WebProNews

Tag: Patents

  • Blackberry Selling $600 Million Worth of Patents

    Blackberry Selling $600 Million Worth of Patents

    Blackberry is selling off its legacy patents, primarily covering mobile devices, messaging, and wireless connectivity, to the tune of $600 million.

    Blackberry was once one of the most popular smartphone manufacturers, selling devices with their distinctive physical keyboard. The devices were popular with professionals and consumers alike, since the keyboard made it extremely easy to text, email, browse the web, and more. Like many brands, however, the iPhone spelled doom for Blackberry’s handset business and the company has since pivoted to software.

    The company is now selling its legacy patents, patents that seem to largely cover its old handset business. The patents are being sold to Catapult IP Innovations Inc., a special purpose vehicle formed specifically to purchase Blackberry’s IP.

    Blackberry will receive $450 million in cash, supplied by funding Catapult IP secured, as well as a promissory note of $150 million for the balance. Blackberry will also retain a license to the patents it is selling.

    It remains to be seen what Catapult IP plans to do with the patents.

  • Huawei Takes Legal Action Against Verizon Alleging Patent Infringement

    Huawei Takes Legal Action Against Verizon Alleging Patent Infringement

    Huawei has announced it is taking legal action against Verizon, alleging patent infringement by the wireless carrier, according to a company press release.

    The lawsuit was filed in the United States District Courts for the Eastern and Western Districts of Texas and seeks compensation for Verizon’s alleged use of 12 patents.

    “Verizon’s products and services have benefited from patented technology that Huawei developed over many years of research and development,” said Dr. Song Liuping, Huawei’s Chief Legal Officer.

    Huawei claims it tried negotiating with Verizon “for a significant period of time” prior to filing the lawsuits, but that the two companies were unable to reach an agreement on license terms.”

    In the midst of the other legal challenges Huawei is facing, it will be interesting to see if its claims against Verizon hold up in court.

  • Apple ‘Slide to Unlock’ Patent Is Invalid, Rules German Court

    Apple ‘Slide to Unlock’ Patent Is Invalid, Rules German Court

    Apple’s patents on its “slide to unlock” feature on its iOS devices are invalid – at least in Germany.

    A German appeals court has stuck by a 2013 ruling which canceled the company’s patent. According to the court, Apple’s slide to unlock feature is actually pretty similar to one on a phone made by Swedish company Neonode – a year before the original iPhone even debuted.

    The court said the patent isn’t “based on an invention”

    “This user-friendly display was already suggested by the state of the art,” said the court. “The contested patent thus isn’t based on an invention.”

    The US version of the patent is still active, and has been since 2009. Here’s what the patent covers, specifically:

    A device with a touch-sensitive display may be unlocked via gestures performed on the touch-sensitive display. The device is unlocked if contact with the display corresponds to a predefined gesture for unlocking the device. The device displays one or more unlock images with respect to which the predefined gesture is to be performed in order to unlock the device. The performance of the predefined gesture with respect to the unlock image may include moving the unlock image to a predefined location and/or moving the unlock image along a predefined path. The device may also display visual cues of the predefined gesture on the touch screen to remind a user of the gesture.

    While some would call this an example of the overly vague patents that haunt the system, Apple has defended this patent many times.

    Though in recent months, courts have seemed skeptical of it.

    Image via Oyvind Solstad, Flickr Creative Commons

  • Facebook Patents a Way to Let Lenders Reject You Based on Your Friends’ Crappy Credit

    Facebook’s filed a new patent, and it might make you think twice about the (virtual) company you keep.

    Here’s the abstract of Facebook’s new patent:

    In particular embodiments, a method includes accessing a graph structure comprising a plurality of nodes and edges where each node represents a user, receiving a request to transmit content related to a first user to a second user, and prohibiting transmission of the content to the second user if the first user and the second user are connected in the graph structure through a series of edges and nodes that comprises an unauthorized node.

    Ok, pretty generic (like a lot of patents).

    The “first embodiment” of the patent addresses a way to fight spam content, and the second deals with search.

    But when you get down to the fourth use for the ‘invention’, it starts to get a little dicey.

    “In a fourth embodiment of the invention, the service provider is a lender. When an individual applies for a loan, the lender examines the credit ratings of members of the individual’s social network who are connected to the individual through authorized nodes. If the average credit rating of these members is at least a minimum credit score, the lender continues to process the loan application. Otherwise, the loan application is rejected,” reads the patent.

    In theory, Facebook says it could develop a way to let lenders use your friends’ credit scores to determine whether or not they want to give you a loan.

    Gee, no thanks.

    Of course, this is just a patent – tech companies files tons of these and they never materialize into actual products.

    But, no. Just no.

