Stopsoftwarepatents - new forum threads

For Sale Brand New Apple Tablet iPad 64GB (Wi-Fi + 3G) $280usd

Fri, 30 Jul 2010 06:46:15 +0000

SERAC SOLUTIONS LTD are one of the leading mobile phone distributorsis.
We are Legitimate registered company under government registration and licensed, Registered No.05735588

OFFER BUY ANY 2 UNITS OF OUR PRODUCT AND GET 1 FREE.

Apple Tablet iPad 64GB (Wi-Fi + 3G) …..$280usd
Apple Tablet iPad 32GB (Wi-Fi + 3G) ….$250usd
Apple Tablet iPad 16GB (Wi-Fi + 3G)…..$230usd

T-Mobile Sidekick:
T-Mobile Pulse$190

Apple iPhone:
Apple iPhone 4GS 64GB $290
Apple iPhone 3GS 32GB- $210
Apple iPhone 3GS 16GB- $200
Apple iPhone 4GB $100
Apple iPhone 8GB $120
Apple iPhone 16GB $130
Apple iPhone 3G 8GB $140
Apple iPhone 3G 16GB $150
Palm Pre Sprint —-$220

GENERAL SALES MANAGER
Your Prompt Enquiry Will be Greatly Appreciated.
Contact :Mr Frank
Contact E-mail:moc.nsm|dtl_snoitulos.cares#moc.nsm|dtl_snoitulos.cares
Registered No.05735588

For Sale Brand New Apple Tablet iPad 64GB (Wi-Fi + 3G) $280usd

Fri, 30 Jul 2010 06:28:25 +0000

SERAC SOLUTIONS LTD are one of the leading mobile phone distributorsis.
We are Legitimate registered company under government registration and licensed, Registered No.05735588

We are recognized distributor of various consumer electronics we sell latest brand and new original phones from there manufacturer with the minimum of 1 full year international warranty. Mind you all the product below are brand new and they come with the minimum of 1 full international warranty.

We specialize in a wide range of products such as Laptops, Mobile Phones, Video Games Console, Plasma & LCD TV, MP3 & MP4 Players, Digital Cameras, Dvd Players (Etc) At Discounted Rates.

We supply superior quality products all products strictly follow the standards of CE, FCC and RoHS, and are carefully inspected by a responsible QA team before packaging.

We give maximum guarantee for safe delivery of items bought from us.

Well we offer international standard warranty with full acceptance for replacement or full refund of money back.

Contact E-mail: moc.nsm|dtl_snoitulos.cares#moc.nsm|dtl_snoitulos.cares
MSN ADD:moc.nsm|dtl_snoitulos.cares#moc.nsm|dtl_snoitulos.cares

OFFER BUY ANY 2 UNITS OF OUR PRODUCT AND GET 1 FREE.

Apple Tablet iPad 64GB (Wi-Fi + 3G) …..$280usd
Apple Tablet iPad 32GB (Wi-Fi + 3G) ….$250usd
Apple Tablet iPad 16GB (Wi-Fi + 3G)…..$230usd

T-Mobile Sidekick:
T-Mobile Pulse$190
T-Mobile MyTouch 3G$155
T-Mobile G2 Touch$170
T-Mobile Sidekick LX 2009$140
T-Mobile Sidekick LX 2008$135
T-Mobile Sidekick LX $105
T-Mobile Shadow $120
T-Mobile G1 $130
T-Mobile Sidekick 3 $100
Juicy Couture Sidekick 2 $80

BlackBerry:
BlackBerry Bold 9700—$280
c-$260
BlackBerry Storm2 9550-$260
BlackBerry Curve 8520-$190
BlackBerry Tour 9630 —-$195
Blackberry Curve 8900 $170
Blackberry Storm 9500 $140
Blackberry Storm 9530 $155
Blackberry Pearl Flip 8220 $105
Blackberry Bold 9000 $135
Blackberry Curve 8320 $125

HTC:
HTC Google Nexus One-$250
HTC HD2-$280
HTC Pure-$200
HTC Tattoo$220
HTC Touch2$220
HTC Snap --$200
HTC Hero -——$200
HTC Touch Pro $155
HTC Touch Diamond 2 $200
HTC Touch Diamond $140
HTC Touch Cruise $140
HTC Touch Pro2 $200
HTC Touch Dual $130
HTC Dream $195
HTC Touch Cruise 09 $215
HTC MAX 4G $200
HTC Touch HD $165
HTC Touch 3G $155
HTC Touch Viva $145
HTC S740 $155

Motorola ROKR ZN50—$230
Motorola Karma QA1-$222
Motorola L800t-$200
Motorola W7 Active Edition --$190
Motorola ZN300—$200
Motorola COCKTAIL VE70$210
Motorola ZN200—-$170

Nokia:
Nokia N900$230
Nokia N97 mini@220usd
Nokia X3@220usd
Nokia X6@220usd
Nokia N97 32GB @220usd
Nokia 6760 slide—$200
Nokia Surge -$175
Nokia N98$200
Nokia N85$190
Nokia N96 16GB $175
Nokia E90 $155
Nokia N97 $195
Nokia N79 $175
Nokia E72 $190
Nokia E71 $180
Nokia E75 - $185
Nokia 8800 Sapphire Arte $205
Nokia N93i $125
Nokia 8600 Luna $145
Nokia 5530 XpressMusic —$190
Nokia 5800 XPress Music-$185

Sony Ericsson:
Sony Ericsson XPERIA X2@250
Sony Ericsson W902 Volcanic @160
Sony Ericsson Idou$150
Sony Ericsson C510 $185
Sony Ericsson P1 $125
Sony Ericsson W995 -$190
Sony Ericsson C905 $145
Sony Ericsson W960 $130
Sony Ericsson G900 $150
Sony Ericsson XPERIA X1 $175
Sony Ericsson C902 $130
Sony Ericsson W902 $145

Samsung:
Samsung B7620 Giorgio Armani$260
Samsung S5600v Blade @200
Samsung B7610 OmniaPRO $220
Samsung i8000 Omnia II $160
Samsung B2100 Xplorer $130
Samsung S9110 Omnia HD - —$155
Samsung I8000 Omnia II $220
Samsung B7320 OmniaPRO $200
Samsung B7300 Omnia LITE$190
Samsung i8910 Omnia HD -$170
Samsung i900 Omnia 16GB $165
Samsung Omnia 8GB -$160
Samsung S8000 Jet
Samsung T929 Memoir $195
Samsung T919 Behold $185
Samsung Giorgio Armani P520 $135
Samsung U900 Soul $160
Samsung G800 $155
Samsung F490 $145

LG Phones
LG GD510 Pop$280
LG GW620$250
LG GM750$220
LG BL40 New Chocolate$200
LG GW550 $160
LG Incite$150
LG GD910$150
LG KS500-$190
LG KF900 Prada$195
LG KC780-$200
LG KP500 Cookie$215
LG KC910 Renoir$210
LG KB770$200
LG CB630 Invision$200
LG KS360-$190

Video Games Console:
Playstation:
Sony PSP Slim Giga Bundle $105
Sony PlayStation 3 80GB Motorstorm Pack $155
Sony Playstation 3 60GB $140
Sony PlayStation 3 40GB $125

Microsoft Xbox:
Xbox 360 Arcade Console — $115
Xbox 360 Pro 60GB Console — $145
Xbox 360 Elite 120GB Console — $165
Nintendo:
Nintendo DS Lite — $70
Nintendo Wii Console — $125

APPLE IPODS:
Apple iPod 60GB (Video) New - $150usd
Apple iPod 30GB (Video) New - $140usd
Apple ipod 80 GB - $140usd
Apple iPod U2 SE 20 GB - $120usd
Apple iPod Photo 60 GB - $120usd
Apple iPod Mini 6 GB - $100usd
Apple iPod 20 GB - $100usd
Apple iPod Photo 30 GB - $110usd
Apple iPod Nano 4GB New! - $90usd
Apple iPod Nano 2GB New! - $80usd
Apple iPod Shuffle 1 GB - $80usd
Apple iPod Mini 4 GB - $70usd
Apple iPod Shuffle 512 MB - $60usd

APPLE LAPTOPS
Apple Macbook Air.$600
Apple MacBook (MA700LL/A) Mac Notebook$500usd
Apple MacBook Pro (MA611LL/A) Notebook$500usd
Apple MacBook (MA254LL/A) Mac Notebook$450usd
Apple iBook G3 (M7698LL/A) Mac Notebook..$400usd
Apple MacBook Pro (MA609LL/A) Notebook$550usd
Apple MacBook Pro (MA600LLA) Notebook$500usd
Apple MacBook Pro (MA610LL/A) Notebook$450usd
Apple Macbook Pro (885909119400) Notebook..$445usd
THE ABOVE LISTED S ARE BRAND NEW PHONES WITH ALL THEIR
COMPLETE ACCESSORIES AND CARRIES 1 FULL YEAR INTERNATIONAL WARRANTY.
RETURN POLICY

We are committed to doing all it takes to keep you a satisfied customer! Many thanks and God bless you as you place your order with SERAC SOLUTIONS LTD
Your enquiry will be greatly appreciated.
You may return the item within ten (10) days of delivery of the order. Products with Manufacturer Warranties which exceed 30 days, returned directly to the manufacturer according to their instruction.
Customer may request a replacement product otherwise company credit will be issued.
OUR TERM

We ship to any destination within 48hours after confirming your part payment for the types and pcs you demand.
We use reputable courier services of your choice for distribution of our goods worldwide!
For more information regarding purchase, kindly contact me at SERAC SOLUTIONS LTD, I look forward in placing your order with us and giving you the most competent services as we are using this medium to look for buyers of various electronics product we stock.

GENERAL SALES MANAGER
Your Prompt Enquiry Will be Greatly Appreciated.
Contact :Mr Frank
Contact E-mail:moc.nsm|dtl_snoitulos.cares#moc.nsm|dtl_snoitulos.cares
Registered No.05735588

Now on sale Apple iphone 4G 32GB...$240,Nokia N8 $230,BlackBerry Pearl 3G 9105---$230

Wed, 28 Jul 2010 21:27:55 +0000

We are the COXANN LIMITED We specialize in a wide range of products such as laptops, mobile phones, plasma & lcd tv, mp3 & mp4 players, video games console, digital cameras, dvd players (Etc) at cheap & affordable prices.

We are one of the leading supplier of high-end products to customers, we deal primarily in genuine and brand new electronics, all items are sourced directly from the manufacturers and carry the manufacturers warranty. We ship 100% of our orders the same business day.

Order from us today and save 10% or more on all your order as we offer the promo of buy 2Unit Get Free Item With Shipping/Discount.

We give maximum guarantee for safe delivery of items bought from us.

COMPANY FULL DETAILS.

Contact Name : Valeriu Bordas
Company Name : COXANN LIMITED
Email Us At : moc.evilswodniw|nnaxoc#moc.evilswodniw|nnaxoc
Registered No.01551883
Incorporation Date: 20-03-1981
Status: Active
Last Accounts Filed up to: 31-03-2009

COXANN LIMITED strive to offer high-quality products at competitive prices. All of our products are brand new, never used, never rebuilt.

All our product comes with the minimum warranty of 1 full international warranty from manufacturer.

For more informations regarding product and purchasing process send your enquiry to

moc.evilswodniw|nnaxoc#moc.evilswodniw|nnaxoc
moc.evilswodniw|nnaxoc#moc.evilswodniw|nnaxoc

Hours of operation:
Monday - Thursday 8:00am - 9:00pm EST
Friday 9:00am - 8:00pm EST
Saturday Sunday- 9:00am - 8:00pm EST.

WHY BUY FROM US?

Your privacy is assured
Our prices are second to none
Secure transaction guaranteed
We ship Monday through Saturday.
Free shipping on qualified orders
We offer reasonable discount on bulk purchases
We ship same day after confirmation of payment.
We offer a 30 day return policy and a 100% money back guarantee.

CHECK OUT FOR OUR EXTRA CHEAPER PRODUCT LIST:

Apple Tablet iPad 64GB (Wi-Fi + 3G) …..$250usd
Apple Tablet iPad 32GB (Wi-Fi + 3G) ….$230usd
Apple Tablet iPad 16GB (Wi-Fi + 3G)…..$200usd

Apple iPhone:
Apple iphone 4G 32GB………….$240
Apple iPhone 3GS 32GB- --$190
Apple iPhone 3GS 16GB-— $175
Apple iPhone 4GB ---- $95
Apple iPhone 8GB ---- $115
Apple iPhone 16GB --- $125
Apple iPhone 3G 8GB --— $130
Apple iPhone 3G 16GB -- $140

T-Mobile Phones:
T-Mobile myTouch 3G Fender Edition—$210
T-Mobile Pulse$180
T-Mobile MDA Vario V-$140
T-Mobile Dash 3G-$150
T-Mobile myTouch 3G$150
T-Mobile G2 Touch—$150
T-Mobile Sidekick LX 2009$135
T-Mobile Sidekick LX 2008$130
T-Mobile Sidekick LX — $110
T-Mobile Shadow - $115
T-Mobile G1 - $125
T-Mobile Sidekick 3 - $100
Juicy Couture Sidekick 2 — $75

BlackBerry:
BlackBerry Pearl 3G 9105-$230
BlackBerry Pearl 3G 9100$225
BlackBerry Bold 9650-$220
BlackBerry Bold 9700 - $210
BlackBerry Curve 8520-$180
BlackBerry Tour 9630 —-$180
Blackberry Curve 8900 — $160
BlackBerry Storm2 9520-$200
BlackBerry Storm2 9550-$205
Blackberry Storm 9500 — $135
Blackberry Storm 9530 — $150
Blackberry Pearl Flip 8220 — $100
Blackberry Bold 9000 — $130
Blackberry Curve 8320 — $120

HTC:
HTC Desire—$250
HTC HD mini$240
HTC Legend-$235
HTC Google Nexus One-$230
HTC Smart-$220
HTC HD2-$200
HTC Pure-$220
HTC Tattoo-$220
HTC Touch2-$230
HTC Ozone --$180
HTC Hero-$180
HTC Magic-$180
HTC Snap-$180
HTC Touch Diamond 2—$145
HTC Touch Pro2 — $145
HTC Dream — $125
HTC Touch Cruise 09 — $125

Motorola phones
Motorola BACKFLIP-$230
Motorola XT800 ZHISHANG-$220
Motorola XT701-$215
Motorola MT710 ZHILING$205
Motorola MILESTONE-$205
Motorola ROKR ZN50—$210
Motorola Karma QA1-$222
Motorola L800t-$200
Motorola W7 Active Edition --$190
Motorola ZN300—$200
Motorola COCKTAIL VE70$210
Motorola ZN200—-$170

moc.evilswodniw|nnaxoc#moc.evilswodniw|nnaxoc
moc.evilswodniw|nnaxoc#moc.evilswodniw|nnaxoc

Sony Ericsson:
Sony Ericsson XPERIA X10 mini pro—$240
Sony Ericsson XPERIA X10 mini$220
Sony Ericsson XPERIA X10-$210
Sony Ericsson XPERIA X2$200
Sony Ericsson Aino-$165
Sony Ericsson Idou-$175
Sony Ericsson C510 — $165
Sony Ericsson P1 — $125
Sony Ericsson C905 — $145
Sony Ericsson W960 — $130
Sony Ericsson G900 — $150
Sony Ericsson XPERIA X1 — $155
Sony Ericsson C902 — $130
Sony Ericsson W902 — $140

Nokia:
Nokia N8 -$230
Nokia C5 -- $210
Nokia X6 16GB-$240
Nokia 5330 Mobile TV Edition-$220
Nokia 6788-$230
Nokia X3-$145
Nokia X6—$220
Nokia 5230$155
Nokia N97 mini$180
Nokia 5800 Navigation Edition$175
Nokia 6760 slide—$220
Nokia 6790 Surge$230
Nokia N900—$220
Nokia 5530 XpressMusic$178
Nokia E72-$210
Nokia N86—$230
Nokia N97 32GB-$175

LG Phones
LG GM750$230
LG BL40 New Chocolate$225
LG GT500 Puccini$220
LG GT505$205
LG GW520$200
LG GD900 Crystal$200
LG GC900 Viewty Smart$195
LG GD330$195
LG KS660$195
LG GB125$190
LG Xenon$195
LG GB210$190
LG GM200$195
LG KC560$190
LG KM900 Arena$190
LG GM730$195
LG Incite$230
LG GD910$230
LG KS500$235
LG KF900 Prada$225

Samsung:
Samsung Galaxy A--$235
Samsung I6500U Galaxy—$235
Samsung I9000 Galaxy S-$235
Samsung M5650 Lindy$230
Samsung I8520 Beam$230
Samsung S8500 Wave$230
Samsung B3410W Ch@t-$230
Samsung M3310$220
Samsung S5630C-$220
Samsung B3410$220
Samsung A797 Flight—$220
Samsung A897 Mythic$220
Samsung S5560-$300
Samsung B7620 Giorgio Armani$220
Samsung I5700 Spica-$220
Samsung T939 Behold 2—$220
Samsung B5310 CorbyPRO$220
Samsung B3210 CorbyTXT-$220
Samsung B7330 OmniaPRO-$205
Samsung S5230W Star WiFi-$180
Samsung S7550 Blue Earth-$180
Samsung W880 AMOLED 12M$230

O2 phones
O2 XDA Serra$230
O2 XDA Guide$225
O2 XDA Zest$220
O2 XDA Ignito$210
O2 XDA Stellar$200
O2 XDA Orbit II$200
O2 XDA Comet—$200

Qtek phones
Qtek 9600$230
Qtek 8600$225
Qtek A9100$225
Qtek 8500$220
Qtek S200$225
Qtek 9000$220

Palm phones
Palm Pre$245
Palm Treo Pro$210
Palm Centro—$200

Eten:
Acer Tempo DX900 ---$180
Eten glofiish X610 --— $130
Eten glofiish V900 --- $230
Eten glofiish X900 --- $180
Eten glofiish DX900 -— $160
Eten glofiish M810 --- $150
Eten glofiish X650 --- $140
Eten glofiish M800 --—- $150

APPLE LAPTOPS
Apple Macbook Air-- --- --$500usd
Apple Macbook Pro MC240LL/A ………………………….$400usd
Apple Macbook Pro MB990LL/A ………………………….$420usd

Please review our returns policy for more details below:

Before you return your items, you must contact us and receive a Return Merchandise Authorization Number (RMA). Any returns sent without an RMA number will not be accepted by COXANN LIMITED We assume all responsibility for the package until it arrives at our office.

