useful aspects of the Web are provided to the public. Having now granted PUBPAT’s requests to review the patents, the Patent Office will turn to decide whether the patents deserve to exist or not.

“EpicRealm is yet another example of the growing trend of businesses whose sole purpose and activity is to sue others for patent infringement, but the fact that they are claiming rights over the vast majority of websites based on these patents that the Patent Office has now found have substantial issues relating to their validity only makes the matter that much more unsettling,” said Dan Ravicher, PUBPAT’s Executive Director. “Perhaps some day soon Congress will fix the patent system so that such exploitation cannot occur. In the interim, with respect to these specific patents, now that the Patent Office has looked at the new evidence we provided and agreed with us that there is substantial doubt about the worthiness of the patents, we expect that the Patent Office will withdraw the patents from issuance.”

Copies of the U.S. Patent Office’s Orders Granting PUBPAT’s Requests for Reexamination against the two patents EpicRealm is widely asserting dynamic websites can be found at http://www.pubpat.org/epicrealmdynamicwebsites.htm

January 23, 2007 In News Archive

PUBPAT News: Wisconsin Group Eases Stem Cell Patent Restrictions After FTCR – PUBPAT Legal Challenge

Date:  Tue, 2007-01-23

Dr. David E. Martin January 23, 2007

WISCONSIN GROUP EASES STEM CELL PATENT RESTRICTIONS AFTER FTCR – PUBPAT LEGAL CHALLENGE

Santa Monica, CA — January 23, 2007 — Policy changes announced today that ease licensing requirements on human embryonic stem cell patents held by the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation (WARF) are a step in the right direction, but don’t go far enough the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights (FTCR) said.

FTCR and the Public Patent Foundation have challenged the validity of three WARF patents (U.S. Patents Nos. 5,843,780, 6,200,806, and 7,029,913) and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has begun re-examination proceedings on each. WARF clearly softened its position on the patents as a result of this challenge, FTCR said.

“WARF’s action demonstrates that their previous stance was indeed detrimental to stem cell research in the United States,” said John M. Simpson, FTCR Stem Cell Project Director. “While I welcome this step forward, the best thing would be for WARF to abandon its claims to these over-reaching patents that are recognized nowhere else in the world.”

WARF said it would allow industry-sponsored research at academic and non-profit institutions without a license; allow easier and simpler cost free cell transfers among researchers and would not require a license or agreement from California’s taxpayer-funded stem cell research program. Further, WARF said it did not expect California’s program to pay any portion of revenues it receives from research it funds.

Californians have approved a $6 billion state-funded stem cell research program to be run by the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine.

“This change in licensing policy ignores the underlying fact that WARF’s patents are wholly without merit because James Thomson did not — in fact — invent human embryonic stem cells,” said Dan Ravicher executive director of the Public Patent Foundation. “The right thing for WARF to do is admit that it doesn’t deserve the patents and abandon them in their entirety.”

The patents are now being re-examined by the U.S. Patent and Trademark office. In July FTCR and the Public Patent Foundation filed requests for re-examination and charged that WARF was hindering stem cell research in the United States and driving some efforts overseas. Dr. Jeanne Loring, a stem cell researcher at the Burnham Institute filed a statement in support of the re-examination request.

“This change in policy is a step in the right direction and academic scientists will be pleased that they can collaborate with other scientists without interference from WARF,” said Loring. “But a change in licensing policy of the human ES cell patents doesn’t solve the fundamental problem that the patents should not have been issued in the first place.”

The Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights is California’s leading non-profit and non-partisan consumer watchdog group. For more information, visit FTCR on the web at http://www.ConsumerWatchdog.org.

FTCR’s stem cell information page is located at http://www.stemcellwatch.org/.

Copies of the challenges filed by FTCR and PUBPAT against the three WARF patents can be found at http://www.pubpat.org/warfstemcell.htm.