    [USPTO via The Next Web]
    Image via Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook

  • Google Glass Picture Taking Could Get Even Dweebier

    If you thought you looked cool wearing Google Glass before, wait till you see this.

    Google has been awarded a patent that allows “a computing device, such as a head-mountable device (HMD), to capture and process images in response to a user placing their hands in, and then withdrawing their hands from, a frame formation”

    In other words, Google wants you to be able snap pictures with Google Glass by doing that little frame thing with your fingers.

    Here’s the actual text of the patent:

    Embodiments described herein may help a computing device, such as a head-mountable device (HMD), to capture and process images in response to a user placing their hands in, and then withdrawing their hands from, a frame formation. For example, an HMD may analyze image data from a point-of-view camera on the HMD, and detect when a wearer holds their hands in front of their face to frame a subject in the wearer’s field of view. Further, the HMD may detect when the wearer withdraws their hands from such a frame formation and responsively capture an image. Further, the HMD may determine a selection area that is being framed, within the wearer’s field of view, by the frame formation. The HMD may then process the captured image based on the frame formation, such as by cropping, white-balancing, and/or adjusting exposure.

    Google isn’t limiting the cool gestures to finger frames. The company wants users to be able to take different-shaped photos by framing in different ways – make a rectangle frame and take a rectangular picture, or make a circle with your fingers and take a circular picture, and so on and so forth.

    Screen Shot 2015-07-09 at 11.49.11 AM

    More or less awkward than saying “OK Glass, take a picture” on the subway? You be the judge.

    Of course, this is just a patent. There’s no way to know if this will actually make it into the next generation of Google Glass – but it does show Google’s thought process.

    And Google wants to make you oh so cool.

    Images via USPTO, h/t Quartz

  • Apple’s Record $533M Payment to Patent Troll Voided

    In February, a federal jury in Texas sided with a patent licensing company called Smartflash and ordered Apple to pay $532.9 million for infringing upon three patents dealing with data storage, payments, and DRM.

    Apple vowed to fight it, obviously, saying:

    “Smartflash makes no products, has no employees, creates no jobs, has no US presence, and is exploiting our patent system to seek royalties for technology Apple invented. We refused to pay off this company for the ideas our employees spent years innovating and unfortunately we have been left with no choice but to take this fight up through the court system.”

    Well, fight it did and a significant victory it has won. A federal judge has thrown out the jury ruling, nullifying what would’ve been the biggest payment in one of these now-ubiquitous “patent assertion” cases.

    According to the judge, it was all about the massively inflated award. From Reuters:

    In a decision on Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap in Tyler, Texas, said jurors who on Feb. 24 awarded the damages to Smartflash LLC because of Apple’s willful infringement might have been confused by his instructions on how to properly calculate royalties.

     

    Apple had argued that the damages were too high because jurors might have improperly considered the entire market value of the products, rather than distinguishing between patented and unpatented features.

     

    Gilstrap said his jury instructions were legally correct but not applicable to the facts of the case, and “may have created a skewed damages horizon for the jury.”

    The bad news for Apple is that a retrial has been scheduled for September 14th.

    All this is taking place in the Eastern District of Texas, where a shockingly high number of patent lawsuits are battled (nearly 25 percent). Why such a high percentage? Juries there tend to give patent licensers favorable results.

  • Google Could Use Your TV Viewing As A Ranking Signal

    It seems almost crazy to think that Google could deliver your search results based on what you’re watching on TV at any point in time, but it’s not out of the realm of possibility, and the company was even granted a patent to be able to to just that.

    Should Google use TV viewing as a ranking signal? Share your thoughts in the comments.

    Google obviously has tons of patents, and they’re not all directly used or necessarily used for what you’d expect, but the possibility remains, and in this case it seems very probable considering the current landscape of technology.

    Bill Slawski at SEO by the Sea, who has been watching Google patents like a hawk for years, points us to one Google has been granted for a “System and method for enhancing user search results by determining a television program currently being displayed in proximity to an electronic device.”

    The Abstract of the patent is as follows:

    A computer implemented method for using search queries related to television programs. A server receives a user’s search query from an electronic device.

    The server then determines, in accordance with the search query and television program related information for television programs available at a location associated with the electronic device during a specific time window, a television program currently being displayed in proximity to the electronic device, wherein the television program related information includes program descriptions for a plurality of television programs being broadcast for the associated location.

    Google filed the patent all the way back in 2011, and it was just granted this week. Here are a couple diagrams showing how it could work.