Return freight is the sole responsibility of the consumer.
Refunds on returned items which were paid for by credit card will only be made by crediting the account charged for the purchase.
Refunds on returned items which were paid for by wire transfer, check or cash (in-store) will only be made by check after a 10-day waiting period.

We ship 100% of our orders the same business day from our warehouse, typically the product will arrive within 2days via either Fedex/Ups Courier Services.

Well we offer international standard warranty with full acceptance for replacement or full refund of money back.

We give maximum guarantee for safe delivery of items bought from us.

As soon as final conclusions are done from your side kindly contact us as soon as possible so as to lead you on how to transact with us.

Thanking you in anticipation and looking forward to doing long term business with you.

Online Chat msn id:moc.evilswodniw|nnaxoc#moc.evilswodniw|nnaxoc

Yours Sincerely

COMPANY FULL DETAILS.

On sale Brand New Apple Tablet iPad 64GB (Wi-Fi + 3G)$280, Apple iPhone 4G 64GB$240

Sat, 26 Jun 2010 10:21:58 +0000

GADGITECH LTD is one of the leading supplier of high-end products to customers, we deal primarily in genuine and brand new electronics, all items are sourced directly from the manufacturers and carry the manufacturer’s warranty.

We are Legitimate registered company under government registration and licensed, Registered No.06427133.

We give maximum guarantee for safe delivery of items bought from us.

Well we offer international standard warranty with full acceptance for replacement or full refund of money back.

We specialize in a wide range of products such as laptops, mobile phones, plasma & LCD TV, mp3 & mp4 players,video games console, digital cameras, DVD players (Etc) at cheap & affordable prices.

We supply superior quality products all products strictly follow the standards of CE, FCC and RoHS, and are carefully inspected by a responsible QA team before packaging.

Order from us today and save 10% or more on all your order as we offer the promo of buy 2Unit Get Free Item Free.

COMPANY FULL DETAILS.
Contact Name : Keshav Himatsingka
Company Name : GADGITECH LTD®
Email Us At : moc.evilswodniw|cni.hcetigdag#moc.evilswodniw|cni.hcetigdag OR moc.liamg|cni.hcetigdag#moc.liamg|cni.hcetigdag
Registered No.06427133
Incorporation Date: 29-01-2007
Status: Active
Last Accounts Filed up to: 28-02-2010

Hours of operation:
Monday - Thursday 8:00am - 9:00pm EST
Friday 9:00am - 8:00pm EST
Saturday Sunday- 9:00am - 8:00pm EST.

WHY BUY FROM US?

Your privacy is assured
Our prices are second to none
Secure transaction guaranteed
We ship Monday through Saturday.
Free shipping on qualified orders
We offer reasonable discount on bulk purchases
We ship same day after confirmation of payment.
We offer a 30 day return policy and a 100% money back guarantee.

GADGITECH LTD® strive to offer high-quality products at competitive prices. All of our products are brand new, never used, never rebuilt, original.

All our product comes with the minimum warranty of 1 full international warranty from manufacturer.

CURRENT OFFER 2 BUY GET 1 FREE : AT WHOLESALE PRICE

Apple Tablet iPad 64GB (Wi-Fi + 3G) …..$280usd
Apple Tablet iPad 32GB (Wi-Fi + 3G) ….$250usd
Apple Tablet iPad 16GB (Wi-Fi + 3G)…..$230usd

T-Mobile Sidekick:
T-Mobile HD2-$200
T-Mobile myTouch 3G Fender Edition$200
T-Mobile Pulse ---$160
T-Mobile MyTouch 3G -$140
T-Mobile G2 Touch --—$145
T-Mobile Sidekick LX 2008–$120
T-Mobile Sidekick LX 2009–$130
T-Mobile Sidekick LX — $90
T-Mobile Shadow — $105
T-Mobile G1 — $110
T-Mobile Sidekick 3 — $85
Juicy Couture Sidekick 2 — $75

Apple iPhone:
Apple iPhone 4G 64GB - $240
Apple iPhone 3GS 32GB- $210
Apple iPhone 3GS 16GB- $190
Apple iPhone 4GB — $90
Apple iPhone 8GB — $100
Apple iPhone 16GB — $105
Apple iPhone 3G 8GB — $120
Apple iPhone 3G 16GB — $130

Palm Pixi ……….$215
Palm Pre…………$180
Palm Treo Pro…….$190
Palm Centro………$1850

BlackBerry Bold 9650-$200
BlackBerry Bold 9700—$210
BlackBerry Storm2 9550-$200
BlackBerry Storm2 9520-$190
BlackBerry Curve 8520 @ 160usd
BlackBerry Tour 9630 @ 180usd
Blackberry Curve 8900 @180usd
Blackberry Storm 9530@150usd
Blackberry Storm 9500 @150usd
Blackberry Pearl Flip 8220 @120usd
Blackberry Bold 9000 @120usd
Blackberry Curve 8320 @110usd
Blackberry Curve 8310 @115usd
Blackberry Curve 8300 @ 110usd
Blackberry 8820 @115usd
Blackberry 8830 World Edition @110usd
Blackberry 8800"indigo" unlocked @ 110usd
Blackberry 8700g @ 110usd
Blackberry 8100 Pearl Cingular unlocked @110usd

Motorola phones
Motorola QUENCH $205
Motorola XT720 MOTOROI $200
Motorola BACKFLIP -$215
Motorola XT800 --$205
Motorola ROKR ZN50$200
Motorola Karma QA1-$200
Motorola L800t-$190
Motorola W7 Active Edition --$180
Motorola ZN300—$200
Motorola COCKTAIL VE70$200
Motorola ZN200—-$160

HTC:
HTC Desire --— $220
HTC HD mini -- $215
HTC Legend — $200
HTC Google Nexus One $200
HTC HD2-$200
HTC Touch2—$180
HTC Smart -- 180
HTC Pure --$180
HTC Snap --$160
HTC Hero -—$180
HTC Touch Pro — $150
HTC Touch Diamond 2 — $180
HTC Touch Diamond — $130
HTC Touch Cruise — $130
HTC Touch Pro2 $190
HTC Dream — $190
HTC Touch Cruise 09 — $200
HTC MAX 4G — $190
HTC Touch HD2 — $180
HTC Touch HD — $150
HTC Touch 3G — $150

Eten:
Acer Tempo DX900 ——$180
Eten glofiish X610 — $130
Eten glofiish V900 — $230
Eten glofiish X900 — $180
Eten glofiish DX900 — $160
Eten glofiish M810 — $150
Eten glofiish X650 — $140
Eten glofiish M800 — $150

Nokia:
Nokia N8-$210
Nokia C6 — $200
Nokia 5330 — $200
Nokia 5235 --— $210
Nokia N97 mini -$190
Nokia N97 32GB - $170
Nokia N900 -—$190
Nokia X3 -- $190
Nokia X6 16GB — $180
Nokia 6760 slide$200
Nokia Surge -$200
Nokia N98—–$190
Nokia N86 8MP —-$170
Nokia N85——$175
Nokia N96 16GB– $150
Nokia E90 — $150
Nokia N97 — $175
Nokia N79 — $155
Nokia E72 — $170
Nokia E71 — $165
Nokia E75 - $180
Nokia 8800 Sapphire Arte — $200
Nokia N93i — $110
Nokia 8600 Luna — $130
Nokia 5530 XpressMusic —$180
Nokia 5800 XPress Music—-$180

Sony Ericsson:
Sony Ericsson XPERIA X10 mini pro — $250
Sony Ericsson XPERIA X10 mini - $230
Sony Ericsson XPERIA X10 -- $200
Sony Ericsson Xperia X2 --- $190
Sony Ericsson XPERIA X1 --- $150
Sony Ericsson Aspen -- $230
Sony Ericsson Vivaz Pro — $210
Sony Ericsson Vivaz — $200
Sony Ericsson Idou—–$170
Sony Ericsson Aino --$170
Sony Ericsson C510 — $170
Sony Ericsson P1 — $120
Sony Ericsson W995 -$180
Sony Ericsson C905 — $140
Sony Ericsson W960 — $130
Sony Ericsson G900 — $150
Sony Ericsson C902 — $130
Sony Ericsson W902 — $130

Samsung:
Samsung: S8500 Wave -$210
Samsung M3710 Corby Beat$195
Samsung I8000 Omnia II —— $200
Samsung B7320 OmniaPRO —— $190
Samsung B7300 Omnia LITE——$185
Samsung i8910 Omnia HD ——-$150
Samsung i900 Omnia 16GB — $140
Samsung Omnia 8GB ——-$130
Samsung S8000 Jet ———— $170
Samsung T929 Memoir — $190
Samsung T919 Behold — $180
Samsung Giorgio Armani P520 — $130
Samsung U900 Soul — $160
Samsung G800 — $150
Samsung F490 — $140

LG Phones
LG KH5200 Andro-1
LG GS290 Cookie Fresh
LG GW820 eXpo -- $220
LG GT540 --- $205
LG GD510 Pop --- $200
LG GW550 --- $190
LG Incite —--—$195
LG GD910 —--—–$190
LG KS500 —- $190
LG KF900 Prada—–$190
LG KC780—- $200
LG KP500 Cookie—–$210
LG KC910 Renoir——$210

Video Games Console:
Playstation:
Sony PSP Go Game console - $190
Sony PSP Slim Giga Bundle — $100
Sony Playstation 3 Slim --$180
Sony PlayStation 3 80GB Motorstorm Pack — $150
Sony Playstation 3 60GB — $140
Sony PlayStation 3 40GB — $120

Microsoft Xbox:
Xbox 360 Arcade Console — $110
Xbox 360 Pro 60GB Console — $140
Xbox 360 Elite 120GB Console — $160

Nintendo:
Nintendo DS Lite — $70
Nintendo Wii Console — $125

APPLE IPODS:
Apple iTouch 64GB $200usd
Apple iTouch 32GB $190usd
Apple iTouch 8GB $180usd
Apple iPod Classic 160GB (Video) - $190usd
Apple iPod 60GB (Video) New - $145usd
Apple iPod 30GB (Video) New - $130usd
Apple ipod 80 GB - $140usd
Apple iPod U2 SE 20 GB - $120usd
Apple iPod Photo 60 GB - $120usd
Apple iPod Mini 6 GB - $100usd
Apple iPod 20 GB - $100usd
Apple iPod Photo 30 GB - $110usd
Apple iPod Nano 4GB New! - $90usd
Apple iPod Nano 2GB New! - $80usd

APPLE LAPTOPS
Apple Macbook Air……………………….$480usd
Apple Macbook Pro MC240LL/A …..$385usd
Apple Macbook Pro MB990LL/A ……$400usd
Apple MacBook (MA700LL/A) Mac Notebook…$410usd
Apple MacBook Pro (MA611LL/A) Notebook…$390usd
Apple MacBook (MA254LL/A) Mac Notebook…$405usd
Apple iBook G3 (M7698LL/A) Mac Notebook..$395usd
Apple MacBook Pro (MA609LL/A) Notebook…$520usd
Apple MacBook Pro (MA600LLA) Notebook…$410usd
Apple MacBook Pro (MA610LL/A) Notebook…$420usd
Apple Macbook Pro (885909119400) Notebook..$415usd

Please review our returns policy for more details below:

Before you return your items, you must contact us and receive a Return Merchandise Authorization Number (RMA).Any returns sent without an RMA number will not be accepted by GADGITECH LTD®

We assume all responsibility for the package until it arrives at our office.

We give maximum guarantee for safe delivery of items bought from us.

As soon as final conclusions are done from your side kindly contact us as soon as possible so as to lead you on how to transact with us.

Thanking you in anticipation and looking forward to doing long term business with you.

Yours Sincerely

Contact Name : Keshav Himatsingka
Company Name : GADGITECH LTD®
Email Us At : moc.evilswodniw|cni.hcetigdag#moc.evilswodniw|cni.hcetigdag OR moc.liamg|cni.hcetigdag#moc.liamg|cni.hcetigdag
Registered No.06427133
Incorporation Date: 29-01-2006
Status: Active
Last Accounts Filed up to: 28-02-2010

On Sale Brand New HTC Desire$220, T-Mobile HD2$200, Nokia N8$210

Sat, 26 Jun 2010 10:20:48 +0000

We are Legitimate registered company under government registration and licensed, Registered No.06427133.

We give maximum guarantee for safe delivery of items bought from us.

Well we offer international standard warranty with full acceptance for replacement or full refund of money back.

We specialize in a wide range of products such as laptops, mobile phones, plasma & LCD TV, mp3 & mp4 players,video games console, digital cameras, DVD players (Etc) at cheap & affordable prices.

We supply superior quality products all products strictly follow the standards of CE, FCC and RoHS, and are carefully inspected by a responsible QA team before packaging.

Order from us today and save 10% or more on all your order as we offer the promo of buy 2Unit Get Free Item Free.

Hours of operation:
Monday - Thursday 8:00am - 9:00pm EST
Friday 9:00am - 8:00pm EST
Saturday Sunday- 9:00am - 8:00pm EST.

WHY BUY FROM US?

Your privacy is assured
Our prices are second to none
Secure transaction guaranteed
We ship Monday through Saturday.
Free shipping on qualified orders
We offer reasonable discount on bulk purchases
We ship same day after confirmation of payment.
We offer a 30 day return policy and a 100% money back guarantee.

GADGITECH LTD® strive to offer high-quality products at competitive prices. All of our products are brand new, never used, never rebuilt, original.

All our product comes with the minimum warranty of 1 full international warranty from manufacturer.

CURRENT OFFER 2 BUY GET 1 FREE : AT WHOLESALE PRICE

Apple Tablet iPad 64GB (Wi-Fi + 3G) …..$280usd
Apple Tablet iPad 32GB (Wi-Fi + 3G) ….$250usd
Apple Tablet iPad 16GB (Wi-Fi + 3G)…..$230usd

Palm Pixi ……….$215
Palm Pre…………$180
Palm Treo Pro…….$190
Palm Centro………$1850

Microsoft Xbox:
Xbox 360 Arcade Console — $110
Xbox 360 Pro 60GB Console — $140
Xbox 360 Elite 120GB Console — $160

Nintendo:
Nintendo DS Lite — $70
Nintendo Wii Console — $125

Please review our returns policy for more details below:

Before you return your items, you must contact us and receive a Return Merchandise Authorization Number (RMA).Any returns sent without an RMA number will not be accepted by GADGITECH LTD®

We assume all responsibility for the package until it arrives at our office.

We give maximum guarantee for safe delivery of items bought from us.

As soon as final conclusions are done from your side kindly contact us as soon as possible so as to lead you on how to transact with us.

Thanking you in anticipation and looking forward to doing long term business with you.

Yours Sincerely

For Sale Brand New Nokia X6 32gb Unlocked

Mon, 07 Jun 2010 15:08:52 +0000

**PHONE 2 STOCK INC. is one of the leading supplier of high-end products to customers, we deal primarily in genuine and brand new electronics, all items are sourced directly from the manufacturers and carry the manufacturer’s warranty. We ship 100% of our orders the same business day. with the Registered No.05086857.

Order from us today and save 10% or more on all your order as we offer the promo of buy 3Unit Get Free Item Free.
We specialize in a wide range of products such as laptops, mobile phones, plasma & lcd tv, mp3 & mp4 players, video games console, digital cameras, dvd players (Etc) at cheap & affordable prices.

COMPANY FULL DETAILS.
Contact Name : Brian Altman
Company Name : PHONE 2 STOCK INC.
Email Us At : moc.oohay|cnikcots2enohp#moc.oohay|cnikcots2enohp
Registered No.05086857
Date of Incorporation: 20/05/2000
Status: Active

Hours of operation:
Monday - Thursday 8:00am - 9:00pm EST
Friday 9:00am - 8:00pm EST
Saturday Sunday- 9:00am - 8:00pm EST.

WHY BUY FROM US?

Your privacy is assured
Our prices are second to none
Secure transaction guaranteed
We ship Monday through Saturday.
Free shipping on qualified orders
We offer reasonable discount on bulk purchases
We ship same day after confirmation of payment.
We offer a 30 day return policy and a 100% money back guarantee.

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
PHONE 2 STOCK INC. strive to offer high-quality products at competitive prices. All of our products are brand new, never used, never rebuilt,original.