November 30, 2006 In News Archive

PUBPAT News: Monsanto Anti-Farmer Patents to be Reexamined at PUBPAT Request

Date:  Thu, 2006-11-30

Dr. David E. Martin November 30, 2006

MONSANTO ANTI-FARMER PATENTS TO BE REEXAMINED AT PUBPAT REQUEST: Patent Office Finds “Substantial Questions” Regarding the Validity of Each of Monsanto’s Four Widely Asserted Patents

NEW YORK — November 30, 2006 — In response to requests filed earlier this year by the Public Patent Foundation (PUBPAT), the United States Patent and Trademark Office will undertake a comprehensive review of four patents related to genetically modified crops held by Monsanto Company that the agricultural giant is using to harass, intimidate, sue – and in some cases literally bankrupt – American farmers. In its Orders granting the four requested reexaminations, the USPTO found that PUBPAT had submitted new evidence that raised “substantial questions of patentability” for every single claim of each of the four patents.

Monsanto has filed dozens of patent infringement lawsuits asserting the four challenged patents against American farmers, many of whom are unable to hire adequate representation to defend themselves in court. The crime these farmers are accused of is nothing more than saving seed from one year’s crop to replant the following year, something farmers have done since the beginning of time.

Now that PUBPAT’s requests for reexamination proceedings have been granted, Monsanto has the opportunity to make opening statements to the Patent Office, to which PUBPAT has the right to respond. After opening statements, if any, the Patent Office will proceed to determine whether the four patents (U.S. Patents Nos. 5,164,316, 5,196,525, 5,322,938 and 5,352,605) are indeed invalid in light of the new evidence presented by PUBPAT in its requests. Third party requests for reexamination, like the ones filed by PUBPAT, are successful in having the challenged patent either changed or completely revoked roughly 70% of the time.

“We are extremely pleased with the Patent Office’s decision to grant our requests to reexamine the patents Monsanto is using to bully American farmers,” said Dan Ravicher, PUBPAT’s Executive Director. “This is the first step towards ending the harm being caused to the public by Monsanto’s aggressive assertion of these patents, none of which would ever have been issued by the Patent Office had they known of the prior art that we uncovered and submitted as part of our reexamination requests.”

Copies of the Patent Office’s Orders Granting Reexamination of the four Monsanto patents can be found at http://www.pubpat.org/monsantovfarmers.htm.

November 16, 2006 In News Archive

M·CAM CEO gives lecture on patent financing at State Intellectual Property Office (SIPO) in Beijing

Date:  Thu, 2006-11-16

Beijing, China −− Nov 16, 2006 −− Dr. David Martin gave an historic lecture today at the State Intellectual Property Office in Beijing China during which he discussed the financial and investment implications of intellectual property policy in the global economy. In an unprecedented event, the SIPO and the Chinese government have become the first to seriously explore the integration of intellectual property rights and the financial consequence of innovation policy on business creation, national competitiveness, and transparency in capital markets.

November 9, 2006 In News Archive

M·CAM and Next Steps Research are sponsors for CVG’s 9th Annual Business Forum

Date:  Thu, 2006-11-09

Debra L. Fisher November 9-10, 2006 Dear Friends of M·CAM: I am pleased to announce that M·CAM and Next Steps Research are collaborating to sponsor the keynote speaker event for the Charlottesville Venture Group’s 9th Annual Business Forum on November 9-10 at the Darden Graduate Business School. The keynote speaker this year is Steven Burke, Senior Vice President, Corporate Affairs, N.C. Biotechnology Center. This event has been and continues to be a highlight for the entrepreneurial community each year for Central Virginia. CVG has carefully selected speakers who ARE entrepreneurs, WORK WITH entrepreneurs, and can HELP entrepreneurs build their businesses. The theme is “Collaborate to Accelerate” – a relevant theme to anyone doing business in our local, regional, or global economy. I encourage you to consider attending the event – there are too many speakers and sessions to list here in this note, but I’ve listed some highlights below. You can also find additional information at CVG.