    Under “description of implementations” in the patent, it says:

    In some implementations, a TV viewer (sometimes referred to herein as a user) has access to a computer, set top box, smart phone, or other Internet-connected electronic device, while he or she is viewing TV content. Occasionally, such a TV viewer executes search queries on the Internet-connected device related to the TV content he or she is watching. For example, when the user is watching a TV program about wildlife, he or she might execute searches on the Internet-connected device related to the particular animal species being described in that program. As another example, a viewer who is watching a movie might execute searches about locations or the actors appearing in the movie. Such a viewer when entering a search query might use search terms that are related to but not identical to the particular content being described in the program he or she is viewing. For example, someone watching a TV program with a segment about a particular model of Porsche might execute a search query for “Porsche” or “sports cars” instead of the designation of the particular model that was the subject of the segment.

    Some implementations leverage the fact that some TV viewers enter search queries during, and related to, TV programs they are viewing to improve the quality of the search results returned to such users. In some implementations, this improvement is provided by a search engine with access to comprehensive information about the content and geographic availability of TV programming for many different modes of live TV broadcasting (e.g., cable, over the air, satellite and Internet-streaming). In some implementations, a search engine compares a search query it receives to the content of TV programs that are presumably available to the user who executed the search query (based on the time the search query was submitted and a location associated with the user/the user’s device). In some implementations, the search engine can determine the location of the user from a user profile or other information entered by the user. In some implementations, the search engine can determine the user’s/device’s location from the IP address of the Internet-connected device employed by the user or, depending on user settings and capabilities of the Internet-connected device employed by the user, location information associated with a GPS receiver in the Internet-connected device, a known location of a nearby WiFi transmitter, or a known location of a nearby mobile/cellular communication tower. When there is an acceptable degree of correlation between the program information and the user’s search query (e.g., when the user executes a query for “Porsche” during the same time window a TV program is airing that includes a segment about a particular Porsche model), the search engine returns enhanced search results based on the presumption that the user in question was watching that particular TV program–or that the user in question would be interested in watching that particular TV program. For example, given that the Porsche model in question is a “911 Turbo,” and that the user executed a search query for “Porsche,” the server can return information about one or more of : 1) the “911 Turbo” model (e.g., a link to information on the Porsche.com website about the “911 Turbo”), 2) information about the TV program that is currently airing with that segment, and 3) suggestions of similar programming that is currently airing or airing in the future and that is available to the user. In this way, implementations provide enhanced search results to viewers of live TV that are relevant to the content of TV programs that they are watching or are likely to be interested in watching.

    Google can already listen to your TV from your mobile device with the “Listen to TV” feature launched last year. It also has a very inexpensive device in the Chromecast that has users literally plugging Google into their TVs.

    TV viewing as a ranking signal could end up being a pretty significant part of how Google delivers results to people for certain types of queries.

    Twitter has taught us time and time again that television plays a very significant role in much of our online activity, so it makes a great deal of sense that Google would consider that when delivering search results.

    Slawki writes in his report on the patent, “I’m going to have to turn up the sound on my TV, and decide carefully what to watch, and test this. It would be very interesting if it works. Is Google clued in to what you are watching on TV? If so, is that through a set top box, or an internet enabled television?”

    “If true, will this change the way that I do keyword research?” he adds. “Will it alter how I create content for the web, or decide upon page titles or meta descriptions? I’m not sure, but I am surprised.”

    The prospect of Google using this certainly makes you think about what it would mean for SEO.

    Do you think this is a good idea for Google to implement? Let us know.

    Lead image via Thinkstock

  • Adam Carolla Settles Patent Suit With Personal Audio

    Comedian and podcaster Adam Carolla has settled a lawsuit with a patent troll called Personal Audio. The suit emerged roughly a year and a half ago, when Personal Audio also sued HowStuffWorks and Togi Entertainment – all over a patent about a “System for disseminating media content representing episodes in a serialized sequence.”

    TechDirt gets into the patent’s text here, while pointing out that Personal Audio had previously sued Apple multiple times, even claiming to have patents on the concept of playlists. It has also sued CBS, NBC, and FOX.

    The EFF got involved to help the podcasters battle the troll.

    Finally, just a couple weeks ago, Personal Audio put out a press release saying it had offered to dismiss the Adam Carolla suit. It dismissed those against Togi and HowStuffWorks in May and June. It said, however, that Carolla had rejected the offer.

    Personal Audio CEO Brad Liddle said, “We are quite surprised that Carolla has turned down the offer that was accepted by his peers. Perhaps this is because he feels he can simply get his fans to fund his future, and now unnecessary, legal expenses. Or perhaps it relates to how he uses the case as material for his show. The fact of the matter is that Adam Carolla is asking people to donate money to him for a lawsuit that he no longer needs to defend. We would like his listeners to understand this situation when deciding whether or not to donate additional money to his cause.”

    Ultimately, Carolla was able to raise half a million dollars from listeners.

    Carolla and Personal Audio filed a motion to dismiss claims, which has been approved by the judge ahead of a trial, which was scheduled for next month. The suit and Carolla’s counterclaims have been dropped without prejudice.