All our product comes with the minimum warranty of 1 full international warranty from manufacturer.
Email Us At : moc.oohay|cnikcots2enohp#moc.oohay|cnikcots2enohp
Email Us At : moc.evil|cnikcots2enohp#moc.evil|cnikcots2enohp
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………
CHECK OUT FOR OUR EXTRA CHEAPER PRODUCT LIST:

HTC:
HTC Desire --— $300
HTC Legend — $275
HTC Google Nexus One $250
HTC HD 2$235
HTC Smart -- $210
HTC Tattoo - $205
HTC Pure --$200
HTC Snap --$160
HTC Hero -—$180
HTC Touch Pro — $150
HTC Touch Diamond 2 — $180
HTC Touch Diamond — $130
HTC Touch Cruise — $130
HTC Touch Pro2 $190
HTC Dream — $190
HTC Touch Cruise 09 — $200
HTC MAX 4G — $190
HTC Touch HD — $150
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Nokia:
Nokia X6 16GB -- $285
Nokia N900 -$260
Nokia 6760 slide$230
Nokia Surge -$220
Nokia N97 mini -$210
Nokia N97 32GB - $200
Nokia N98—–$190
Nokia N86 8MP -$170
Nokia N85——$175
Nokia N96 16GB– $150
Nokia E90 — $150
Nokia N79 — $155
Nokia E72 — $170
Nokia E71 — $165
Nokia E75 - $180
Nokia 8800 Sapphire Arte — $200
Nokia N93i — $110
Nokia 8600 Luna — $130
Nokia 5800 XPress Music—-$180
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
BlackBerry:
BlackBerry Bold 9700 - $250
BlackBerry Curve 8520-$180
BlackBerry Tour 9630 -$200
Blackberry Curve 8900 — $150
BlackBerry Storm2 9520-$200
BlackBerry Storm2 9550-$210
Blackberry Storm 9500 — $130
Blackberry Storm 9530 — $140
Blackberry Pearl Flip 8220 — $100
Blackberry Bold 9000 — $120
Blackberry Curve 8320 — $105
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
T-Mobile Sidekick:
T-Mobile Pulse ---$200
T-Mobile MyTouch 3G -$170
T-Mobile G2 Touch --$145
T-Mobile Sidekick LX 2008–$120
T-Mobile Sidekick LX 2009–$130
T-Mobile Sidekick LX — $90
T-Mobile Shadow — $105
T-Mobile G1 — $110
T-Mobile Sidekick 3 — $85
Juicy Couture Sidekick 2 — $75
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Apple iPhone:
Apple iPhone 3GS 32GB- $250
Apple iPhone 3GS 16GB- $225
Apple iPhone 16GB — $120
Apple iPhone 3G 8GB — $150
Apple iPhone 3G 16GB — $175
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Palm Pixi ……….$215
Palm Pre…………$180
Palm Treo Pro…….$190
Palm Centro………$1850
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Motorola phones
Motorola Milestone-$250
Motorola XT720 MOTOROI $210
Motorola BACKFLIP -$215
Motorola XT800 --$205
Motorola ROKR ZN50$200
Motorola Karma QA1-$200
Motorola L800t-$190
Motorola W7 Active Edition --$180
Motorola ZN300—$200
Motorola COCKTAIL VE70$200
Motorola ZN200-$160
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Eten:
Acer Tempo DX900 --$180
Eten glofiish X610 — $130
Eten glofiish V900 — $230
Eten glofiish X900 — $180
Eten glofiish DX900 — $160
Eten glofiish M810 — $150
Eten glofiish X650 — $140
Eten glofiish M800 — $150
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Sony Ericsson:
Sony Ericsson XPERIA X10 mini pro — $270
Sony Ericsson XPERIA X10 mini - $255
Sony Ericsson XPERIA X10 -- $240
Sony Ericsson Xperia X2 --- $210
Sony Ericsson XPERIA X1 --- $150
Sony Ericsson Aspen -- $230
Sony Ericsson Vivaz Pro — $210
Sony Ericsson Vivaz — $200
Sony Ericsson Idou—–$170
Sony Ericsson Aino --$170
Sony Ericsson C510 — $170
Sony Ericsson P1 — $120
Sony Ericsson W995 -$180
Sony Ericsson C905 — $140
Sony Ericsson W960 — $130
Sony Ericsson G900 — $150
Sony Ericsson C902 — $130
Sony Ericsson W902 — $130
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Samsung:
Samsung: S8500 Wave -$210
Samsung I8000 Omnia II —— $200
Samsung B7320 OmniaPRO —— $190
Samsung B7300 Omnia LITE——$185
Samsung i8910 Omnia HD ——-$170
Samsung i900 Omnia 16GB — $140
Samsung Omnia 8GB ——-$130
Samsung S8000 Jet ———— $170
Samsung T929 Memoir — $190
Samsung T919 Behold — $180
Samsung Giorgio Armani P520 — $130
Samsung U900 Soul — $160
Samsung G800 — $150
Samsung F490 — $140
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………
LG Phones
LG GW820 eXpo $220
LG GT540 -- $205
LG GD510 Pop — $200
LG GW550— $190
LG Incite——$195
LG GD910—–$190
LG KS500—-$190
LG KF900 Prada—–$190
LG KC780—-$200
LG KP500 Cookie—–$210
LG KC910 Renoir——$210
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Video Games Console:
Playstation:
Sony PSP Go Game console - $190
Sony PSP Slim Giga Bundle — $100
Sony Playstation 3 Slim --$180
Sony PlayStation 3 80GB Motorstorm Pack — $150
Sony Playstation 3 60GB — $140
Sony PlayStation 3 40GB — $120
…………………………………………………….
Microsoft Xbox:
Xbox 360 Arcade Console — $110
Xbox 360 Pro 60GB Console — $140
Xbox 360 Elite 120GB Console — $160
Nintendo:
Nintendo DS Lite — $110
Nintendo Wii Console — $145
…………………………………………………..
APPLE IPODS:
Apple iTouch 64GB $200usd
Apple iTouch 32GB $190usd
Apple iTouch 8GB $180usd
Apple iPod 60GB (Video) New - $145usd
Apple iPod 30GB (Video) New - $130usd
Apple ipod 80 GB - $140usd
Apple iPod U2 SE 20 GB - $120usd
Apple iPod Photo 60 GB - $120usd
Apple iPod Mini 6 GB - $100usd
Apple iPod 20 GB - $100usd
Apple iPod Photo 30 GB - $110usd
Apple iPod Nano 4GB New! - $90usd
Apple iPod Nano 2GB New! - $80usd
…………………………………………………………………………
Apple Tablet iPad 64GB (Wi-Fi + 3G) …..$550usd
Apple Tablet iPad 32GB (Wi-Fi + 3G) ….$450usd
Apple Tablet iPad 16GB (Wi-Fi + 3G)…..$350usd
………………………………………………………………….
APPLE LAPTOPS
Apple Macbook Air……………………….$500usd
Apple Macbook Pro MC240LL/A …..$385usd
Apple Macbook Pro MB990LL/A ……$400usd
Apple MacBook (MA700LL/A) Mac Notebook…$410usd
Apple MacBook Pro (MA611LL/A) Notebook…$390usd
Apple MacBook (MA254LL/A) Mac Notebook…$405usd
Apple iBook G3 (M7698LL/A) Mac Notebook..$395usd
Apple MacBook Pro (MA609LL/A) Notebook…$520usd
Apple MacBook Pro (MA600LLA) Notebook…$410usd
Apple MacBook Pro (MA610LL/A) Notebook…$420usd
Apple Macbook Pro (885909119400) Notebook..$415usd
………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Please review our returns policy for more details below:
We give maximum guarantee for safe delivery of items bought from us.

Before you return your items, you must contact us and receive a Return Merchandise Authorization Number (RMA). Any returns sent without an RMA number will not be accepted by PHONE 2 STOCK INC.® We assume all responsibility for the package until it arrives at our office.
As soon as final conclusions are done from your side kindly contact us as soon as possible so as to lead you on how to transact with us.

Thanking you in anticipation and looking forward to doing long term business with you.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Yours Sincerely.**

For Sale Brand New Apple Iphone 3gs 32gb Unlocked

Mon, 07 Jun 2010 15:06:19 +0000

Hours of operation:
Monday - Thursday 8:00am - 9:00pm EST
Friday 9:00am - 8:00pm EST
Saturday Sunday- 9:00am - 8:00pm EST.

WHY BUY FROM US?

Your privacy is assured
Our prices are second to none
Secure transaction guaranteed
We ship Monday through Saturday.
Free shipping on qualified orders
We offer reasonable discount on bulk purchases
We ship same day after confirmation of payment.
We offer a 30 day return policy and a 100% money back guarantee.

Yours Sincerely.**

Buy Apple iPhone 4G 64GB $200, iPhone 3GS 32GB $180, Apple iPad $190, HTC EVO 4G

Thu, 03 Jun 2010 04:36:47 +0000

Zebtech Limited is one of the leading supplier of high-end products to customers, we deal primarily in genuine and brand new electronics, all items are sourced directly from the manufacturers and carry the manufacturer’s warranty.

We ship 100% of our orders the same business day. with the Registered No.04948022.

We specialize in a wide range of products such as laptops, mobile phones, plasma & lcd tv, mp3 & mp4 players, video games console, digital cameras, dvd players (Etc) at cheap & affordable prices.

Order from us today and save 10% or more on all your order as we offer the promo of buy 2Unit Get Free Item Free.

COMPANY FULL DETAILS.

Contact Name : Ethan Liam
Company Name : Zebtech Limited®
Email Us At : moc.evilswodniw|hcetbez-tlusnoc#moc.evilswodniw|hcetbez-tlusnoc
Registered No.04948022
Incorporation Date: 29-01-2006
Status: Active
Last Accounts Filed up to: 30-04-2010

Hours of operation:
Monday - Thursday 8:00am - 9:00pm EST
Friday 9:00am - 8:00pm EST
Saturday Sunday- 9:00am - 8:00pm EST.

WHY BUY FROM US?

Your privacy is assured
Our prices are second to none
Secure transaction guaranteed
We ship Monday through Saturday.
Free shipping on qualified orders
We offer reasonable discount on bulk purchases
We ship same day after confirmation of payment.
We offer a 30 day return policy and a 100% money back guarantee.

Zebtech Limited® strive to offer high-quality products at competitive prices. All of our products are brand new,

never used, never rebuilt,original.

All our product comes with the minimum warranty of 1 full international warranty from manufacturer.

CURRENT OFFER 2 BUY GET 1 FREE : AT WHOLESALE PRICE

Apple Tablet iPad 64GB (Wi-Fi + 3G) …..$220usd
Apple Tablet iPad 32GB (Wi-Fi + 3G) ….$200usd
Apple Tablet iPad 16GB (Wi-Fi + 3G)…..$190usd

T-Mobile Sidekick:
T-Mobile MDA Vario V-$140
T-Mobile Dash 3G-$150
T-Mobile Garminfone—$180
T-Mobile Pulse Mini --- $175
T-Mobile Pulse ---$160
T-Mobile MyTouch 3G Fender Edition-$145
T-Mobile myTouch 3G Slide-$149
T-Mobile MyTouch 3G -$140
T-Mobile G2 Touch --$145
T-Mobile Sidekick LX 2008–$120
T-Mobile Sidekick LX 2009–$130
T-Mobile Sidekick LX — $90
T-Mobile Shadow — $105
T-Mobile G1 — $110
T-Mobile Sidekick 3 — $85
Juicy Couture Sidekick 2 — $75

Apple iPhone:
Apple iPhone 4G 64GB - $200
Apple iPhone 3GS 32GB- $180
Apple iPhone 3GS 16GB- $170
Apple iPhone 4GB — $90
Apple iPhone 8GB — $100
Apple iPhone 16GB — $105
Apple iPhone 3G 8GB — $120
Apple iPhone 3G 16GB — $130

Palm Pixi ……….$200
Palm Pre…………$170
Palm Treo Pro…….$180
Palm Centro………$180

BlackBerry:
BlackBerry Bold 9650 - $200
BlackBerry Bold 9700 - $180
BlackBerry Curve 8520-$170
BlackBerry Tour 9630 -$160
Blackberry Curve 8900 — $150
BlackBerry Storm2 9520-$185
BlackBerry Storm2 9550-$185
Blackberry Storm 9500 — $130
Blackberry Storm 9530 — $140
Blackberry Pearl Flip 8220 — $100
Blackberry Bold 9000 — $120
Blackberry Curve 8320 — $105

Motorola phones
Motorola Milestone -- $200
Motorola QUENCH -- $200
Motorola XT720 MOTOROI $200
Motorola BACKFLIP -$215
Motorola XT800 --$205
Motorola ROKR ZN50$200
Motorola Karma QA1-$200
Motorola L800t-$190
Motorola W7 Active Edition --$180
Motorola ZN300—$200
Motorola COCKTAIL VE70$200
Motorola ZN200—-$160

HTC:
HTC Wildfire --— $225
HTC EVO 4G --— $210
HTC Desire --— $200
HTC HD mini --- $205
HTC Legend --— $200
HTC Google Nexus One $200
HTC Smart --— $201
HTC Tattoo --— $200
HTC Pure --— $200
HTC Snap --— $160
HTC Hero --- $180
HTC Touch Pro — $150
HTC Touch Diamond 2 — $180
HTC Touch Diamond — $130
HTC Touch Cruise — $130
HTC Touch Pro2 $190
HTC Dream — $190
HTC Touch Cruise 09 — $200
HTC MAX 4G — $190
HTC Touch HD2 — $180
HTC Touch HD — $150
HTC Touch 3G — $150

Nokia:
Nokia N8 — $215
Nokia C6 -- $220
Nokia C5 — $205
Nokia 5330 — $200
Nokia 5235 --— $210
Nokia N97 mini -$190
Nokia N97 32GB - $170
Nokia N900 -—$190
Nokia X3 -- $190
Nokia X6 16GB — $180
Nokia 6760 slide$200
Nokia Surge -$200
Nokia N98—–$190
Nokia N86 8MP —-$170
Nokia N85——$175
Nokia N96 16GB– $150
Nokia E90 — $150
Nokia N97 — $175
Nokia N79 — $155
Nokia E72 — $170
Nokia E71 — $165
Nokia E75 - $180
Nokia 8800 Sapphire Arte — $200
Nokia 5530 XpressMusic —$180
Nokia 5800 XPress Music—-$180

Sony Ericsson:
Sony Ericsson XPERIA X10 mini pro — $220
Sony Ericsson XPERIA X10 mini - $210
Sony Ericsson XPERIA X10 -- $200
Sony Ericsson Xperia X2 --- $190
Sony Ericsson XPERIA X1 --- $150
Sony Ericsson Aspen -- $225
Sony Ericsson Vivaz Pro — $210
Sony Ericsson Vivaz — $200
Sony Ericsson Idou—–$170
Sony Ericsson Aino --$170
Sony Ericsson C510 — $170
Sony Ericsson P1 — $120
Sony Ericsson W995 -$180
Sony Ericsson C905 — $140
Sony Ericsson W960 — $130
Sony Ericsson G900 — $150
Sony Ericsson C902 — $130
Sony Ericsson W902 — $130

Samsung:
Samsung W960 AMOLED 3D - $210
Samsung: S8500 Wave -$210
Samsung M3710 Corby Beat$195
Samsung I8000 Omnia II —— $200
Samsung B7320 OmniaPRO —— $190
Samsung B7300 Omnia LITE——$185
Samsung i8910 Omnia HD ——-$150
Samsung i900 Omnia 16GB — $140
Samsung Omnia 8GB ——-$130
Samsung S8000 Jet ———— $170
Samsung T929 Memoir — $190
Samsung T919 Behold — $180
Samsung Giorgio Armani P520 — $130
Samsung U900 Soul — $160
Samsung G800 — $150
Samsung F490 — $140

LG Phones
LG KH5200 Andro-1
LG GS290 Cookie Fresh
LG GW820 eXpo -- $190
LG GT540 --- $180
LG GD510 Pop --- $190
LG GW550 --- $170
LG Incite —--—$185
LG GD910 —--—–$165
LG KS500 —- $170
LG KF900 Prada—–$180
LG KC780—- $195
LG KP500 Cookie—–$200
LG KC910 Renoir——$200

Video Games Console:
Playstation:
Sony PSP Go Game console - $180
Sony PSP Slim Giga Bundle — $95
Sony Playstation 3 Slim --$170
Sony PlayStation 3 80GB Motorstorm Pack — $150
Sony Playstation 3 60GB — $140
Sony PlayStation 3 40GB — $120

Microsoft Xbox:
Xbox 360 Arcade Console — $100
Xbox 360 Pro 60GB Console — $120
Xbox 360 Elite 120GB Console — $140

Nintendo:
Nintendo DS Lite — $70
Nintendo Wii Console — $125

APPLE IPODS:
Apple iTouch 64GB $190usd
Apple iTouch 32GB $180usd
Apple iTouch 8GB $170usd
Apple iPod Classic 160GB (Video) - $180usd
Apple iPod 60GB (Video) New - $140usd
Apple iPod 30GB (Video) New - $120usd
Apple ipod 80 GB - $140usd
Apple iPod U2 SE 20 GB - $120usd
Apple iPod Photo 60 GB - $120usd
Apple iPod Mini 6 GB - $100usd
Apple iPod 20 GB - $100usd
Apple iPod Photo 30 GB - $110usd
Apple iPod Nano 4GB New! - $90usd
Apple iPod Nano 2GB New! - $80usd

APPLE LAPTOPS

Apple Macbook Air……………………….$400usd
Apple Macbook Pro MC240LL/A …..$350usd
Apple Macbook Pro MB990LL/A ……$360usd
Apple MacBook (MA700LL/A) Mac Notebook…$380usd
Apple MacBook Pro (MA611LL/A) Notebook…$370usd
Apple MacBook (MA254LL/A) Mac Notebook…$390usd
Apple iBook G3 (M7698LL/A) Mac Notebook..$300usd
Apple MacBook Pro (MA609LL/A) Notebook…$400usd
Apple MacBook Pro (MA600LLA) Notebook…$385usd
Apple MacBook Pro (MA610LL/A) Notebook…$390usd
Apple Macbook Pro (885909119400) Notebook..$400usd

Please review our returns policy for more details below:

Before you return your items, you must contact us and receive a Return Merchandise Authorization Number (RMA).

Any returns sent without an RMA number will not be accepted by Zebtech Limited® We assume all responsibility

for the package until it arrives at our office.

We give maximum guarantee for safe delivery of items bought from us.

As soon as final conclusions are done from your side kindly contact us as soon as possible so as to lead you on how

to transact with us.

Thanking you in anticipation and looking forward to doing long term business with you.

Online Chat Msn ID : moc.evilswodniw|hcetbez-tlusnoc#moc.evilswodniw|hcetbez-tlusnoc

Yours Sincerely

Exclusive offer: Buy iphone 3Gs/Blackberry bold 9650/ipad cash on delivery.

Mon, 17 May 2010 09:25:40 +0000

**A+ MOBILE LIMITED
Registered No. 03756711
VAT NO:087627814
Incorporation Date: 1999

Address : 7 MELBRAY MEWS, LONDON, SW6 3NS (UK).(SHOWROOM),WE HAVE MOVED TO SOUTH GLOUCESTERSHIRE BS32 4BW.

Branch office : 1724 W Gardner,Spokane, WA 99201. +1-509-362-226. (USA).
Branch office: Arena Plaza Kerepesi út 22,1087 Budapest 1087, (HUNGARY).

For more product information call us on: +447031744718 OR VOICE CHAT on:moc.liamtoh|reffodtlelibomsulpa#moc.liamtoh|reffodtlelibomsulpa OR moc.liam7y|dtlelibomsulpa#moc.liam7y|dtlelibomsulpa & speak to a representative directly.

INQUIRY: +447031744718 OR +44703174991 - 773 Ext.

Fueled by consistently strong growths in personal and portable electronics devices and an ever increasing demand for the highest quality,A+ Ltd has maintained its mission that responds both to its own change and to new developments in world demand for electronics since its inception in 1999. As one of the major consumer electronic retail and wholesale companies around the globe, A+ltd offers a wide range of name branded products.

Aplus Mobile Inc home.
We offer Cash On Delivery ( Terms and conditions apply).

