● 11.12.17

●● Time for the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) to Disregard Rulings From the Eastern District of Texas

Posted in America, Courtroom, Microsoft, Patents at 11:24 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Judge Gilstrap alone has become a cautionary tale and there are other culprits

Summary: A look at the latest developments at the Federal Circuit and some bits about Microsoft’s extortion using software patents (even after Alice)

Writing about Georgetown Rail Equipment Co. v Holland L.P. the other day, this article sheds light on a case we have not covered here before. It is not about software patents, but it ought to give a clue to the Federal Circuit (CAFC). It’s a reminder that Texas has serious issues. Maybe they should lower the seriousness (or impact) assigned to just about every decision from the Eastern District of Texas, which is a disgraced court district, sometimes even corrupt.

“Maybe they should lower the seriousness (or impact) assigned to just about every decision from the Eastern District of Texas, which is a disgraced court district, sometimes even corrupt.”Over the past decade or so we have seen far too many cases in which judges ruled for the financial interests of their towns rather than justice itself. Up until TC Heartland it has gone largely unaddressed.

For CAFC to gain or regain credibility perhaps it should take all this into account. CAFC is currently dealing with MasterMine v Microsoft [1, 2, 3] — a case which threatens to revive fears of software patents. “Every so often a decision comes out of the Federal Circuit that has immediate value for patent prosecutors,” the patent microcosm wrote, and the “decision in Mastermine Software, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., is one such case.”

To quote a key part:

Prosecutors in the software/electronic arts will find this case helpful. It should be particularly useful in dealing with rejections from patent examiners struggling with the distinction between true hybrid claims and system functionality driven by user interaction.

Remember that Microsoft continues to leverage software patents against the competition, notably GNU/Linux. A few days ago we saw an article about it. “Earlier this year,” it said, “the company agreed to license a series of connected car software patents to Toyota.”

We wrote several articles about this.

So patents with near-zero value under Alice were actually used for financial gain? It’s worth reminding ourselves that very many of the rulings in favour of software patents came from low-level courts in the Eastern District of Texas. Erasing their toxic legacy may be worthwhile. That would also help wipe out software patents. █

Share in other sites/networks: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.

Permalink  Send this to a friend

----------

➮ Sharing is caring. Content is available under CC-BY-SA.