    The EFF says, “We can assume that Carolla did not pay Personal Audio a penny. We can also assume that, in exchange, Carolla has given up the opportunity to challenge the patent and the chance to get his attorney’s fees.”

    It notes that it has its own challenge against Personal Audio’s patent, which is on a “separate track” and will continue.

    Carolla and Personal Audio are in a quiet period until the end of September, where both parties are unable to make public comment about the settlement.

    Image via AdamCarolla.com

  • Tesla Opens Up All Its Patents, Which Elon Musk Calls ‘Landmines’ of Innovation

    Tesla Opens Up All Its Patents, Which Elon Musk Calls ‘Landmines’ of Innovation

    On the heels of news that Tesla Motors would be opening up its Supercharger patents in order to help speed up the electric car revolution, the company’s CEO Elon Musk has apparently decided what the hell, let’s just release all the patents.

    Musk has made the announcement in a Tesla blog post entitled All Our Patent Are Belong To You (spectacular, by the way). To summarize Musk’s argument, the current patent system only serves to stifle innovation, the advancement of electric cars needs to accelerate, and Tesla can’t do it alone.

    “Yesterday, there was a wall of Tesla patents in the lobby of our Palo Alto headquarters. That is no longer the case. They have been removed, in the spirit of the open source movement, for the advancement of electric vehicle technology,” says Musk.

    He goes on to state that Tesla will not sue anyone who, in good faith, uses their technology.

    “Tesla Motors was created to accelerate the advent of sustainable transport. If we clear a path to the creation of compelling electric vehicles, but then lay intellectual property landmines behind us to inhibit others, we are acting in a manner contrary to that goal. Tesla will not initiate patent lawsuits against anyone who, in good faith, wants to use our technology.”

    After explaining that the original purpose of Tesla’s patents were always defensive, as opposed to offensive, Musk makes it clear that this move isn’t going to hurt Tesla.

    At best, the large automakers are producing electric cars with limited range in limited volume. Some produce no zero emission cars at all.

    Given that annual new vehicle production is approaching 100 million per year and the global fleet is approximately 2 billion cars, it is impossible for Tesla to build electric cars fast enough to address the carbon crisis. By the same token, it means the market is enormous. Our true competition is not the small trickle of non-Tesla electric cars being produced, but rather the enormous flood of gasoline cars pouring out of the world’s factories every day.

    We believe that Tesla, other companies making electric cars, and the world would all benefit from a common, rapidly-evolving technology platform.

    Nearly every reaction I can find is praising the move.

    “This is a testimony to Tesla’s commitment to its mission. People don’t buy what you make they buy why you make it!! Patents are really shackles to progress and power of collective innovation. Thanks for taking a lead on this Tesla!,” says one commenter.

    “This is beyond outstanding! Well done Tesla! This won’t make as big a splash in the media as it deserves to and few people will understand how important this decision is. This is so opposite the offensive patent strategy executed by companies like Apple and I dare say Tesla holds far more useful and world changing proprietary tech,” says another.

    On the contrary, I think this is going to be a very highly-publicized decision. The ‘good faith’ stipulation has yet to be hashed out, so Musk and Tesla could simply be choosing to ignore most cases of malfeasance.

    But after such a public declaration, it would be hard to imagine Tesla initiating a patent lawsuit anytime soon.

    Image via Tesla

  • Microsoft To Close Nokia Devices And Services Acquisition, Signs Licensing Agreement With Motorola

    In 2011, Microsoft and Nokia partnered to create a “third” smartphone horse in the race against Apple and Android.

    In September, it became more than a partnership when the two companies announced that Microsoft would buy Nokia’s Devices & Services business, and bring Nokia CEO and former Microsoft employee Stephen Elop back to Microsoft. Shareholders approved the deal in November, and in December, it won European Commission approval.

    Microsoft announced last month that it expected to close in April, and on Monday, it said it will close on Friday. On that date, Nokia’s Devices & Services business will officially be part of Microsoft. Brad Smith, General Counsel & Executive Vice President, Legal & Corporate Affairs at Microsoft writes on the company blog:

    The completion of this acquisition follows several months of planning and will mark a key step on the journey towards integration. This acquisition will help Microsoft accelerate innovation and market adoption for Windows Phones. In addition, we look forward to introducing the next billion customers to Microsoft services via Nokia mobile phones.

    As with any multinational agreement of this size, scale and complexity, our two companies have made adjustments to the original deal throughout the close preparation process. We’ve entered into numerous agreements to address items ranging from manufacturing to IT. These include the following:

    · While the original deal did not address the management of online assets, our two companies have agreed that Microsoft will manage the nokia.com domain and social media sites for the benefit of both companies and our customers for up to a year.

    · The original deal had all employees in Nokia’s Chief Technology Office continuing with Nokia. We’ve adjusted the agreement so the 21 employees in China working on mobile phones will join Microsoft and continue their work.