  • Entrepreneurial Boot Camp – NEW for 2006 – Fred Hutchison promises an interactive, educational, and relevant series of workshops for budding entrepreneurs or for those who’d like to gain access to some seasoned entrepreneurs.
  • Thursday night’s gala features Steven Burke, Senior VP from the North Carolina Biotechnology Center. Steven is a great speaker and will no doubt share some interesting perspectives on collaboration in the biotech industry.
  • Take advantage of the 90-second pitch opportunity at Thursday night’s gala to pitch your business, ideas, or needs.
  • Networking opportunities throughout the event will give you great opportunities to meet some new faces and build meaningful business relationships.
  • Friday’s panels will feature entrepreneurs sharing experiences and expertise to help attendees avoid pitfalls and build effective and efficient collaborations.
  • Friday’s Luncheon Speaker, Jim Brady from PayerPath, will relate his personal experiences with small emerging businesses as well as global giants – relevant to everyone here in Central Virginia!
  • Darden Business Concept Competition – this is the second year that CVG has had this as part of the Forum. Students will pitch their business concept to the crowd. A great event for potential angels, institutional investors, and VCs alike.

I hope that you have a chance to take part in the event. I look forward to seeing you there!

October 3, 2006 In News Archive

PUBPAT News: WARF Stem Cell Patents To Be Re-Examined At Request Of FTCR, PUBPAT

Date:  Tue, 2006-10-03

Dr. David E. Martin October 3, 2006 Santa Monica, CA – October 3, 2006 – The United States Patent and Trademark Office has granted requests from a consumer group and public service patent attorneys to re-examine three overreaching patents on human embryonic stem cells held by the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation (WARF), the groups said today. The challenges were brought by the Foundation Taxpayer and Consumer Rights (FTCR) and the Public Patent Foundation (PUBPAT) against WARF patents that are impeding scientific progress and driving vital stem cell research overseas. In granting the requests to re-examine the three WARF patents, the PTO found that there were “substantial questions” regarding their validity. “We’re pleased the PTO has decided to re-examine these patents,” said John M. Simpson, FTCR’s Stem Cell Project Director. “The patents should never have been issued in the first place.” Simpson said WARF’s aggressive assertion of patents was not surprising. “They have a history of putting profits before public benefit,” he said. In the 1943 WARF refused to license vitamin D irradiation technology to manufacturers of oleomargarine and was threatened with a federal antitrust suit before relenting. In 1965 and 1975 the government again filed suits against WARF accusing it of impeding scientific advances through restrictive licensing practices. “They’ll tell you they’re all about technology transfer and supporting research. Actually WARF is run by managers with dollar signs in their eyes,” said Simpson. Third party requests for patent re-examination, like the ones filed by FTCR and PUBPAT, are successful in having the subject patent either changed or completely revoked roughly 70% of the time. “WARF has been allowed to profit at the expense of public health while many American scientists have been barred from conducting life-saving medical research. These over-reaching patents threaten our health, waste taxpayer money, and send valuable research overseas,” said Dan Ravicher, Executive Director of PUBPAT. FTCR and PUBPAT argued that the work done by University of Wisconsin researcher James Thomson to isolate stem cell lines was obvious in the light of previous scientific research, making the work unpatentable. To receive a patent, something must be new, useful and non-obvious. Dr. Jeanne Loring, a stem cell scientist at the Burnham Institute for Medical Research, had filed a statement supporting the groups’ challenges. “The real discovery of embryonic stem cells was by Martin Evans, Matt Kaufman, and Gail Martin in 1981, and none of these scientists considered patenting them,” said Loring. “It is outrageous that WARF claimed credit for this landmark discovery nearly 15 years after it was made.” The groups said the patents’ dubious validity is underscored by the fact that no other country in the world honors them. As a result, U.S. researchers have sent research monies abroad where they can avoid paying royalties to WARF. Now that re-examination has started, WARF may make an opening statement to the Patent Office, to which FTCR and PUBPAT can respond. After opening statements, the Patent Office will proceed to determine whether WARF’s patents are indeed invalid in light of the issues raised by FTCR and PUBPAT. California voters approved the nation’s largest publicly funded stem cell research program in 2004 with Proposition 71,which allocated $3 billion in grants over the next 10 years. For an overview of state stem cell programs and pending legislation go to: http://www.curesforcalifornia.com/page.php?id=122. Copies of the challenges filed by FTCR and PUBPAT against the three WARF patents can be found at http://www.pubpat.org/warfstemcell.htm