Couriers:UPS,TNT,FedEx & DHL ONLY.
Delivery Days :( 38HRS FedEx Express). 42HRS-DHL /UPS/TNT.
Product list:

Apple iphone 3G S 32GB @
Apple iphone 3G S 16GB @
Apple iphone 3G 32GB @
Apple iphone 3G 16GB @
Apple ipad Tablet @

NOKIA PHONES:

Nokia X6 / X3 / X2/ N8 @
Nokia C5 @
Nokia N97 Mini @
Nokia N900 @
Nokia E97 @
Nokia N97 32GB @
Nokia 6303i classic @

BLACK BERRY PHONES:

Blackberry Pearl 3G 9100 & 9105 @
Blackberry Bold 9650 @
Blackberry Bold2 9700 @
BlackBerry Storm2 9520 @
Blackberry 9630 TOUR @
Blackberry Curve 8520 @

HTC PHONES:

HTC DESIRE @
Google Nexus one @
HTC PURE @
HTC SNAP @
HTC IMAGIO @
HTC Hero @
HTC Touch HD Mini/HD2 @
HTC PRO 2 @

SONY ERICSSON:
======== =====
Xperia X10 Mini pro @
Vivaz / Vivaz Pro @
Sony Ericsson Aino @
Sony Ericsson X10 @
Sony Ericsson SATIO IDOU@
Sony Ericsson XPERIA X2 @
Sony Ericsson XPERIA X3 @

Sony Playstation3 Slim 180GB @
Microsoft Xbox 360Elite @

SAMSUNG PHONES:

Samsung OMNIA PRO @

Apple Mac Book Pro:

Apple Macbook Pro 17/2.33/2G Intel Core 2 Duo @
Apple Macbook Air 17/2.4Ghz/160 Intel Core 2 Duo @
Apple Macbook Mb990 13.3 Aluminium Ultimo Modelo 2009 @
Ultra portable Acer Ferrari 1000 @

DIGITAL CAMCORDER:

Canon XH A1 Mini DV Digital Camcorder @
Canon GL2 Mini DV Digital Camcorder @
Canon XL H1 HDV Digital Camcorder @

Pioneer Pro DJ Mixer (Black) @
Pioneer 96Khz / 24 bit digital mixer. @
Pioneer Professional DVD Turntable @
Pioneer Pro DJ 96Khz 24bit Mixer @
Pioneer Professional DVD Turntable @
Pioneer Djm-800 4 Channel Dj Mixer W/midi @

Terms & Conditions:
Please when making inquiry via e-mail, kindly provide a valid contact TELEPHONE NUMBER, this is to reduce online crime as signed under the agreement of the NEW SCOTLAND YARD*/(UK INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES).Police Home Office, UK Central Authority. A+ LTD reserves the right to control the quantity of any items offered for sale.
Mr. Nicolas M. Greg,
Marketing Executive,
moc.liamtoh|reffodtlelibomsulpa#moc.liamtoh|reffodtlelibomsulpa
A+ Ltd| Copyright 2010|. All right reserved.®**

FFII: World Day preparations #ssp09 - answer like your minister

Fri, 18 Sep 2009 19:15:29 +0000

September 24th software professionals around the world will celebrate the annual World Day against Software Patents. This year the Swedish EU Presidency happens to contributes a minister consultation to the #ssp09 celebrations with an aim to "[review] Community innovation policy in a changing world". At the 24th September Ministerial Council session ministers will be asked to reflect on the following questions(1):

1. What are the main strengths and weaknesses of present Community innovation policy, compared with the efforts of our global competitors?

2. What should be the key elements of a successful future EU innovation policy, in particular of the forthcoming European Innovation Plan, to address our global challenges and to strengthen the EU's competitiveness and growth?

3. What should be done to increase the innovation capacity of SMEs [Small medium Enterprises]?

The Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure e.V. encourages you to submit your own answers to

consultation at ffii.org

We would appreciate to publish your answers online.

Please also keep us informed how you would celebrate World Day against Software Patents (#ssp09).

September 24 is remembered as the day when our European Parliament expressed its dissatisfaction with software patentability in Europe (2) and endorsed legal clarifications to protect European digital markets from undesirable software patenting (3).

Background

A while ago Hartmut Pilch summarized the current status of software patents in Europe as follows:

In July 2005, after several failed attempts to legalise software patents in Europe, the patent establishment changed its strategy. Instead of explicitly seeking to sanction the patentability of software, they are now seeking to create a central European patent court, which would establish and enforce patentability rules in their favor, without any possibility of correction by competing courts or democratically elected legislators.

National patent specialists of the Council are working to set up a European Patent Court with loyal judges ("Unified Patent Litigation System (UPLS)") to avoid broad democratic deliberations on substantive patent law, and hand over EU powers to the European Patent Organisation (EPOrg).

Equally implicit are the objectives of the Swedish Presidency for an European Innovation Plan: "In a context of economic crisis, it is time to step up a gear and propose an ambitious European Innovation Plan, which puts society at its heart and is oriented alongside the main societal challenges." …"progress has not been so satisfactory in providing an adequate legal framework for the protection of Intellectual Property Rights, venture capital markets remain fragmented across the EU and the standardisation process needs to brought more in line with research and industry needs."(1)

More patenting, more enforcement tools for non-praticing entities ("trolls"), less competition/market access, standards as patent cartells for dominant market players from oversees rather than more "open standards" for a participatory digital society? What underlies the competetiveness jargon? For sure, European Digital Independence or protection of European software manufacturers from software patents and other legal risks/friction are not on the Swedish agenda for an "European Innovation Plan".

The three questions above are for the discussions of a Commission document (4) which claims "The European patent system is costly and fragmented, discouraging innovation compared to the US and Japan. The difference in patenting costs in comparison to these countries is significant and is not being reduced. It is high time to change this situation." The Patent specialists prepare a solution, a central European Patent Court.

[1] http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/09/st13/st13079.en09.pdf
[2] http://press.ffii.org/Press%20releases/September%2024%20Is%20World%20Day%20Against%20Software%20Patents
[3] http://eupat.ffii.org/papri/europarl0309/amends05/juri0504/mgp/
[4] http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2009:0442:FIN:EN:PDF

Contact

Benjamin Henrion
FFII Brussels
+32-2-414 84 03
+32-484-566109
bhenrion at ffii.org
(French/English)

About the FFII

The FFII is a not-for-profit association active in over fifty countries, dedicated to the development of information goods for the public benefit, based on copyright, free competition, and open standards. More than 1000 members, 3,500 companies and 100,000 supporters have entrusted the FFII to act as their voice in public policy questions concerning exclusion rights (intellectual property) in data processing.

IBM says software patents drive OSS development

Tue, 18 Aug 2009 14:29:49 +0000

In its Amicus Brief to the US Supreme Court on the Bilski case, IBM is arguing that

patent protection has promoted the free sharing of source code […] which has fueled the explosive growth of open source software development.

IBM also argue that the machine-or-tranformation test allow software to be patented, and that:

software patent protection provides significant economic, technological, and societal benefits.

IBM also "finds alarming decisions in the wake of Bilski concluding that software is excluded from patentable subject matter" making references to the BPAI decisions on Ex Parte Altman. IBM also says that they are "committed to ensuring that such technology [software] is and remains patentable"."

What's wrong with the United Patent Litigation System (UPLS)?

Wed, 08 Jul 2009 12:01:06 +0000

A journalist of WorldIPReview recently asked FFII what were its views of the proposed United Patent Litigation System (UPLS), which is now being questioned by the Council in a submission to the ECJ. FFII had already published a press release mentioning the new push for software patents in Europe via a centralised and trusted court.

Here are some answers to the questions of the journalist, note that I did not touch on the subject of "Where is the European Parliament?" in the legislator section.

Q1: What particular element of the United Patent Litigation System (UPLS) proposal has initiated concern regarding software patents?

1. Centralisation

The United Patent Litigation System (UPLS) is heavily inspired from the European Patent Litigation Agreement (EPLA). They have a lot of similarities, inside the FFII we call the UPLS the EU-EPLA, which is the EPLA rebranded with a EU flag on top to make it look like an EU project.

The UPLS and EPLA have in common that they are both international treaties, and not EU regulation (directive, council framework decision, etc…) per se. It means that other countries that are non-EU (such as Turkey, Iceland or even the United States) could potentially join the treaty. The fact that it is not an EU piece of law means that the legislator won't be the European Parliament. As we saw with other international treaties such as ACTA, those treaties are typically negotiated behind closed doors, and the Parliaments (the European one or the nationals ones) typically do not have a say over their content. The UPLS is mainly a piece of legislation written by bureaucrats of the Commission and Government officials, with no input whatsoever from members of those parliaments.

The pro-software patent lobby, mainly represented by EICTA members (mainly Philips, Siemens, Alcatel, Nokia, Ericsson) or BSA (heavily driven by Microsoft) called members of the EPP party some days before the vote of failed software patent directive, asking them to vote for rejection, and push for a central patent court instead.

The divergence of opinions of several courts in Europe (mainly Germany and UK) was the argument the Commission used in 2002 to issue a directive proposal on the subject:

http://web.archive.org/web/20000818230031/www.freepatents.org/agree/images/pat1.png

With the elimination of different courts and creation of a central patent court for validity cases, the disparity of interpretations by different courts has been abolished.

This disparity is important, because it shows to the legislator where there is conflict of interpretation, and where the legislator should intervene to clarify.

2. Legislator

The problem with creating a international patent court between several countries is to balance it with a legislator, who would be competent to correct the behaviour of such court.

In the present state, the legislator would be the government officials signatory of the European Patent Convention, among which you find often that they belong to National Patent Offices.

This conflict of interests has been denounced during the strike of EPO examiners a while ago.

The influence of National Patent Office was also very important during the software patent directive in the Council, where the decision to support software patents was motly made by officials from National Patent Offices.

3. Trusted patent judges

Specialized patent judges have a tendency to favour the patentee, and in the case of the UPLS, they will be handpicked.

The main reason to avoid the creation of patent tribunals inside the ECJ legal system is to be able for the patent establishment to be able to handpick their judges.

Among the top patent judges in Europe, it is pretty easy to see which judges favour software patentability and which do not. The pro software patents will be a criteria for selecting judges. You can expect for example that the delegation of Germany will propose candidates that will favour a narrow and hair-stretched interpretation of the EPC, like the EPO technical board of appeal is doing with "software … as such", software is technical, further technical effect, and so on.

4. No judicial review by the ECJ

One of the main battle right now is the competence by the ECJ to review the behaviour of such court.

The UPLS is a seperate legal system from the EU legal system, and is not connected to it in any meaningfull way.

The US experience with specialized patent courts shows that those courts have interpreted the law broadly, they have notably lowered the threshold of obviousness, allowed software and business method patents, or granted automatic injunctions.

Rencently, the US Supreme Court is taking more and more case for review, in order to correct the abuse behaviour of such specialized patent courts. Such mecanism would not be available in the present draft of the UPLS. It is not surprising to hear that the patent establishment is heavily lobbying against it.

Q2: If software patents are enabled by the UPLS, what might be the effects on how computer programmers work? Please give examples

1. Higher total costs of litigation

The fact that a regional court can issue EU-wide injunctions to stop a potentially infringing product is quite a powerful instrument.

You can expect damages to be calculated in function of the size of the market, in this case the whole EU, plus other countries which will be part of the UPLS agreement.

This is basically what is happening in the United States, where district courts issue US-wide injunctions with US-wide damages.

The patent industry, when trying to justify the need for the UPLS, mostly never mention this.

EU-wide injunctions and damages will be an incentive for patent trolls to enforce their patents.

The other problem with the UPLS is the cost of the procedure. Right now, 90% of cases are not cross-border cases (in one country only), and the Commission and other UPLS proponents try to solve a problem encountered in 10% of cases.

The UPLS, with its system of specialized patent courts, and its international dimension, carries a high probability to raise the lawyer's fees for the majority of non-cross border disputes (90% of cases). Since the system will be fully specialized, patent lawyers will definitely raise their prices. This might be sensitive for Eastern countries, where the cost of litigation is pretty low, compared to western standards.

2. EU-wide injunctions to stop a software product

The main risk with such system is to have a very favourable regional court issuing quasi-automatic EU-wide injunctions in order to stop the diffusion of a suspected infringing product.

There has been recently a hearing in the European Parliament about the IPRED1 directive, where a french expert said french judges were now forced to issue injunctions in the case of "suspicion" of infringement, instead of "quasi-certainty" of infringement.

Right now, it is very complicated for a patentee to obtain an EU-wide injunction, because he has to go to every jurisdiction, and this has never happened up to now. The "lis pendens" mecanism has also provided that a court in one member state has to wait for the outcome of a case in another country if the same patent and the same facts are involved in a pending procedure.

A typical example is the RIM case in the US, where the Blackberry was very close to be wiped out of the US market with a US-wide injunction.

3. Out of court settlements for most of European players

There will be a strong pressure for most software players in Europe to bow to out-of court settlements. It can be expected that in most cases, the cost en entry to go to court will still be too high, especially for very small companies (1 to 10 employees), which represent the majority in the software sector.

The result of this will be the near obligation to sign unfavourable out-of-court settlements.

While large software companies has the means and the ability to defend themselves and go until the end of the court procedure, most of the european software players don't have the financial ressources nor the time to afford litigation in court. This is what we explained in the FFII's submission in July 2006 at the public hearing organised by the Commission on the consultation:

http://press.ffii.org/Press_releases/FFII_statement_given_at_EU_patent_policy_hearing

"[…] if you are an SME and accused of patent infringement, it becomes harder to defend yourself because litigation just became more expensive. And if you cannot defend yourself, you will be forced to license, even if the patent is weak or invalid."

4. Loss of legal certainty

It is merely impossible for software producers and users to know if the software they are producing/using/reusing is not infringing a patent. The whole software patent system makes the software development impossible, by creating a situation where producers and users are under a constant threat of being sued. It is not surprising to see that 85% of companies who were questionned in the issue in a survey in Germany fear that software patents might impede their work.

The copyright system provides a legal system where there are very few lawsuits, and when there might be infringement, those are most of time clear and sharp, and thus quickly resolved. This is the total opposite with software patents, since most of them are very broad and thus, which maximise the probability of infringement for the patentee.

Q3: Aside from the software patents element, what is your perspective on the UPLS as a whole?

I don't think it will fly. The main reasons are:

1. Location of the courts: member states don't agree for more then 30 years about where to locate the courts. The UPLS do not provide any indication where the courts will be located, and this is left out of the agreement because it is a too hot potato.

2. Lack of judicial review by the ECJ: I think several member states wants to see a judicial review by the ECJ, notably to avoid the risk of pro-patent courts that would not be "correctable" by a senior court. The US example is very telling about what the EU system would look like with the UPLS, without the fact that you would have a kind of US Supreme court to correct abusive behaviours.

3. Other legal problems, such as:
a. link with national constitutions: in most countries, parties have the right to appeal to a constitutional court, which won't be the case with UPLS cases; this is sensitive in the case where judges might be biaised in favour of one of the parties; you can think to the recent Piratebay case in Sweden where the judges are member of copyright lobby groups.
b. some constitutions of some member states require that the judge is of the nationality of such state: this is the case for France or Bulgaria for example.
c. languages: it is not given that citizens will be able to use their language to defend themselves.
d. impossibility for the EU to join the EPC: the amendments proposed by the Commission do not talk about how the EU (which is not a state as such) would have access to the International Court of Justice (which is only accessible to states member of the UN) in the Hague in case of disputes around the interpretation of the treaty.

Q4: What advantages and disadvantages can you foresee if the UPLS is implemented?

Advantages

EU-wide injunctions and damages for patent holders
EU-wide revocation of a patent for defendents
Possible invalidation of software patents EU-wide (not very likely, but possible)
High costs of litigation, good for the patentee to reach a deal out of court
Uniform caselaw developed for software and biotech patents
No diverging decisions over the same patent by multiple courts

Disadvantages

No real legislator to correct decisions of such international patent court
No divergence of decisions which might show to the legislator where to intervene
Possible validation of software patents EU-wide (very likely)
Possible forum-shopping with a pro-patent court located in Turkey, Latvia or somewhere else
More incentives for patentees to litigate and enforce their patents
Pro-patentee courts
Raise of the costs of litigation for most member states and stakeholders, due to the specialisation of the courts
Possible EU-wide injunctions to stop a product (think to the Blackberry removed at the scale of the EU)
No judicial review to correct the eventual deviance of such specialized courts
Potential higher costs of litigation for the patent holder

The Bilski test was invented by IBM

Fri, 03 Jul 2009 09:02:06 +0000

By reading the Amicus Brief of IBM to the CAFC, it is pretty clear that the machine tranformation test which allows software patents and ban business method patents was invented by IBM lawyers:

IBM respectfully submits that the gravamen of that precedent, as informed by the constitutional objective of "promot[ing] the Progress of Science and useful Arts," is that a patentable "process" within the meaning of § 101 is one that involves a technological contribution — namely, a process that either (i) is tied to a particular machine or apparatus, or (ii) causes transformation or reduction of an article to a different state or thing, and in either instance produces technologically beneficial results. This test sets forth a reasonable and balanced standard for subject matter eligibility.

This test is now being interpreted by several US courts and the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (BPAI) as allowing software patents (read the article "Bilski at the BPAI - What a Mess (Part 1)" on 271patent blog):

Claim: (Ex Parte Buhan) A method for storing content encrypted by control words in a receiver/decoder unit having a local storage unit and being connected to a security unit, said control words as well as a necessary right for the access to the content being transmitted in entitlement messages that can be decrypted by system keys, the method comprising …

BPAI: We note a receiver/decoder unit having a local storage unit is mentioned in the preamble, which storage unit is embodied in the first step of storing the encrypted content. We also note in the preamble a security unit, which is embodied in the second step of storing the system keys. Both the local storage unit and the security unit constitute tangible, solid, real-world machines, the former exemplified by a magnetic hard disk, and the latter by a smart card (See Fig. 1). We find these elements sufficient for satisfying the “particular machine” prong of the Bilski machine or transformation test, and thus find the Examiner erred in rejecting these method claims.

The Bilski test to validate software patents is an invention of IBM. Now let's guess what the new USPTO president David Kappos will defend at the US Supreme Court against Bilski. Conflict of interests, no one?