    · The original deal had Microsoft acquiring Nokia’s Korean manufacturing facility. The agreement was adjusted and Microsoft will not acquire the facility.

    Microsoft also announced on Monday that it has entered into a patent licensing agreement with Motorola Solutions, Inc. The deal covers devices running Android and Chrome OS.

    “Microsoft and Motorola Solutions share a respect for intellectual property and a commitment to fair and reasonable patent licensing programs,” said Nick Psyhogeos, GM, associate general counsel, IP licensing of the Innovation and Intellectual Property Group at Microsoft. “Microsoft prefers licensing to litigation, since licensing is a more effective way to share technology and accelerate the pace of innovation.”

    “Our Motorola Solutions communications technology works best for everyone when it is backed with robust intellectual property and patents,” said Joe White, vice president of Enterprise Mobile Computing, Motorola Solutions. “We are pleased to have agreed upon a solution that allows our customers to purchase Android products from Motorola Solutions with confidence.”

    Terms were of the patent agreement were not disclosed.

    Image via Nokia

  • Google Is Trying to Trademark the Word ‘Glass’, Currently Having Some Issues

    Google is attempting (and currently failing) to trademark the word ‘Glass’, in reference to their Google Glass wearable tech. Most of you will probably find joy in half of that statement. The United States Patent and Trademark Office is currently holding up their application for the trademark, citing a couple of main objections. “That’s effing stupid” not being one of them, unfortunately.

    From The Wall Street Journal:

    In a letter to the company last fall, a trademark examiner raised two main objections. One concern was that the trademark was too similar to other existing or pending computer software trademarks that contain the word “glass,” creating a risk of consumer confusion.

    The examiner also suggested that “Glass” — even with its distinctive formatting — is “merely descriptive.” Words that simply describe a product don’t have trademark protection under federal law — “absent a showing of acquired distinctiveness.” For example, a company that makes salsa couldn’t trademark the term “spicy sauce.”

    Basically, the USPTO is telling Google that ‘Glass’ isn’t enough of a thing on its own to merit a trademark–it’s just descriptive of the Google Glass device. Google can make the logo look as futuristic as they want, but at least right now, the USPTO isn’t buying that ‘Glass’ should be Google’s.

    Recently, Google’s lawyers responded to the USPTO, in a 1,928 page letter. Before you say “holy hell, there’s no way there’s that much to say about why ‘Glass’ should be trademarked,” you’re absolutely right. According to the WSJ, the vast majority (about 1,900 pages) are just examples of articles about Google Glass.

    Google’s goal here, obviously, is to bury the USPTO’s first objection, that the trademark would create consumer confusion. Google is basically saying “look, everyone in the world already associates ‘Glass’ with our product.”

    Of course, Google could just call it ‘Google Glass’, because they already have that one on lockdown. Apparently, it has to be just ‘Glass’. No word on whether or not Google is trying for the TM on ‘Glasshole.’ Might wanna lock that one up too.

    As of right now, Google lists ‘Glass’ as one of their trademarks.

    I don’t want to misplace all of my frustration. Let’s throw some at the patent system in general. Google is just doing what all companies do–cover all of their bases. It’s a predatory world out there, and Google is just doing what companies have to do these days. That doesn’t make the whole thing any less stupid, mind you, but there you go.

    On the other hand, trademarking (or attempting to trademark) works like ‘Glass’, ‘Face’, ‘Book’, and even ‘Apple’ is some weak shit. It’s infuriating, in fact. What do you think?

    Image via Robert Scoble, Google+

  • Microsoft & Dell Agree to Cross-License Patents

    Microsoft & Dell Agree to Cross-License Patents

    As the traditional computing industry continues to sink under a wave of new mobile technology, traditional computer hardware and software companies are struggling to find a place in the rapidly shifting landscape. This new reality was highlighted this week as two of the giants of 90s computing have now combined forces to stave off patent assaults.

    Microsoft and Dell this week announced that they have signed a patent licensing agreement. The deal will allow both companies to cross-license patents and is an extension of the close working relationship the two companies have had over the past three decades.

    “Today’s announcement builds on our history of collaborating to bring new technologies to market,” said Neil Hand, VP of End User Computing Products at Dell. “The relationship between Dell and Microsoft continues to help Dell deliver choice and flexibility to customers looking for the best technology to meet their needs.”

    Under the specific terms of the agreement, Microsoft and Dell will be able to use their combined portfolio of patents that apply to products such as the Android operating system, Chrome OS, and Xbox video game consoles. Royalties have been agreed upon for Microsoft to license Android and Chrome patents and for Dell to license Xbox patents. The terms of these royalty agreements have not been released.

    “Our agreement with Dell shows what can be accomplished when companies share intellectual property,” said Horacio Gutierrez, corporate VP of Innovation and Intellectual Property at Microsoft. “We have been partnering with technology manufacturers and vendors for many years to craft licensing deals, instead of litigation strategies.”

    In recent months, Dell completed a major buyout that brought the company back under the private control of investors including Dell founder Michael Dell and investment firm Silver Lake Partners. The company, like so many other traditional PC manufacturers, is converting its business to focus more on enterprise services and software.

    Microsoft, under the leadership of new CEO Satya Nadella, is currently forging ahead with its plan to become a “devices and services company.” The company fell behind others such as Apple and Google over the past decade and is now struggling to catch up in the mobile market while dealing with the fallout of its (relatively) unsuccessful Windows 8 release.

  • Google Granted The Panda Patent?

    Google has been granted what could be its patent for the controversial Panda update. It was filed on September 28, 2012, a year and a half after the update first launched, and awarded this week on March 25th.

    It may or may not be related to the actual Panda update, though Search Engine Land seems pretty sure that it is with the headline “Google Granted Patent For Panda Algorithm”. Update: They’ve now updated the story to say, “This patent may have nothing to do with the Panda algorithm, to be fair.”

    Here’s the abstract for the patent on “Ranking Search Results”:

    Methods, systems, and apparatus, including computer programs encoded on computer storage media, for ranking search results. One of the methods includes determining, for each of a plurality of groups of resources, a respective count of independent incoming links to resources in the group; determining, for each of the plurality of groups of resources, a respective count of reference queries; determining, for each of the plurality of groups of resources, a respective group-specific modification factor, wherein the group-specific modification factor for each group is based on the count of independent links and the count of reference queries for the group; and associating, with each of the plurality of groups of resources, the respective group-specific modification factor for the group, wherein the respective group-specific modification for the group modifies initial scores generated for resources in the group in response to received search queries.

    The patent holds the name of apparent Panda update author Navneet Panda along with that of Vladimir Ofitserov.

    I’ll leave it to the Internet’s authority on Google patents, Bill Slawski, to explain, as he says he’ll be digging into it more.

    Last month marked the three-year anniversary of the original Panda update. It has since been integrated with Google’s indexing, and is no longer announced each time it rolls out. Google has indicated it launches roughly once a month.

    The update has harmed many businesses, and forced some to “Google-proof” their sites.

    Google recently said it’s working on the “next generation” of the Panda, which it said will be kinder to small businesses and small sites. We’ll see.

    Image via Wikimedia Commons

  • U.S. Closes Samsung Patent Abuse Investigation

    U.S. Closes Samsung Patent Abuse Investigation

    The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) today officially closed its investigation into Samsung’s possible abuse of patents. The decision was made following the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) decision to overturn previously awarded bans on Apple products in the U.S.

    As part of the ongoing and years-long patent war between Samsung and Apple, Samsung was awarded sale bans on certain iPhone and iPad models in the U.S. The USTR reversed this ban today, citing the fact that the ban was not in the public’s interest.

    The patents that Samsung had used to obtain the ban were so-called standards-essential patents (SEPs). Such patents are deemed essential to certain markets and must be licensed non-discriminatorily at fair market prices. The Department of Justice was investigating whether Samsung’s ban on Apple products may have violated antitrust laws. According to the DOJ, using SEPs to obtain product bans could represent an abuse of market power.

    “While there are certain circumstances where an exclusion order as a remedy for infringement of such patents could be appropriate, in many cases there is a risk that the patent holder could use the threat of an exclusion order to obtain licensing terms that are more onerous than would be justified by the value of the technology itself, effectively exploiting the market power obtained through the standards-setting process,” said the DOJ in an official statement.

    “The U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) reviewed the exclusion order issued by the ITC against Apple at Samsung’s request and overturned it, determining that it was not consistent with the public interest. As a result of the USTR’s action, the Antitrust Division has determined that no further action is required at this time. The Antitrust Division is therefore closing its investigation into Samsung’s conduct, but will continue to monitor further developments in this area.”

    Image via Samsung

  • Twitter Bought 900 Patents From IBM After Infringement Claims

    Twitter Bought 900 Patents From IBM After Infringement Claims

    Twitter has acquired over 900 patents from IBM. The deal, which includes a cross-license agreement, was made last month, but the two companies have now formally announced it.

    IBM has received more patents in the U.S. than any other company for 21 consecutive years.

    Twitter Legal Director Ben Lee said, “This acquisition of patents from IBM and licensing agreement provides us with greater intellectual property protection and gives us freedom of action to innovate on behalf of all those who use our service.”

    Ken King, General Manager of Intellectual Property for IBM, said, “We are pleased to reach this agreement with Twitter because it illustrates the value of patented IBM inventions and demonstrates our commitment to licensing access to our broad patent portfolio. We look forward to a productive relationship with Twitter in the future.”