USPTO refuses to disclose Bilski's pending patent application

Mon, 22 Jun 2009 11:53:35 +0000

The US Supreme Court will soon hear Bilski on why software and business method patents are so good/harmful for the US economy. I was trying to find out on Google and other search engines where was the Bilski's pending patent application, and I end up writing to the new USPTO President and ex-IBM David Kappos. I finally got an answer from a USPTO official that the Bilski's pending patent application cannot be seen by the public:

Bahr, Robert <vog.otpsu|rhaB.treboR#vog.otpsu|rhaB.treboR>
to gro.iiff|noirnehb#gro.iiff|noirnehb
date Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 12:31 PM
subject Copy of the Bilski pending patent application

Dear Mr. Henrion,

I understand that you have a question as to why the USPTO's administrative file of the Bilski application is not available to the public. The application at issue in Bilski is not a published or patented application, and thus must be maintained in confidence under 35 USC 122(a). The Bilski application was the subject of an appeal to the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal Circuit), and the relevant portions of the USPTO's administrative file of the Bilski application was filed with the Federal Circuit during this appeal. These portions of the USPTO's administrative file of the Bilski application are part of the Federal Circuit's records, and any member of the public may inspect the Federal Circuit's records. The USPTO's administrative file for the Bilski application, however, is not open to public inspection. This is explained at MPEP 1216.01.

I hope you find this information useful

Regards,

Robert W. Bahr
Senior Patent Counsel
Office of the Deputy Commissioner
for Patent Examination Policy

For those who wants to submit an Amicus Brief to the US Supreme Court, this is nearly mission impossible without the pending patent application. Some blog mention claim 1, but this is not enough to understand what the patent is about:

1. A method for managing the consumption risk costs of a commodity sold by a commodity provider at a fixed price comprising the steps of: (a) initiating a series of transactions between said commodity provider and consumers of said commodity wherein said consumers purchase said commodity at a fixed rate based upon historical averages, said fixed rate correspoding to a risk postion of said consumer; (b) identifying … (c) initiating a series of transactions between said commodity provider and…

Patent expert Alison Crofts says EPLA is pushed by pro-software patents lobby

Tue, 09 Jun 2009 10:51:14 +0000

In its edition of IP Value 2007, the Intellectual Asset Magazine (IAM) was publishing an article about the Reform of European Patent System, where an expert (Alison Crofts from Dorsey & Whitney) mentions that the push for the EPLA is coming from the pro-software patents lobby:

The industry-based driving force behind the EPLA comes from the pro-software patent group as a way to ensuring that their software or potential software patents are fully enforceable across Europe.

European Patent Office refuses spanish amicus brief against software patents

Thu, 04 Jun 2009 20:13:11 +0000

Alberto Barrionuevo, CEO of the small spanish software company OpenTIA and ex-president of the FFII, had submitted an amicus brief to the Enlarged Board of Appeal in spanish. The European Patent Office has notified him that they are refusing his letter because it was not written in one of the 3 official languages of the EPO (French, English or German):

From: DG3registry_eba <gro.ope|abe_yrtsiger3gd#gro.ope|abe_yrtsiger3gd>
To: Alberto BARRIONUEVO <se.aitnepo|oirraba#se.aitnepo|oirraba>
Date: Thu, 7 May 2009 15:10:18 +0200
Subject: Re: Amicus Curiae Brief contribution to referral G03/08

Dear Sirs,

Any written statement filed to our proceedings should be in one of the official languages of the EPO = German, Enlish or French.
To ensure that your statement can be given due consideration you are kindly requested to file it in one of the these languages.

You may file it as a signed pdf.file or by signed fax.

Best regards
W. Roepstorff
Registrar

As of today, the letter is still available in the online register of the EPO, see also a copy of it in PDF or HTML.

Why discriminate citizens in function of their language? Basically Spain should go out of the European Patent Convention if its citizens cannot talk to the authority granting patents for their territory.

The EPO has tried automatic translation for spanish, and a while ago, I submitted a link to a spanish automated translation of the Amazon Gift patent to the es-parl discussion list (Es-parl — Coordinación y debate anti-patentes en España). Here are some of the results:

[es-parl] Automated translation of Amazon 1-click patent from english to spanish
Benjamin Henrion bh en udev.org
Mie Nov 12 14:49:48 CET 2008

Hi,

Automated translation is proposed by the EPO as the magic bullet to
solve the Community Patent problem.

Can you tell me if this looks like comprehensible spanish:

http://epo.worldlingo.com/wl/epo/epo.html?SEED=EP0927945&SEED_FORMAT=E&ACTION=Claims&OPS=ops.espacenet.com&LOCALE=en_V3&TRGLANG=ES&T=1

It is the automated translation of the Amazon 1-click patent:

http://v3.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/claims?CC=EP&NR=0927945&KC=&FT=E

which is currently being appealed at the EPO TBA.

Best,

—
Benjamin Henrion
FFII Brussels - +32-484-566109 - +32-2-4148403

Here is the answer I got:

Hu Benjamin,

Definitely the text is not compressible in Spanish.

Best regards,

Javier

It is time for EU citizens to put some sand into the EPO machine and challenge its accessibility in front of constitutional courts, or courts of human rights. Such language discrimination cannot exist at the time we want to build a patent system for Europe.

If such basic human rights considerations cannot be satisfied, some people will take care of the future of the EPO:

The European Patent Office is a corrupt malicious organisation which should not exist. (Applauds)

FFII: European Commission pushes for software patents via a trusted court

Tue, 12 May 2009 09:17:39 +0000

Brussels, 12 May 2009 — The European Commission is pushing for software patents via a centralised trusted patent court that would be created with the United Patent Litigation System (UPLS), an international treaty that would remove national courts. This court system would be shielded against any review by the European Court of Justice (ECJ). Thus patent judges would have the last word on software patents.

At the next Competitiveness meeting of May 28-29, the Council of Ministers will request a legal opinion to the ECJ about potential conflicts of the UPLS with the EU treaties. The current draft mentions that the ultimate power to interpret patent law will rest with hand-picked patent judges.

Hartmut Pilch, founder of the Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure (FFII) predicted this already in 2007: "I don't think EU joining European Patent Convention (EPC) would automatically mean that ECJ can intervene on substantive patent law questions. If there is a ECJ above the European Patent Judiciary (EPJ), then probably only for very special questions relating to areas outside patent law, such as EU treaties, and it would not be accessible to the litigating parties but only to the EPJ itself."

Benjamin Henrion, President of the FFII and leader of its litigation working group, says: "A central patent court forbidding any petition right for review to the ECJ means the patent court has the last word over software patents. The Agreement is drafted in a way to avoid the ECJ intervention on substantive patent law."

Brian Kahin, senior fellow of the Computer & Communications Industry Association, says: "Given the U.S. experience with the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and the many areas where the Supreme Court has recently stepped in to provide balance, it is clear that the European Court of Justice needs to be able to oversee the evolution of patent law. Otherwise, there is constant danger that a self-interested patent community will successfully press to expand the scope, volume, and power of the patent system."

The UPLS carries the risk that specialized patent courts will have the last word for important questions such as limits of patentability. This is typically what happens in Germany where the Senates of the Federal Patent Court should refer basic questions to the Supreme Court but do not do this.

Benjamin Henrion concludes: "This specialized patent court will be shielded against external intervention and won't be an EU institution. Those patent judges want to have the last word over European patent law."

Background

The proposed United Patent Litigation System (UPLS) is an international treaty which is heavily inspired by the now defunct European Patent Litigation Agreement (EPLA).

In 2005, large companies asked the European Parliament to drop the software patent directive, and push for a central patent court instead.

The German Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology clarified that the validation of software patents goes via central caselaw: "We must moreover continue to attempt to harmonise the practise of granting patents for computer-implemented inventions at the European level. This is to be attempted by a common European patent court system (EPLA) in which the member states can voluntarily participate. Thereby a unified procedure and legal certainty are achieved."

The current UPLS draft is shielded against ECJ intervention in software patents and substantive patent law. The centralised patent court won't be an EU institution.

The Court of Justice of the European Communities would only "rule on preliminary questions asked by the court structure established in the framework of the Unified Patent Litigation System, […] on the interpretation of EC law and on the validity and interpretation of acts of the institutions of the Community." The UPLS itself would not be a "institution of the Community" (the EPO is not either) and thus not fall under ECJ jurisdiction.

On the other side of the Atlantic, specialized patent courts in the United States (CAFC) have watered down the patentability requirements, allowing software patents, business method patents and lowered the threshold for patent quality. The poster child of the lowering quality is the Dembiczak case, where the specialized patent court allowed a patent over a plastic bag with a pumpkin drawing. The Supreme Court judges overturned the patent, heavily criticising the obviousness threshold of the specialized patent court: "This is gobbledygook. It really is, it's irrational. It's worse than meaningless."

Contact

Benjamin Henrion
FFII Brussels
+32-2-414 84 03
+32-484-566109
gro.iiff|noirnehb#gro.iiff|noirnehb
(French/English)

About the FFII

Conference on "Make software patents work for SMEs"

Wed, 22 Apr 2009 11:53:39 +0000

The European Commission is organising a conference dedicated to "Make IPR work for SMEs" next Monday in Brussels. You can submit your questions by email to me for next Monday on how to "Make software patents work for SMEs". I might be interested to submit them.

Here is the mail sent to participants:

from ue.aporue.ce|FNOC-RPI-TSEB-RTNE#ue.aporue.ce|FNOC-RPI-TSEB-RTNE
date Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 1:11 PM
subject Welcome to the Conference Making IPR work for SMEs

Dear Conference Registrant,

We look forward to welcoming you on next Monday, 27 April 2009, to the conference "Making IPR work for SMEs".

Attached please find form which you can use to submit questions to the conference speakers. These forms will be collected periodically in the conference room, so please feel free to prepare questions now and during the conference.

«Template for Questions to the Panels 220409.doc»

For any further details, including the up to date programme of the conference, please see the conference website:
http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/enterprise_policy/industry/ipr_conference.htm

Best regards,

The Conference Team

European Commission
Enterprise Directorate General
Industrial Policy and Economic Reforms Directorate
Development of Industrial Policy Unit
Tel. : + 32 (0)2-29.53611
Fax. : + 32 (0)2-29.98020
mail: ue.aporue.ce|FNOC-RPI-TSEB-RTNE#ue.aporue.ce|FNOC-RPI-TSEB-RTNE

Here is the form:

Conference Making IPR work for SMEs
Brussels, Monday, 27 April 2009
Venue: Charlemagne Building (Salle Alcide de Gasperi), 170 Rue de la Loi (Wetstraat)

First Name:
Last Name:
From (City/Country):
Working for/Interested in/Affiliated to/
E-mail Address:
My Question is:
I want to put my question to (name(s) of speaker(s) or panellist(s)):

The conference might be biaised in favour of patent holders who needs more tools to enforce their software patents:

Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) can be a vital competitive advantage for small and medium sized European businesses. Their competitiveness, creativity and innovative abilities are threatened by counterfeiting, piracy and uncertainty about enforcing their rights.

Small and medium enterprises are particularly vulnerable to these risks. They often lack resources and knowledge to act against fake products or are convinced it is impossible to do so.

This kind of conference remembers me the intervention of a guy in the audience at a patent conference organised by CGPME, where he said that the patent system was a burden for SMEs (too hard to navigate, SMEs don't understand it).

In the context of the Small Business Act, you will find nothing about those problems, because the patent lobby managed to put some bits in there in order to favour the applicant. They fail to mention the burden on all those companies that have to deviate a significant part of their R&D budget in order to comply with the claims of others.

Stallman: "The EPO is a corrupt and malicious organisation which should not exist"

Mon, 20 Apr 2009 12:13:51 +0000

Last Wednesday, farmers and software developers were demonstrating in Munich in front of the European Patent Office. Richard Stallman was describing the European Patent Office as a "corrupt and malicious organisation which should not exist":

Here is what he said:

So we have here two different areas attacked and threatened by patents.
It's no accident.
The European Patent Office is a corrupt malicious organisation which should not exist. (Applauds)
The European Patent Office is working for the people who wants to crush everyone's life with monopolies.
It is their tool, pure and simple.
By all means try to make it start respecting your freedom.
By all means try to get rid of plant patents, and animal patents and software patents.
But if the European Patent Office stands in your way, get rid of it too.
It's time to stop treating every european institution as if is was sacred and unquestionable.
Every institution, every government deserve only as much respect as it earns.
The idea of the European Union was a beautiful idea. The practical implementation tries to impose a new constitution by pretending it's not a constitution.
They are gonna let me tell you any more.
Happy hacking!

FFII and EPO announce "Binaries-As-Prior-Art"

Wed, 01 Apr 2009 16:14:21 +0000

FFII and EPO announce "Binaries-As-Prior-Art"

Brussels & Munich, 1st April 2009 — After years of confidential work, the European Patent Office (EPO) and the Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure (FFII) today announce a radical way to improve software patent quality: Binaries-As-Prior-Art, or BAPA. BAPA combines a database of billions of compiled computer programs ("binaries") with a powerful Cloud search engine that can find any invention in microseconds.

EPO President Alison Brimelow explains how BAPA will raise patent quality: "rather than searching hand-written prior art, examiners can now search fast because we licensed Amazon's One-click technology. You upload the patent application and BAPA shows whether or not an invention is new."

FFII Chief Engineer B.U. Scotty explains how it works: "we use a Just-In-Time Lisp expression parser that maps the binary object code into reverse polish notation. Using a Beowulf cluster of Babelfish we instantly machine translate the Polish into English, German or French, and finally Lojban. We use a fuzzy text mapping algorithm to compare with the patent claim. If the match score is less than 50%, we consider the invention to be original. If the Babelfish turn purple, we consider it to be inventive. When the computer beeps, that is an indication of a technical effect!"

Scotty explains why BAPA is so complex: "every other possible technique was patented. But they forgot to patent, 'and do it in Polish!'".

Brimelow is happy with the FFII-EPO collaboration: "after many years of fighting over whether or not software can be patented, we're happy to say that we can now work with legal certainty. With our superior BAPA system we can accept or deny patent applications directly over the Web. We take all credit cards!"

Benjamin Henrion, President of the FFII, comments: "I think BAPA is a milestone. This puts the EPO way ahead of any technology the Americans can develop. They have Google, but we have Poland. Thank you, Poland!"

Not everyone is pleased. The European Commission was told that project BAPA was about machine translation of community patents. The Free Patent Association (FPA), which advocates Corel/GNU/Linux and the new GPLv4, still maintains that software patents are a "like land mines to programmers" according to its chairman, Richard Stallman. And Pieter Hintjens, former President of the FFII, complains: "all these people are claiming they invented BAPA! It was my idea, years ago, and but Red Hat patented the idea and sold it to the EPO."

Industry likes the idea. IBM's John B. Wise, Community and Patents Sourcerer for EMEA says, "IBM has always thought it was bad to blame overworked patent examiners for poor patents. Now we can blame the machines and lousy software!" IBM recently filed its millionth software patent, on "A system and method for representing discrete numerical values using two opposing bits".

BAPA has already collected the full contents of the Pirate Bay for its prior art database. The public can submit binaries as prior art on the following website: http://binariesaspriorart.org. Commodore-64 video games are particularly welcome.

Background Information

Software is available in three main forms: as "notes-on-the-back-of-a- manilla-envelope" (NOTBOME) made by non-technical engineers who would not know a black-red binary tree from a banana tree, and as "coffee", which when drunk by programmers, solidifies into a concrete usable third form called "binary code". It is well known that binary code holds the essential, computer-verified contents of entire history of software technology. Furthermore, unlike "source code", which is an encrypted and unreadable form of binary code, binary code is not often protected by copyright, and thus a perfect match for the patent system.

Advanced software factories can turn NOTBOME and coffee directly into binary code, with no intervening source code. This proves that the only valid form of prior art is the pure, computer-validated binary.

Earlier versions of BAPA were called "CAPA" and "NOTBOMEPA", neither of which produced great results.

Contact

Benjamin Henrion
FFII Brussels
+32-2-414 84 03
+32-484-566109
gro.iiff|noirnehb#gro.iiff|noirnehb
(French/English)

About the FFII

The FFII is a not-for-profit association active in over fifty countries, dedicated to the development of information goods for the public benefit, based on copyright, free competition, and open standards. More than 850 members, 3,500 companies and 100,000 supporters have entrusted the FFII to act as their voice in public policy questions concerning exclusion rights (intellectual property) in data processing.

Believe to achieve.