    A couple months ago, in an update to its S-1, Twitter revealed that IBM had issued a letter to the company alleging that it was infringing upon at least three of its patents, but “inviting” Twitter to negotiate a “business resolution”.

    Those particular patents were for “Efficient retrieval of uniform resource locators,” “Method for presenting advertising in an interactive service,” and “programmatic discovery of common contacts.”

    The companies did not reveal the terms of the deal.

    The news recalls when Facebook bought 750 IBM patents a couple years ago.

    Image via Twitter

  • Google Ordered To Pay AdWords Royalties Over Patent Infringement

    A court has ruled that Google must pay 1.36% of its U.S. AdWords earnings from 2012 to 2016 to holding company (or patent troll, if you prefer) Vringo, which bought some old Lycos patents in 2011, which Google is said to be infringing upon. Those expire in 2016.

    Vringo already won about $30 million after suing Google, Microsoft, AOL, Gannett and Target. Google was ordered to pay $15.8 million before, but Vringo wanted more, and has now won the ongoing royalties mentioned above.

    Ars Technica reports:

    Today, Vringo got the payout it was looking for: a 1.36 percent running royalty on US-based revenue from AdWords, Google’s flagship program. US District Judge Raymond Jackson had already ruled last week (PDF) that the AdWords program, which was tweaked by Google after the Vringo verdict, wasn’t “colorably different” from the old infringing program. He gave Google and Vringo one last session to hammer out a royalty rate, and when they couldn’t, he went ahead and set it (PDF)—at almost exactly the rate Vringo was seeking.

    Because some aspects of Google’s revenue are opaque, it’s impossible to know exactly what Vringo’s win would be worth—and the company is a long way from cashing a check. But if the royalty rate were to be upheld on appeal, Google would surely have to pay hundreds of millions of dollars.

    According to Greg Sterling at Search Engine Land, they’re looking at potentially $1 billion.

    Google is obviously expected to appeal.

    Meanwhile, the company is reportedly nearing a settlement with the EU over an ongoing antitrust probe, which could help Google avoid a substantial fine.

    Image via Google

  • Google and Samsung to Share Patents

    Google and Samsung to Share Patents

    The years-long legal fight between Apple and Samsung is continuing to rage in courts around the world. Other high-profile patent lawsuits have come and gone in recent years, creating an uneasy climate in which tech companies are now engaging in an expensive patent-gathering cold war.

    This situation has led to surprising developments in recent years, including massive patent cross-licensing agreements between industry competitors. Now, two of the biggest tech companies in the world have combined forces to establish a solid position in the patent wars.

    Today Samsung and Google announced that they have entered into a patent agreement. The arrangement is being described as a “long-term cooperative partnership” in which the two companies will share their patent portfolios. According to Google and Samsung, the deal will allow both companies to collaborate more closely in the future.

    “This agreement with Google is highly significant for the technology industry,” said Seungho Ahn, head of the Intellectual Property Center at Samsung. “Samsung and Google are showing the rest of the industry that there is more to gain from cooperating than engaging in unnecessary patent disputes.”

    Under the terms of the agreement, Google and Samsung will cross-license each company’s patents for both technology and business applications. In addition to the cross-licensing of existing patents, the new deal also covers patents that Google and Samsung will file over the next 10 years.

    “We’re pleased to enter into a cross-license with our partner Samsung,” said Allen Lo, deputy general counsel for patents at Google. “By working together on agreements like this, companies can reduce the potential for litigation and focus instead on innovation.”

    Image via Samsung

  • House Passes Innovation Act, Hopes To Stop Patent Trolls

    I think that we can all agree that patent trolls are just about the worst. Even if you have no stake in the tech sector, frivolous litigation aiming to make a quick buck off of somebody else’s innovation hurts consumers in more ways than one. After years of ignoring the problem, it looks like Congress is finally starting to notice the ill effects as well.

    The Hill reports that the House has overwhelmingly passed the Innovation Act today in a 325-91 vote. The bill targets those who have come to be known as “patent trolls.” It does this by creating a whole new set of hoops that those seeking to file a patent suit would have to jump through. Before passing the final bill, the House voted to pass an amendment that would increase the number of hoops.

    To further dissuade individuals and companies from filing frivolous lawsuits, the legislation would also require courts to award fees to the winner. This is called the “loser pays” provision, and it’s set up to stop a common tactic used by patent trolls that seeks to not win a lawsuit, but simply force the defendant into bankruptcy through attorney fees and related charges. Under this provision, defendants no longer have to worry as much about money when challenging a patent claim.