Fri, 27 Mar 2009 12:22:26 +0000

I beg pardon beforehand, if this letter delivered you inconvenience.
Words: « quickly to begin to work?» already at all disgust. Did a spam bother with these headings ? How really to begin to work a money in the Internet? 95% of make money online jobs are scams! I offer to you real, fully legal, on the square, method of earnings.
I want to warn at once – this article not for free of charge lovers. This business requires small financial investments and expenses of own forces.
I ask attentively to read this text and grasp the meaning in what, and then deciding is needed it to you or not. I make warranty you, that after reading of this text you will change satisfied of that in a network to begin to work unreal. All of it works, and I would say very well!
To do it or not – to decide you! But if you already read it, this work for you! I long shopped around in the Internet. I lost very much time in search of that work which would arrange me fully. That no projects were with redemption in 1000 $, which need to be sold people, to quite not interested in their receipt, no doubtful participation in photo sessions or clicking on references for what that stakes of cents… All read attentively, estimated the chances and decided to take chance $6. Fermenting as usual to on different family I find this article, which it is talked in, that it is possible to do thousands of dollars in a couple of weeks at an investment only 6$, forums. Well … thought I, it must be next nonsense, but all the same decided to finish reading and know that there such offer… I diffuse the copied not text, but fully written with me (which you and read). There is not an enormous amount of exclamation marks and spellings errors in nm. Here are not fairy-tale promises. Here that indeed happened with me. But at a desire you can find one of initial reports through Internet on a context «, as usual, to on different family to the forums, I found this article, which it is talked in, that it is possible to do thousands of dollars in a couple of weeks». In these reports write often: « disbelieved at once!!!!», « it was in shock!!!». For some reason I trusted at once. And was not in shock, when a money began to come. However is equal to me, who undertook it pyramid, how many he began to work (and, apparently, quite a bit). I also in it participate and from someone get a money, sending only $6. If you consistently will follow resulted below to instructions, success will not be turned away and from you. Below I also by the words quietly, without exclamation marks, will tell why this system works. And when it will die.
Algorithm of work: it is necessary to send for 1$ on 6 Lr- purses, which are below transferred. Then to delete first purse from a list, the same displacing a list on one grinding off upwards, the sixth is freed the same, where you inscribe the number of the purse and fill up this, with you on a sixth line, report on 200 different forums.
Now I will tell you as it works and the most important WHY…
I promise you, that if you will in exactness observe the below transferred instructions, you will begin to get a far more money, what you thought, not adding the special efforts to it.
Suggestion: Read it pair of one times! Follow instructions and a money will begin to act on your purse.
It is legal. And your deposit is only 6$…
IT IS IMPORTANT: It is not deception and it is legal, here you risk nothing, but it works.
NOTICE: Follow instructions in EXACTNESS and 1000$ and anymore will be your in a flow from 20 to 60 days. Vs it successfully works due to HONESTY of participants.
Here the same 3 steps to success:
1. If you do not have the same 6$ in an electronic kind, you need to be registered in the system of Liberty Reserve. To lead an account in the system of Liberty Reserve not difficultly.
Call on a site LibertyReserve.com, from above a site press on reference of "Create Account " and fill the fields. Registration consists of 2 parts. In the first part fill all information, in LR 3 types of passwords, will memorize them all. After the first step to you the number of your account will come on indicated e-mail, you it is necessary it will be to call at the account in a flow 14 days, registration is rescinded otherwise. At the first entrance on account of you will ask to enter the personal information, after it registration is complete! All fields noted * obligatory for filling. Account Information is Information about account. First Name, Last Name E-mail, Re-enter e-mail. Security Information . Password. Re-enter Password. Login PIN (5 numbers). Re-enter Login PIN (5 numbers). Master Key (3 numbers). Re-enter Master Key - to Repeat the code of safety (3 numbers). Security Question (to choose from a list). Answer (on a secret question). Personal welcome message is the Welcoming phrase. Enter the code (turing number) shown on the image - Enter numbers from a picture. Further we press on the button Agree. Personal Information. Account Name, Company Name, Address, City, Country, State/region, Zip/postal Code, Date of Birth, Phone (with CC). Mobile Phone (with CC)- accordingly. Further we press on the button Submit.
2. Take the first number of purse from a below indicated list, send on him 1$, in the field «note» write “, enter me in the list of purses of Lr”. All that you did it created a certain favour and the most important it is absolute legally. you ask legal service for which pay. Send for 1$ on the followings purses without a note (in each for 1$ ):
1. U6724341 (here write NOTE)
2. U4282685 (here and farther to write nothing!)
3. U5163580
4. U9222492
5. U5962172
6. U8541169
Now ATTENTION!
After a dispatch 1$ on everything delete 6 purses first from this list and will move 2-nd purse to the place of 1-st , which you wiped, 3-rd into place of 2-nd, 4-th-on place of 3-rd and 5-th-on place of 4-th, 6-th into place of 5-th! And in a sixth number which appeared empty, ENTER NUMBER of Your LR of PURSE!! Do in my article, whichever to you changes, but only will save MAIN IDEA!
3. You will place this article on no less what 200 forums and ribbons from news (News Groups).
you will memorize, than you will place anymore, the higher there will be your profit, and this profit will straight depend on you. This business continues to exist and prosper only due to honesty and seriousness of participants. So when you will attain the first position you will have thousands of dollars simply as a creator of list! It costs 6$ and a bit work! Engage in this now – not putting aside on tomorrow…!
Time is money!
How to diffuse information in forums:
1. We open the search engine of google.com, yahoo.com or other.
2. We write a phrase in the line of search: « new thread, new post» or « to begin a new thread » or «forum» (without quotation marks) search Engine will find thousands of pages, references to which at once bring around to a form for filling of new theme of forum. And yet: not frightened, if suddenly on a that site, where you wanted to place the announcement, already am one or a few alike. It confirms that this business INDEED WORKS superfluous time! Now I will tell you, why you in any case actually lose nothing, and win only!
Say, from a 200 placing you will get 5 answers only (very little and low number)! Therefore, on your purse 5$, while will translate you are on a 6-th item on a list! Now 5 people do these for a 200 placing every MINIMUM with your purse on 5-th position, and only 5 people answer the that first to five - it yet 25$! Farther 25 people do these for a 200 placing with your purse already on a 4-th line (because it inscribe) and only 5 answer is your profit - 125$! Now, these 125 people, placing and getting 5 answers only, give you there is 625$ arrived (you are on a 3-rd line)! Farther anymore: 625 people do these to on MINIMUM a 200 placing with the number of your purse on a 2-nd line and only 5 people answer, it already 3125$! And it that 5 persons will answer just. If 8 will answer, your profit will be « it is terrible to think ». All depends on you and from your persistence. What on the greater amount of forums you will place this article, the higher there will be your profit. And it all for a primary deposit in 6$! On my opinion is not bad. When you on a book are not already, you simply send again 6$ in those purses, what in (for this purpose will save this article in NOTEBOOK) the first time and again, moving the numbers of purses, deleting the first, put the number on 6-th position and place again.
You can itself present that 1000 people from around the world join in with the Internet and read these articles every day! Just as you read it now. Well, so that? Will you spend only 6$, to know, it works? And if you all will do how I described higher, IT WILL WORK.
It will NEVER DIE.
This line for pessimists: And suddenly will this business collapse and to me nobody money of not will send? IN FACT BUT every day from 20000 to 50000 thousand new users appear in the Internet! On the prognoses of specialists, only to 2009 the amount of users will be increased the Internet from present 32 million persons, to 45 million. What chances, that will they want to make attempt itself in by something new? Well and last: It is an indeed great axiom: To get something, it is necessary to give something! And to get yet anymore, it is necessary to give yet anymore! I assure — it 6$ you necessarily you will return and, the same, will lose nothing. And if will be active — you will get much more. Necessarily be active. When begin to scatter a report on forums, in certain moment it all begins to bother. Tested personally on itself. It is desirable to give up this undertaking. But take patience! All depends only on you. You will make sure herein! Make real money from home. SUCCESSES ALL!

Believe to achieve.

Thu, 19 Mar 2009 12:07:46 +0000

I beg pardon beforehand, if this letter delivered you inconvenience.
Words: « quickly to begin to work?» already at all disgust. Did a spam bother with these headings ? How really to begin to work a money in the Internet? 95% of make money online jobs are scams! I offer to you real, fully legal, on the square, method of earnings.
I want to warn at once – this article not for free of charge lovers. This business requires small financial investments and expenses of own forces.
I ask attentively to read this text and grasp the meaning in what, and then deciding is needed it to you or not. I make warranty you, that after reading of this text you will change satisfied of that in a network to begin to work unreal. All of it works, and I would say very well!
To do it or not – to decide you! But if you already read it, this work for you! I long shopped around in the Internet. I lost very much time in search of that work which would arrange me fully. That no projects were with redemption in 1000 $, which need to be sold people, to quite not interested in their receipt, no doubtful participation in fotosessions or clicking on references for what that stakes of cents… All read attentively, estimated the chances and decided to take chance $6. Fermenting as usual to on different family I find this article, which it is talked in, that it is possible to do thousands of dollars in a couple of weeks at an investment only 6$, forums. Well … thought I, it must be next nonsense, but all the same decided to finish reading and know that there such offer… I diffuse the copied not text, but fully written with me (which you and read). There is not an enormous amount of exclamation marks and spellings errors in nm. Here are not fairy-tale promises. Here that indeed happened with me. But at a desire you can find one of initial reports through Internet on a context «, as usual, to on different family to the forums, I found this article, which it is talked in, that it is possible to do thousands of dollars in a couple of weeks». In these reports write often: « disbelieved at once!!!!», « it was in shock!!!». For some reason I trusted at once. And was not in shock, when a money began to come. However is equal to me, who undertook it pyramid, how many he began to work (and, apparently, quite a bit). I also in it participate and from someone get a money, sending only $6. If you consistently will follow resulted below to instructions, success will not be turned away and from you. Below I also by the words quietly, without exclamation marks, will tell why this system works. And when it will die.
Algorithm of work: it is necessary to send for 1$ on 6 Lr- purses, which are below transferred. Then to delete first purse from a list, the same displacing a list on one grinding off upwards, the sixth is freed the same, where you inscribe the number of the purse and fill up this, with you on a sixth line, report on 200 different forums.
Now I will tell you as it works and the most important WHY…
I promise you, that if you will in exactness observe the below transferred instructions, you will begin to get a far more money, what you thought, not adding the special efforts to it.
Suggestion: Read it pair of one times! Follow instructions and a money will begin to act on your purse.
It is legal. And your deposit is only 6$…
IT IS IMPORTANT: It is not deception and it is legal, here you risk nothing, but it works.
NOTICE: Follow instructions in EXACTNESS and 1000$ and anymore will be your in a flow from 20 to 60 days. Vs it successfully works due to HONESTY of participants.
Here the same 3 steps to success:
1. If you do not have the same 6$ in an electronic kind, you need to be registered in the system of Liberty Reserve. To lead an account in the system of Liberty Reserve not difficultly.
Call on a site LibertyReserve.com, from above a site press on reference of "Create Account " and fill the fields. Registration consists of 2 parts. In the first part fill all information, in LR 3 types of passwords, will memorize them all. After the first step to you the number of your account will come on indicated e-mail, you it is necessary it will be to call at the account in a flow 14 days, registration is rescinded otherwise. At the first entrance on account of you will ask to enter the personal information, after it registration is complete! All fields noted * obligatory for filling. Account Information is Information about account. First Name, Last Name E-mail, Re-enter e-mail. Security Information . Password. Re-enter Password. Login PIN (5 numbers). Re-enter Login PIN (5 numbers). Master Key (3 numbers). Re-enter Master Key - to Repeat the code of safety (3 numbers). Security Question (to choose from a list). Answer (on a secret question). Personal welcome message is the Welcoming phrase. Enter the code (turing number) shown on the image - Enter numbers from a picture. Further we press on the button Agree. Personal Information. Account Name, Company Name, Address, City, Country, State/region, Zip/postal Code, Date of Birth, Phone (with CC). Mobile Phone (with CC)- accordingly. Further we press on the button Submit.
2. Take the first number of purse from a below indicated list, send on him 1$, in the field «note» write “, enter me in the list of purses of Lr”. All that you did it created a certain favour and the most important it is absolute legally. you ask legal service for which pay. Send for 1$ on the followings purses without a note (in each for 1$ ):
1. U6724341 (here write NOTE)
2. U4282685 (here and farther to write nothing!)
3. U5163580
4. U9222492
5. U5962172
6. U8541169
Now ATTENTION!
After a dispatch 1$ on everything delete 6 purses first from this list and will move 2-nd purse to the place of 1-st , which you wiped, 3-rd into place of 2-nd, 4-th-on place of 3-rd and 5-th-on place of 4-th, 6-th into place of 5-th! And in a sixth number which appeared empty, ENTER NUMBER of Your LR of PURSE!! Do in my article, whichever to you changes, but only will save MAIN IDEA!
3. You will place this article on no less what 200 forums and ribbons from news (News Groups).
you will memorize, than you will place anymore, the higher there will be your profit, and this profit will straight depend on you. This business continues to exist and prosper only due to honesty and seriousness of participants. So when you will attain the first position you will have thousands of dollars simply as a creator of list! It costs 6$ and a bit work! Engage in this now – not putting aside on tomorrow…!
Time is money!
How to diffuse information in forums:
1. We open the search engine of google.com, yahoo.com or other.
2. We write a phrase in the line of search: « new theme» or « to begin a new theme job» (without quotation marks) search Engine will find thousands of pages, references to which at once bring around to a form for filling of new theme of forum. And yet: not frightened, if suddenly on a that site, where you wanted to place the announcement, already am one or a few alike. It confirms that this business INDEED WORKS superfluous time! Now I will tell you, why you in any case actually lose nothing, and win only!
Say, from a 200 placing you will get 5 answers only (very little and low number)! Therefore, on your purse 5$, while will translate you are on a 6-th item on a list! Now 5 people do these for a 200 placing every MINIMUM with your purse on 5-th position, and only 5 people answer the that first to five - it yet 25$! Farther 25 people do these for a 200 placing with your purse already on a 4-th line (because it inscribe) and only 5 answer is your profit - 125$! Now, these 125 people, placing and getting 5 answers only, give you there is 625$ arrived (you are on a 3-rd line)! Farther anymore: 625 people do these to on MINIMUM a 200 placing with the number of your purse on a 2-nd line and only 5 people answer, it already 3125$! And it that 5 persons will answer just. If 8 will answer, your profit will be « it is terrible to think ». All depends on you and from your persistence. What on the greater amount of forums you will place this article, the higher there will be your profit. And it all for a primary deposit in 6$! On my opinion is not bad. When you on a book are not already, you simply send again 6$ in those purses, what in (for this purpose will save this article in NOTEBOOK) the first time and again, moving the numbers of purses, deleting the first, put the number on 6-th position and place again.
You can itself present that 1000 people from around the world join in with the Internet and read these articles every day! Just as you read it now. Well, so that? Will you spend only 6$, to know, it works? And if you all will do how I described higher, IT WILL WORK.
It will NEVER DIE.
This line for pessimists: And suddenly will this business collapse and to me nobody money of not will send? IN FACT BUT every day from 20000 to 50000 thousand new users appear in the Internet! On the prognoses of specialists, only to 2009 the amount of users will be increased the Internet from present 32 million persons, to 45 million. What chances, that will they want to make attempt itself in by something new? Well and last: It is an indeed great axiom: To get something, it is necessary to give something! And to get yet anymore, it is necessary to give yet anymore! I assure — it 6$ you necessarily you will return and, the same, will lose nothing. And if will be active — you will get much more. Necessarily be active. When begin to scatter a report on forums, in certain moment it all begins to bother. Tested personally on itself. It is desirable to give up this undertaking. But take patience! All depends only on you. You will make sure herein! Make real money from home.SUCCESSES ALL!

Commission says the Community Patent is all about Software Patents

Wed, 18 Mar 2009 13:01:07 +0000

The European Commission has issued a communication asking for the creation of the Community Patent in order for "ICT companies to protect their inventions in the single market".

The IPR system also needs to be improved by the creation of a Community patent for innovative ICT companies to protect their inventions in the single market.

It is pretty clear that the patent lobby seeks to validate software patents via a central patent court. Large companies were rejecting the software patent directive, aiming to validate software patents via the Community Patent and skip the debate about patentable subject matter:

NSP: Does the Community Patent restart the debate over patents for computer-implemented inventions (software patents)? Why or why not?

Pilch: It restarts the push for software patents, without a debate.[…] The Community Patent plan doesn't even mention the subject of software, although, make no mistake about it, software patentability is one of the main drivers of these plans.

Slashdot: Jury Rules That H.264 is Not Patented

Wed, 11 Mar 2009 17:06:03 +0000

"Well, IANAL, but looking at the summary of the AVC license here [mpegla.com], specifically the portion quoted below, it seems like royalties are only required to be paid by "end product manufacturers". You could certainly argue that source code is not the end product, and thus you could distribute it without limit. And if you want to distribute object code as well, the only limit would be that no single person who builds it should distribute more than 100,000 compiled copies unless they want to pay royalties. I seem to recall that some existing OSS MPEG-4 related projects distribute source code only for that sort of reason. Royalties to be paid by end product manufacturers for an encoder, a decoder or both ("unit") begin at US $0.20 per unit after the first 100,000 units each year. There are no royalties on the first 100,000 units each year. Above 5 million units per year, the royalty is US $0.10 per unit."

Source: http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/01/27/0755234

90% of companies suing Google are patent trolls

Thu, 05 Mar 2009 16:57:07 +0000

Google has published a statement on their Public Policy Blog stating that 90% of companies suing them for patent infringement were non practicing entities, or patent trolls:

Of the 20 patent lawsuits filed against Google since late 2007, all but two have been filed by plaintiffs who don’t make or sell any real product or service — in other words, by non-practicing entities or “patent trolls.”

Google goes on by clarifying that in lots of cases, the patents are "invented" by the patent lawyers themselves:

We've also noticed a more disturbing trend: in many of these cases, the patents being asserted against us are owned by — and in a surprising number of cases, are even “invented” by — patent lawyers themselves.

The American Congress is proposing a legislation in the US that would reduce the amount of damages, but the reader will note that it won't prevent Google being sued by patent trolls, so chances to get rid of software patent litigation is not ready to happen:

All too often, Google and other companies face mounting legal costs to defend against questionable patent claims from speculators gaming the system to reap windfall profits. And those lawsuits make it more difficult and costly to introduce the next revolutionary product.

It is to be expected that the companies operating in the US will still continue to be sued in the next years if a more serious reform about substantive patent law is not made. It seems that Congress does not want to touch the Bilski case, probably because the large companies defining the law in Washington wants the advantages of software patents without the disadvantages. This is unfortunately impossible.

"Council seeks to legalise software patents with the Community Patent" says French expert

Wed, 11 Feb 2009 13:40:53 +0000

The Council seeks to legalise software patents with the Community Patent, says Mr Pellegrini, ex-advisor of Michel Rocard, former MEP and rapporteur of the failed software patent directive (french article published in Etoile: François Pellegrini, défenseur des libertés numériques et candidat aux élections européennes):

Comme dans toute organisation polycéphale, l'incohérence est de mise. Par exemple, le Parlement avait voté contre la brevetabilité logicielle en 2005, avec le soutien d'une partie de la Commission (la direction de la Société de l'Information), et contre une autre partie de la Commission (la direction générale du Marché Intérieur dirigée par le commissaire Mac Creevy, très critiqué pour ses positions extrêmement favorables aux grands groupes privés) ainsi que le Conseil (dans lequel règnent les "experts" missionnés par les offices de brevets nationaux). En 2009, rien n'a changé. Le Conseil et une partie de la Commission cherchent à légaliser les brevets logiciels illégalement accordés par l'Office Européen des Brevets (une institution extra-communautaire hors de tout contrôle) au travers de la mise en œuvre du "brevet communautaire" et des règles de brevetabilité qui l'accompagneraient.

Translation in english:

Like in any polycephalic organisation, incoherence happens. For example, the Parliament has voted against the software patent directive in 2005, with the support of a part of the Commission (Directorate General Information Society), and against another part of the Commission (Directorate General Internal Market lead by Commissioner Mc Creevy, heavily criticised for his positions extremely favourable to large private groups) and the Council (in which rules the "experts" of National Patent Offices). In 2009, nothing has changed. The Council and a part of the Commission seeks to legalise software patents illegaly granted by the European Patent Office (an extra-community institution outside of any control) trough the implementation of the "Community Patent" and the substantive patent rules that goes with it.

The ultimate goal of this move is to create central caselaw on software patents by a specialized patent court in Europe. With the recent caselaw of Symbian using ambiguous terms like "technical", it is highly probable that patent judges in a central validity court won't scrap all the software patents illegaly granted by the EPO:

The Court of Appeal in UK has allowed a software patent, possibly setting an important legal precedent. Last week's decision by the Court of Appeal has upheld a previous decision by the High Court that the Intellectual Property Office or IPO's refusal of a patent application by Symbian was not correct in law. The application was for a patent for an indexing system for library functions in an operating system. Accordingly, in considering the "technical effect" of the invention by smartphone OS vendor Symbian, the patent examiner had displayed an excessively "narrow" point of view. The Court of Appeal, under the leadership of Lord Justice Sir Robin Jacob, has thus wished to minimise somewhat the differences due to the so-called "absurd" discrepancies between the IPO and the EPO – the European Patent Office (EPO). The Court also wants to harmonise patenting practice in England and Wales with that on the Continent.

Experts at the European Commission are already saying that the link between this central patent court and the ECJ is important for groups like FFII to have hope in having the caselaw of this future court reviewed by an independent court. There were also proposals in the register of documents in the Council to make the Court of First Instance of the ECJ also specialized in patent law. Mr Judge Jacob is also a very good candidate to be part of the Central Patent Court, he is foreseen as the driver of the bus where all the other specialized patent judges in Europe will sit.

Mr Hartmut Pilch has already said after the rejection of the software patent directive, which was requested by EICTA and other pro-software patent lobby, that the debate will move to the Community Patent:

Question: Does the Community Patent restart the debate over patents for computer-implemented inventions (software patents)? Why or why not?

Answer: Pilch: It restarts the push for software patents, without a debate.[…] The Community Patent plan doesn't even mention the subject of software, although, make no mistake about it, software patentability is one of the main drivers of these plans.

A press article issued by Out-law just after the rejection of the directive also mentions the Community Patent as the next vehicule to validate software patents:

According to the Parliament, the Community Patent has been mentioned by a number of MEPs as the appropriate legislative instrument to address the issue of software patentability.

EPO lobbying for a Central Patent Court

Mon, 01 Dec 2008 13:42:50 +0000

The European Patent Office does not only grant software patents, it also lobbies the legislators to validate them through the creation of a central patent court. Here is what they recently said in a press release:

The report repeatedly calls for the creation of a centralised European patent judiciary and above all, a Community patent to do away with some of the most obvious shortcomings of the present European patent system, a stance which the EPO wholeheartedly endorses. Moreover, the EPO welcomes the report as it provides further insight into applicant behaviour, bringing support to some of the Office's initiatives intending to safeguard or increase the quality of European patents, such as "Raising the bar", to introduce stricter rules related to the filing of divisional applications.

Despite the fact that the EPO is only an executive institution, it has also lobbying powers when it comes to define the kind of patent law that the society needs.

Maybe someone should invite the EPO to oppose the creation of a central patent court, as it would validate their infamous "technical effect" interpretation of the European Patent Convention?:

The current EPO examination guidelines specify that a computer program is patentable subject matter if, when executed on a computer, it produces a further technical effect which goes beyond the normal physical interactions between the program and the computer. This meaningless phrase has been introduced in 1998 by decision T1173/97 of the Boards of Appeal of the European Patent Office (EPO) with the intention to circumvent the European Patent Convention's restrictions on software patenting, by suggesting a far-fetched interpretation of the phrase "as such". Since then, the EPO has been issuing large numbers of software patents, while unsuccessful attempts have also been made to include the notion of further technical effect in laws such as the software patent directive.

Chocolate coins for EPO cash cow

Mon, 17 Nov 2008 13:13:22 +0000

According to Staff Union of the European Patent Office (SUEPO), Examiners of the European Patent Office have recently invaded one of the secret meetings of the Administrative Council with chocolate coins, pointing to the conflict of interests between the National Patent Offices (NPOs) and their appetite of "more patents, more money":

The EPO staff are trying to make their voice heard by a series of actions against the undermining of the European Patent Organisation by its own governing body (see below).
On October 22nd, some 500 staff took part in a demonstration during a meeting of the Administrative Council, symbolically showering delegates with chocolate coins to signify that the member states are solely interested in milking the organisation as a cash cow.

The EPO examiners were also demonstrating in September in Brussels.

Mr Thierry Sueur, a patent agent from Air Liquide and lobbyist for large corporations inside Business Europe (ex-UNICE), is pointing at the cash cow problem in an Interview for the Future (p292):

Within the political sphere, there are several problems to be solved: in the biotech ﬁeld, in the software ﬁeld, the Community patent. However, I am convinced that the way the EPO is managed today (by the Administrative Council) is such that it will mean either the death of the EPO or its transformation into a cash machine.

Obama proposes patent reform

Fri, 07 Nov 2008 20:49:59 +0000

The new US-President Obama wants to improve "predictability and clarity" in the patent system as well as "patent quality". His
reforms would "reduce the uncertainty and wasteful litigation that is currently a significant drag on innovation":

Protect American Intellectual Property at Home: Intellectual property is to the digital age what physical goods were to the industrial age. Barack Obama believes we need to update and reform our copyright and patent systems to promote civic discourse, innovation and investment while ensuring that intellectual property owners are fairly treated.

Reform the Patent System: A system that produces timely, high-quality patents is essential for global competitiveness in the 21st century. By improving predictability and clarity in our patent system, we will help foster an environment that encourages innovation. Giving the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) the resources to improve patent quality and opening up the patent process to citizen review will reduce the uncertainty and wasteful litigation that is currently a significant drag on innovation. As president, Barack Obama will ensure that our patent laws protect legitimate rights while not stifling innovation and collaboration.

ACTA - fuel for patent trolls?

Mon, 03 Nov 2008 09:22:39 +0000

ACTA, a multi-lateral treaty currently being discussed secretly behind closed doors, might export the dangerous IPRED1 directive to the United States, which allow patent trolls in Europe to preventively freeze bank accounts of a company in case of "suspicion of infringement".

According to a leaked document authored by the European Commission DG Trade, the secret ACTA treaty will reopen the debate on the liabilities of Internet Service Providers (ISPs) over content, as well as trying to achieve criminal sanctions in the EU under the French Presidency Sarkozy. France has already criminal sanctions for file sharers, and a law project on file sharing and "graduated response" has been recently passed the Senate.

Here are the more relevant parts:

ACTA will also create a new international benchmark for legal frameworks on IPR enforcement, whilst fully respecting civil liberties and the rights of consumers, as is the case for the Community acquis. It is critical to have a strong and modern legal framework as is the case in the EU- so that law enforcement agencies, the judiciary, and private citizens have the most up-to-date tools necessary to effectively bring counterfeiters to justice. Areas for possible provisions include:

[…]

Civil enforcement : e.g. the mechanisms available in EU Enforcement Directive of 2004, such as the availability of preliminary measures, preservation of evidence, damages and legal fees and costs;

Criminal enforcement : It would be key to the effectiveness of ACTA as an enforcement instrument for it to contain clear standards for deterrent and efficient criminal action against counterfeit. There is no EU legislation in this area yet. The Commission has proposed a Directive harmonising the treatment of criminal IP infringements at EU level in 2006, but it has not been adopted so far. This means that The EU Presidency, on behalf of its Member States will coordinate this area of the negotiation and, to a large extent, define what kind of measures the EU is ready to undertake;

Internet distribution and information technology - e.g. mechanisms available in EU E-commerce Directive of 2000, such as a definition of the responsibility of internet service providers regarding IP infringing content.

The Members of the EU are also very keen on copying provisions of the EU Enforcement Directive of 2004, which allows notably to preventively freeze bank accounts of normal businesses in case of "suspicion" of infringement.

The treaty would apply the same harsh sanctions for all IP infringements, whether they are patents or plant variety rights. ACTA might be a fuel for patent trolls, since it could lower down the threshold level for obtaining injunctions and freezing bank accounts of the suspected infringer. This is exactly what happened in the Italy recently just after the implementation in italian law of the IPRED1 directive with the Philips Vs Princo case. In this case the bank accounts of the Italian trader were frozen in advance, even before a court decision was reached:

‘Piracy’ provisions under the Enforcement Directive and patent infringement
Laura Orlando (Trevisan & Cuonzo Avvocati)

Princo Corporation, Ltd v Koninklijke Philips Electronics, Docket no. 3213/07, Court of Genoa, 18 April 2007

The Court of Genoa has issued its first decision on the application to patent infringement of the remedies introduced by Directive 2004/48 on the Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights, dismissing the appeal filed by Princo against a precautionary seizure order over its movable and immovable property issued by a judge of the Genoa IP Chamber on the grounds that the patent infringement was committed intentionally and on a commercial scale.

During a hearing in the European Parliament on the revision of the directive, a french expert confessed that the directive was problematic in France and lowered down the threshold to obtain an injunction from "quasi-certainty of infringement" to "suspicion of infringement". He said that current judges tends to keep the old way of issuing injunctions only when they have quasi-certainty, but this could change with new judges.

This lowering of barriers to obtain injunctions for patents has been highlighted in an FFII's analysis in the problems of the IPRED1 directive:

Overheated protection attracts trolls

The broad and abstract nature of software patents makes infringement unavoidable, and most software systems unavoidably infringe on multiple patents. All companies ignore software patents to some extent, simply because every single useful program you write infringes on several patents.

The IPRED (1) Directive gave patent litigants great powers to harass software producers, seize documents and freeze assets. Harsh measures which are justified against commercial piracy enterprises, not against legitimate entrepreneurs. One could say that the Directive enhances legal security for right owners by introducing new legal insecurity for competitors.

Software entrepreneurs may well be careful in using these measures, the competitors could retaliate. But there is no way to retaliate against patent trolls. These companies do not produce anything, acquire patents at low cost for instance by buying bankrupted companies. Their patents tend to have broad claims on trivial methods so that infringement is unavoidable. While the Directive is meant to fight piracy, it gives trolls the means to extortionate entrepreneurs. Patents should never be under the scope of anti-piracy measures.

The provisions mentioned in the ACTA document resemble the IPRED (1) Directive. While "exporting" an adopted Directive may seem uncontroversial, in this case it is not, since IPRED (1) is disproportional. The fact the Community made a mistake before does not make it legitimate to export this Directive – the Community's actions have to be proportional.

It is clear that DG Trade and other delegations of Member States are pushing for provisions against "patent pirates" inside ACTA.

With the export of low injunction levels to the United States, we might have a fireworks of patent lawsuits in the US soon. The US Supreme Court made the threshold higher to issue injunctions in the eBay vs MerckExchange case (a patent troll which had a trivial patent on the "Buy Now!" feature), see the Forbes article "Supreme Court Buries Patent Trolls":

The online auction house had petitioned the Supreme Court to review the practice of automatically issuing a permanent injunction whenever a patent was found valid and infringed, arguing that the rigid standard was not grounded in the law.

At stake for eBay was the viability of the popular, fixed-price "Buy It Now" section of its Web site. MercExchange, a tiny, Virginia-based patent-holding company, won millions of dollars in damages when it successfully sued eBay for violating one of its patents related to the fixed-price auction feature.

ACTA, by exporting the harsh sanctions of the IPRED1 directive, will just do the opposite.

German television 3sat has a reportage about software patents

Mon, 03 Nov 2008 09:13:13 +0000

German television 3sat has a reportage about software patents. A german programmer highlights that software patents ruin investment in software development. I hope you understand german :-).

USPTO does not like killing business method patents?

Mon, 03 Nov 2008 00:09:04 +0000

The New York Times has an article titled "Federal Court **Limits** Patents on Business Methods" about the recent Bilski decision. The USPTO has requested a change in the title of the article:

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/30/**federal-court-kills-patents-on-business-methods**/

October 30, 2008, 6:29 pm
Federal Court Limits Patents on Business Methods
By Brad Stone

UPDATED 10/31 12:30: Change to headline and comment from United States Patent and Trademark Office
[…]
UPDATE: Jennifer Rankin Byrne, director of public affairs for the United States Patent and Trademark Office, wrote to say that the word “kill” in the original headline on this item was too strong. The court rejected calls to exclude all business method patents, but narrowed the definition of what is patentable to innovations that involve transformations of a machine or computer.

“We are pleased that the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has agreed with the USPTO regarding the correct test to be applied in determining patent eligibility for process claims, based upon Supreme Court precedent,” she wrote.

If Mrs Jennifer Rankin Byrne could point out where she sees the term computer in the Bilski decision, that would help to back her statement.

Bilski not touching the issue of software patents

Thu, 30 Oct 2008 19:14:32 +0000

The decision on the Bilski case has been published today by the specialized patent court in the US (CAFC - Court of Appeal of the Federal Circuit). The judges says that the Bilski case is not helpful to draw the line between what is patentable and what is not in the case of software patents (see footnote nr 23, pages 21 and 22):

although invited to do so by several amici, we decline to adopt a broad exclusion over software or any other such category of subject matter beyond the exclusion of claims drawn to fundamental principles set forth by the Supreme Court … We also note that the process claim at issue in this appeal is not, in any event, a software claim. Thus, the facts here would be largely unhelpful in illuminating the distinctions between those software claims that are patent-eligible and those that are not.

So business patents might be scraped, but software patents are still there in the US. IBM might be happy.

When is the next Bilski with a pure software patent?

Bilski: Be prepared for huge lobbying in Congress?

Wed, 08 Oct 2008 13:09:14 +0000

The outcome of the Bilski case, which should be published in October, might invalidate software patents in the United States:

Plager said he regretted the unintended consequences of the decisions in State Street Bank and AT&T. Those rulings led to a flood of applications for software and business method patents, he noted. If we “rethink the breadth of patentable subject matter,” he said, we should ask whether these categories should be excluded from patent protection.

If the CAFC are clever enough to follow the Supreme Court and kick software patents out, you might see the desperate large corporations and their patent department rushing to Congress. Especially if tomorrow the banks value their patent portfolio as void, and not useful to get any credit.

Here is what Brian Kahin, well-known critic of software patents in the United States, was saying recently:

One possibility is that the Supreme Court will revisit the issue of patentable subject matter and make it clear that the Federal Circuit's permissive policies were not grounded on Supreme Court precedent. That would deflate much but by no means all of the speculation, and patent holders and attorneys would undoubtedly beseech Congress for rescue.

Will the patent system trigger financial collapse in 2008?

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 17:22:25 +0000

This was the title of an article written one year ago. Here is the end, which is happening nowadays:

What does this mean for the patent system? David Martin points out that three separate bubbles are about to pop at the same time: consumer debt, mortgage debt, and patent debt. Each of these bubbles will cause enormous damage to those institutions who were over-committed, and most certainly to those who helped create the bubble. The patent offices will not go unrewarded for helping to create another Great Depression, by printing trillions of Euro worth of funny money.

The problems lies in the evaluation of patents by banks, which was up to now overlooked by patent experts in the banks. Now, notably with the Basel2 interbanks agreement, and the need for banks to offer products, the third market of "intagibles" might collapse. Patents are used by companies to obtain credit at the bank.

The day the banks turn the screw on how they view patents (which are most of the time of dubious quality, and are just some fake money printed by the State), the day their value will greatly diminish.

You can also have a look at the paper of David Martin "Social Contingent Liabilities and Synthetic Derivative Options" at European Patent Conference, it is interesting to see that this guy predicted what is happening now.

PS: I am gonna put the video of David Martin presentation later on today
PS2: Here it is, it is pure joy for those who believe that the patent system is just a religion, and that it will backfire soon thanks to Basel II and the coming credit crisis:

So we have this giant conundrum of "we don't have the data, we don't understand the research, we don't understand the economic consequences of intellectual property", however, we're going to have the incentive to understand it (smile). And the incentive is: the illiquidity of our banking system.
Now, you came here to talk about patents, and you came here to talk about patent quality and you came here to talk about patent economics. I'm here to tell you that the day has come when we actually have to pay the piper. And what we have to do is we have to agree that we can't keep arguing this wonderful esoteric feel-good arguments about whether the patents are good or bad. Because at the end of the day it doesn't matter. When capital resources dry out, not in the SME market but in all the markets, because credit costs go up by a 125%, I can assure you that the incentive to talk about reform is changing remarkably. It's changing in some very dramatic fashions. And if you don't believe me, ask why I was as an economist, why I was the only economist to talk about the globalised mortgage allegation failure of the economy before it happened. And then ask yourself, might I be onto something with this whole Basel II thing. I would suggest that rather than talking about reforming the patent system and optimising the patent system, we actually talk about the accountability for the innovation system at large. And we talk about the fact that we need to do a better job with understanding the economic consequence for a system which is out of control. Thank you.

StopSoftwarePatents wallpapers for your desktop background

Sat, 27 Sep 2008 22:52:29 +0000

Some german contributors sent us some nice SSP wallpapers for your desktop background. So that you remember that the issue of fighting software patents is a daily task. Enjoy!

National Public Meeting on Software Patents in India (4th October, Bangalore)

Sat, 27 Sep 2008 22:30:40 +0000

Several organisations in Bangalore are organising a meeting to discuss the dubious plans of the Indian Patent Office to adopt the same infamous 'technical effect' doctrine of the EPO. The Indian patent law is a copy/paste from the European Patent Convention, containing the 'as such' provision. The Patent Office said it would organise a public meeting, but it seems that organisations prefer to organise their own meeting:

Software patents have always been very contentious. The issue has cropped up again recently in India as the Patent Manual that is being prepared by the Indian Patent Office has guidelines on the Patent Office's understanding of section 3(k) of the Indian Patents Act, and the patentability of software. The Patent Office has been having a series of stakeholder meetings related to the Patent Manual, in which the issue of software patents has been raised by various interested parties. Given the large opposition to the Patent Manual's reading of the Indian Patent Act, the Patent Office has promised to hold a public meeting solely on software patents. However, the date and location of the consultation hasn't been announced yet. We, a loose group of civil society organisations interested in the issue of software patents, believe that a public meeting (and not just an invitees only "industry consultation") on the issue of software patents will help gather together viewpoints which will be invaluable to the Patent Office.