    The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Bob Goodlatte, said its passage helps to correct a patent system that was never meant to be used in such a way:

    “The tens of billions of dollars spent on settlements and litigation expenses associated with abusive patent suits represent truly wasted capital. The patent system was never intended to be a playground for litigation extortion and frivolous claims.”

    As expected, the bill did have some opponents though. One of the most outspoken – Rep. Dana Rohrabacher – argued that the bill would hurt small inventors defending their patents from large companies. She also holds the belief that the term “patent troll” was invented by large companies to smear small patent holders.

    While it’s impossible to say that small patent holders will be completely immune to ill effects from the legislation, it’s important to note that this legislation is primarily aimed at protecting these small patent holders. The legislation protects the defendant which is usually the small patent holder, not the other way around.

    As a compromise, the House passed an amendment that will study the effects of the legislation on small and minority-owned businesses. If disturbing trends of abuse come to light, Congress can come back to reevaluate the legislation.

    We’re getting ahead of ourselves though. The legislation has only just passed the House and now it has to make its way through the Senate. Thankfully, the Obama administration has stated its support for the bill in the past which should make its passage through the Democrat-controlled Senate rather painless.

    [Image: Wikimedia Commons]

  • Google Patents Microphone “Tattoo” For Your Neck

    What’s up with Google and hi-tech tattoos? Earlier this year, Motorola showed off a new concept for wearable computing that involved the user getting an electronic tattoo. Now Google has filed a patent for a similar technology that may one day replace the now new smart watch.

    Google’s new patent – “Coupling an electronic skin tattoo to a mobile communication device” – is just as it sounds. It’s an electronic temporary tattoo that a user applies to their neck, and connects to their smartphone to allow for hands free calling. Think of it like an extension of the behind the ear microphones that secret service agent use, but this technology is even more inconspicuous.

    Speaking of which, Google itself says the technology would be best suited for security personnel at events or emergency situations. For example, plains clothes officers could communicate with each other at events without arousing any suspicion.

    Interestingly enough, Google also says that its neck tattoo could be used as a more sophisticated lie detector. Here’s how they envision it working:

    “Optionally the electronic skin tattoo 200 can further include a galvanic skin response detector to detect skin resistance of a user it is contemplated that a user may be nervous or engaging in speaking falsehoods may exhibit different galvanic skin response than a more confident, truth telling individual.”

    As was said above, the tattoo is only temporary as it’s applied via a “sticky substance.” It probably won’t be long, however, before somebody directly applies a microphone to their throat through a tattoo or other method. The cyborg revolution is only just beginning after all, and Google may be one of the harbingers.

    [Image: United States Patent and Trademark Office]
    [h/t: Softpedia]

  • BlackBerry Patent Portfolio Could Draw Interest

    Back in August, following another dismal quarterly report, BlackBerry announced that it was exploring “strategic alternatives” – including the possible sale of the company. Earlier this week that possibility became a reality, with a consortium led by FairFax Financial offering $4.7 billion for the Canadian company.

    The buyout seemed to have been announced early, with FairFax still having six weeks for due diligence. During that time, BlackBerry has the option of courting other offers. Though another wholesale offer for BlackBerry is unlikely to appear, CNN this week reported that offers for the company’s patent portfolio are a very real possibility.

    The report states that BlackBerry’s patent portfolio could be worth $2 billion to $3 billion, making up possibly more than half of the FairFax offer. As was speculated shortly after BlackBerry announced its “strategic alternative” search, the company could find a better offer by selling off its more important pieces. BlackBerry’s stockpile of mobile enterprise patents could prove particularly valuable in such an endeavor.

    The CNN report goes on to quote Chris Marlett, CEO of MDB Capital Group as saying BlackBerry’s patents could give a “massive advantage” to any company engaged in the widespread practice of tech patent lawsuits. Marlett was also quoted as saying the patents make up such a large portion of BlackBerry’s value “because their business is falling apart.”

    (via BGR)

  • Google Patents Adds Patents From More Countries

    Google announced today that it has expanded Google Patents to include documents from agencies in China, Germany, Canada and the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). Obviously, this greatly increases the coverage breadth of Google’s patent search engine.

    “Many of these documents may provide prior art for future patent applications, and we hope their increased discoverability will improve the quality of patents in the U.S. and worldwide,” says Google engineering manager Jon Orwant. “So if you want to learn about a Chinese dual-drive bicycle, a German valve for inflating bicycle tires, attach a Canadian trailer to your bike, or read the WIPO application for pedalling with one leg, those and millions of other inventions are now available on Google Patents.”

    “Thanks to Google Translate, all patents are available in both their original languages and in English, and you can search across the world’s patents using terms in any of those languages,” he adds.

    Google Patents

    Last year, Google announced the addition of European patents. Prior to that, Google Patents only featured documents from the U.S.

    At the time, Google also launched a feature called the Prior Art Finder aimed at finding relevant art results.