Tentative agenda and plan is available at http://fci.wikia.com/wiki/Say_No_To_Software_Patents/National_Public_Meeting

Here is the draft agenda:

1. Presentation on the principles of patent law and software patents | Nagarjuna G. (Free Software Foundation of India) and Prabir Purkayastha (Delhi Science Forum)
2. Discussion on software patents in the Indian context: Indian Patent Act, and the draft patent manual | Prashant Iyengar (Alternative Law Forum), Venkatesh Hariharan (Red Hat), and Sudhir Krishnaswamy (National Law School)
3. Discussion on patents and the development sector (freedom of speech, open standards, healthcare, biotech, agro-sector, etc.) | Sunil Abraham (Centre for Internet and Society), Anivar Aravind (Moving Republic), and others
4. Presentation on software patents that have been granted in India | Pranesh Prakash (Centre for Internet and Society)
5. Open house on software patents | People speaking will include: T. Ramakrishna (National Law School), Abhas Abhinav (DeepRoot Linux), Sreekanth S. Rameshaiah (Mahiti Infotech), Vinay Sreenivasa (IT for Change), any others who wish to speak

In 2005, the Indian parliament rejected the Nat ordinance, which would have legalised software patents in India.

Netherlands Patent Office goes Open Source

Fri, 26 Sep 2008 21:49:20 +0000

It is quite a strong political message. The Netherland Patent Office is the first body to switch to Open Source according to the plan Netherlands in Open Connections:

The Netherlands Patent Office is the first government authority to implement the ‘Nederland Open in Connection' action plan and to switch a large number of its ICT systems to what is known as open source software. As the first step, Frank Heemskerk, minister of Foreign Trade launched the new website of the Netherlands Patent Office today, which is based on open source software. By the end of 2009, the entire office environment, including desktop computer systems and the relationship management system will be running on the basis of open source software.

Some persons said with regards to the task of stopping software patents: The penguin will save us! What they mean is that the awareness about the dangers of software patenting was first raised vocally by the open source community. In 2003 I contributed to a talk about "software patents or open source?". What a stupid title! I was not even an open source proponent. Ever since the patent community tries to marginalise the rejection of software patents as belonging to a kind of open source social movement who is supposed to reject the ownership of software and inventions. It is these misconceptions about the lobby environment which make it real fun to defend the interests of the commercial software sector against these technocrats.

The penguin will save us! means that once open source comes in, a company also switches to software patent criticism as the opposite happens when your company gets sued by a patent troll and hires a patent attorney to define your corporate policy. Open Source so to speak also implies anti-software patents. But critics of software patenting are not necessarily pro open source.

As open source is becoming the dominant software infrastructure model the marginalisation branding heavily fires back. Patent offices have to demonstrate that they are open source friendly. The fact is, that a patent office using open source is nothing special as everyone does it. Sure some companies which are still in the software as a product business fight the model on political grounds. And for similar ideological reasons they also lobby for software patents.

Microsoft wins against Alcatel-Lucent 457

Fri, 26 Sep 2008 10:01:19 +0000

Alcatel-Lucent again failed to enforce their US 5,341,457, one of the patents they claim is related to MP3, against Microsoft. Earlier a lower court awarded them a billion dollar claim. Now the Courts of Appeal of the Federal Curcuit sided against the French company. Thus Microsoft does not have to pay more than one billion.

If Alcatel-Lucent sent a cease and desist letter to an small-medium enterprise it would be suicidal for the company to enter litigation regardless the merits of the patent.

Find the case documented on Wikipedia: Alcatel vs. Microsoft

While it was ruled that they don't infringe each others patents the patent is not pulled yet. The judgement also does not affect enforcement in other jurisdictions than the United States nor does it affect the validity of the 457 patent in the States. The audio codec MP3 is mined with several patents but some of them are expired. The 457 is not part of the Frauenhofer licensing package. Alcatel-Lucent can exercise an option to appeal.

1337

Thu, 25 Sep 2008 06:59:21 +0000

for thpse geeks out there (myself included) i think you will appreciate this, stop software patents is now past 1337 members full picture

Government in New Zealand pushes for Software Patents

Wed, 24 Sep 2008 18:00:42 +0000

The Government of New Zealand is proposing a set of amendments to the national patent law, none of them mentions the exclusions of software from the field of patentability, thus making software patentable in New Zealand. The Government claims that Free Trade Agreements (notably the ones with the US and China) and other international treaties require software patents in New Zealand.

The Government won't specifically exclude software, but they do exclude mathematical algorithms:

The term "manner of manufacture" is carried over from the Patents Act 1953 and has been interpreted by the courts to exclude such things as "products of nature", mere discoveries, mathematical algorithms, mere schemes or plans, and methods of medical treatment of humans.

However, we are at stage 2 of the review of Patent Legislation. Stage 3 is yet to take place and it specifically mentions software:

To address the deficiencies of the Patents Act 1953, Cabinet, in August 2001, agreed to a 3-stage review of the Act. The proposals discussed in this regulatory impact statement are part of Stage 2 of this Review. Cabinet has previously agreed to proposals in Stage 1 (August 2001) and the first part of Stage 2 (September 2001). Contentious issues including Māori and other concerns regarding issues such as the patentability of biotechnological inventions, medical treatments, and computer software and business methods, will be dealt with in Stage 3 of the review. The criteria for granting a patent contained in the Patents Act 1953 are less stringent than the criteria now applied in most other developed countries, including New Zealand’s major trading partners. This means that patents granted in New Zealand provide a broader monopoly than would be provided for the same invention in other countries.

The Green party has already taken a position against software patents in New Zealand, but what is more important is to convince the right wing conservatives that software patents harms the local economy.

Adobe's position on software patents has changed?

Wed, 24 Sep 2008 13:10:23 +0000

The Adobe's position on software patents seems to have changed since 1994. Or maybe the current one is being written by the patent department?

Here is the position of Adobe on software patents in 1994 published by James Huggins:

Let me make my position on the patentability of software clear. I believe that software per se should not be allowed patent protection. I take this position as the creator of software and as the beneficiary of the rewards that innovative software can bring in the marketplace. I do not take this position because I or my company are eager to steal the ideas of others in our industry. Adobe has built its business by creating new markets with new software. We take this position because it is the best policy for maintaining a healthy software industry, where innovation can prosper.

The problems inherent in certain aspects of the patent process for software-related inventions are well-known, the difficulties of finding and citing prior art, the problems of obviousness, the difficulties of adequate specifications for software are a few of those problems. However, I argue that software should not be patented, not because it is difficult to do so, but because it is wrong to do so.

In summary, these are my main points:

the software industry thrived without patents, creating its fundamental base in an era of no software patents;

software patents harm the industry, with no corresponding benefit;

software embodies mathematical algorithms;

the law, starting with the Constitution, argues against patents for software-related inventions;

and last, the proper form of protection for software is copyright.

Here is a press clip from a recent article published in an Indian newspaper TheIndu:

Naresh Gupta, Sr. Vice President, Print & Publishing Business Unit Adobe, and Managing Director, Adobe India, a leader of the imaging software and solutions business, says: “We believe in safeguarding of intellectual property rights. Adobe invests significant resources towards innovation and we expect protection of our Intellectual Property Rights, to be able to sustain business.”

Political backing

Wed, 24 Sep 2008 09:04:28 +0000

I'm a member of the Socialist Party (England & Wales) and have begun raising the issue. My branch is a small one, but I hope to spread awareness of the dangers of software patents as widely as I can in the party.

If anyone else has similar contacts, I would suggest they could do likewise.

Dr Flocke: "50% of the applications are made by only 3% of the applicants"

Tue, 23 Sep 2008 18:38:31 +0000

Half of the patent applications are filed by only 3% of the applicants. Which means that at least half of the patent applications are filed by large corporations.

Dr Flocke has cited those numbers in his interview with the Staff Union of the European Patent Office (SUEPO):

If there are two things that don't fit together then it is SMEs and the existing patent system. Considering only the registration numbers, it is clear that SMEs are a 'free-patent zone' and not participating in the patent system. 50% of the applications are made by only 3% of the applicants, a third of registrations come from 0,3%, the so-called frequent applicants.

Those numbers are probably for any field, but it would be interesting to have them for the software sector.

"Alison demission" shout EPO examiners in Brussels

Tue, 23 Sep 2008 17:43:35 +0000

EPO examiners were asking for the demission of the President of the EPO, Alison Brimelow, shouting in the streets of Brussels "Alison demission". I hope they will be heard, of they might be a need to cry louder, the European Elections are coming soon in 2009. Unfortunately for EPO examiners, the EPO is not an EU institution and will probably never be.

Very few EPO examiners believes she is doing something to tackle quality problems of the EPO:

According to an EPO internal staff survey of June 2008, only 9% of the EPO examiners believes that "Brimelow and the Vice-Presidents actively promote patent quality".

EPO does not stand anymore for quality patents, but for progress (bars) and profit:

The board of directors of the European Patent Office is nearly exclusively composed of representatives of the national patent offices. Yet, half of the yearly fees go to the national patent offices. This contributed to the emergence of this pan-european organisation that controls itself and profits from it.

I wonder how the EPO examiners can claim issuing quality for such patents:

Bilski case for October

Tue, 23 Sep 2008 16:41:24 +0000

The Patently-O blog mentions that the judgment on the Bilski case will be published in October. Chief Judge Michel said:

I think it will be a very significant decision. It probably will have broader scope than either In re Comiskey or In re Nuijten.

I doubt that the judges will kick software patents out, even if Judge Plager mentioned his regrets:

Plager said he regretted the unintended consequences of the decisions in State Street Bank and AT&T. Those rulings led to a flood of applications for software and business method patents, he noted. If we “rethink the breadth of patentable subject matter,” he said, we should ask whether these categories should be excluded from patent protection.

United States law on patentability does not need to be stretched:

Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent. (35 U.S.C. § 101)

Some patent lawyers will of course argue that software is a process (data processing), but I doubt it will be enough to convince all the judges.

Conference Knowright2008: Software authors lost their rights

Sun, 21 Sep 2008 14:59:04 +0000

I was arguing at the recent Knowright2008 conference in Krakow (Poland) why software authors lost their rights with software patents. I was explaining why the Berne Convention which protects software under a copyright regime (for source code and binary code) does not give space for software patents.

Here is the presentation:

Sorry, no match for the embedded content.

After my presentation, the BSA representative mentioned his disagreement with my argumentation, saying that there is the "idea" and the "implementation".

Maybe there are Americans in the room to cite the First Amendment?

Kiel Conference with talk about software "patent dirt"

Sun, 21 Sep 2008 03:11:30 +0000

Lawyer Felix van Kourten will speak at the 10th October Kiel Linux and Open Source Days for the Kiel based initiative Patentschmutz.de ("patent dirt" a pun; the German word Patentschutz means "patent protection"). Patent rights are a notable concern for the open development environment predominated by communties of developers. The organisers decribe the talk as follows (rough translation):

Immaterial protection rights are important for Linux (and free software in general) because the GPL and many similar licenses are based on copyright
But immaterial protection rights can also be abused or assume a damaging role. This happens in particular when those rights are not appropriate for the subject matter. For instance the patent system is not applicable for software in a meaningful way. Nevertheless there is ambition to expand patent law to software. This would cause catastrophical consequences for the European software environment. Not only free software would be effected but small and midsized companies in general - even if they only use software and do not develop themselves
The talk provides an overview over immaterial protection rights and explains why copyright but not patent law is applicable for software. Further it will be shown, where these damaging attempts for patent expansion originate from and how we can take influence on the political process.
The safest solution would be a clearexclussion of patentability for software by law. The initiative patentschmutz.de aims for that. We rely on your support. We are all affected by software patents!

Details

10. October, 14.30 - 15.30 Room: R012

McCain wants to hire Microsoft's CEO Steve Ballmer

Sat, 20 Sep 2008 22:10:46 +0000

The Daily Background has published an article mentioning that McCain wants to hire Microsoft's CEO Steve Ballmer. McCain is advised by ultra-pro software patents advocates, and he shows now that he is very close to large corporations:

In another move that was sure to infuriate many geeks, the 70 year old presidential hopeful also said that he would ask Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer to serve on his cabinet to deal with technology issues if elected. He did not however say what position Ballmer might be hired in, but did joke that he might consider him for a diplomatic position, such as ambassador to China.

As we mentioned earlier on, McCain's advisor Rai Gifford has signed a brief in the case arguing for a broad scope in what can be patented.

EPO examiners take the streets in Brussels asking to "Save the EPO"

Fri, 19 Sep 2008 16:25:03 +0000

On Thursday, 18 September 2008, staff members of the European Patent Office (EPO) demonstrated in Brussels for a reform of its supervisory board. Examiners are complaining about the broken governance of the Institution. Examiners do not trust neither members of the Administrative Council, neither their President Brimelow.

Unsatisfied with the governance of its Administrative Council (AC), the Staff Union of the European Patent Office (SUEPO) called for a strike at all EPO sites while a delegation of around 250 staff members from Munich, Den Hague, Berlin and Vienna were demonstrating in Brussels.

Following the call of SUEPO, EPO staff members effectively ceased their activities at all four sites of employment.

In Brussels, the Administrative Council headed by Alison Brimelow, gathered on Thursday in order to think about a "strategic renewal" of the European Patent Office. The Union Syndicale Fédérale (USF), the trade union of the European public service, associated itself to the strike. USF claimed that the Administrative Council, largely composed of representatives of the National Patent Offices, "has consistently interfered with the efficient, centralised European patent system".

The major issues at stake were the Administrative Council pushing for increased decentralisation of patenting in favour of National patent offices, increased pressure on patent examiners to favour quantity of granted patents rather than quality and questions about financial difficulties of the EPO with which many patent examiners disagree.

The demonstration started of at Square Frère Orban and headed to the seat of the European Commission at the Berlaymont. Petitions were dropped at the German and British embassies. A delegation of SUEPO was then invited to discuss with members of the European Commission.

Concerning software patents, patent examiners didn't feel qualified to speak about that issue. One examiner told us that the EPO received more than 250.000 patent applications a year so they are not able to know them all. Another patent examiner confessed that most of them were against software patents but as civil servants they were not allowed to speak out publicly about their concerns.

In an open letter to the staff, Alison Brimelow considered the strike as "destructive behaviour" at a time "when the integrity of the patent system as a whole is being questioned" and will only lead to bring "the EPO and its staff into disrepute".

StopSoftwarePatents T-shirts arrive tomorrow

Tue, 16 Sep 2008 06:24:34 +0000

100 T-shirts with the Red Dove and the Stop Software Patents slogan arrive tomorrow at the Brussels office, so pre-order yours! The previous yellow one is a collector now. The following logo is printed on the front, while the back does not has anything printed on it.

The price will be 10EUR VAT incl. Keep having a eye on the T-shirt page in order to know more on how to order. You can send me an email if you are interested to buy a T-shirt.

EPO examiners do not trust Brimelow for her quality reforms

Mon, 15 Sep 2008 11:48:57 +0000

According to an EPO internal staff survey of June 2008, only 9% of the EPO examiners believes that "Brimelow and the Vice-Presidents actively promote patent quality". Brimelow is progressing, since Alain Pompidou, the former President, had a trust of only 7%.

Here is the SUEPO press release for the demonstration of this Thursday mentioning the survey:

Press release - Brussels, 18 September 2008

European Patent Office (EPO) employees demonstrate

The distribution of power in the EPO must be shifted

Whilst the management of the European Patent Office is meeting with EPO President Alison Brimelow in Brussels, staff of the EPO from Berlin, Munich, The Hague and Vienna are travelling to Brussels to demonstrate against the policies she has pursued to date during her term of office. They demand the reform of one of the key management bodies, the Administrative Council. The Staff Union of the European Patent Office (SUEPO) believes that the Council needs to be restructured. “The Administrative Council does not act in the interests of a quality European patent which reinforces business, science and innovation,” states SUEPO.

EPO Administrative Council policies damage the quality of European patents

Above all, the union levels strong criticism at the composition of the Administrative Council, which almost exclusively comprises representatives of the national patent offices. Since many of the national offices are financially dependent on the fees resulting from the work of the EPO, decisions taken by the EPO Administrative Council are influenced by the interests of the national patent offices and the desire for as many patents to be granted as possible, believes the SUEPO. Constant decisions in favour of quantity damage the quality of the patents, however.

€4.6 billion at stake

For the national patent offices, there is a lot of money at stake. In 2007, the annual fees for examined and granted patents totalled €600 million. 50% thereof, i.e. €300 million, remains with the national patent offices. The total amount accruing from the annual fees for granted patents alone over the next few years was already known at the start of 2008: €4.6 billion – half of which, €2.3 billion, would go to the national patent offices. For this reason, insists SUEPO, the probability is great that the members of the Administrative Council will manage the EPO predominantly with an eye to the interests of their own offices.

SUEPO asks Sarkozy for help

In a letter to the current President of the European Council, Nicolas Sarkozy, the SUEPO urgently requests the EU bodies to rethink the distribution of power in the EPO. “The present EPO Administrative Council does not act in the interests of a high quality European patent which reinforces innovation, science and industry,” states the SUEPO. Given a growing pool of global knowledge and jurisprudence, it is essential to invest in future in the scientific and legal know-how of the patent examiners in particular, and enough time must be allowed for them to examine the ever more complicated applications. According to the union, however, these goals can only be achieved with a reformed Administrative Council that is committed to quality. The union goes on to emphasize that it endorses the efforts undertaken by the EU to create a European Community patent and supports the resulting political control exercised by EU institutions. It would also be conceivable for representatives of industry to be involved in decisions taken by the EPO Administrative Council.

Workforce: Alison Brimelow’s alibi

Moreover, the confidence of the workforce in the EPO President, Alison Brimelow, and her Vice-Presidents is very low. According to internal staff survey conducted in June 2008, only 6% of the workforce have confidence in the management qualities of this body. And only 9% of the patent examiners believe that Brimelow and the Vice-Presidents actively promote patent quality.

Dressed in T-shirts bearing the slogan “ALIson BrImelow consultations, Inc.”, EPO staff in Brussels are drawing attention to the fact that they have not been included in any of the decisions made under her leadership and that all the consultations on Brimelow’s part are events put on for the sake of show. According to SUEPO, Brimelow’s commitment to staff participation in the reorganisation of the EPO was pure “lip service”.

INFO: Demonstration: 18 September 2008, Start: 2 pm at Frère Orban

Route: Rue de la Science, Rue Jaques de Lalaing, Chausée d’Etterbek, Place Jean rey, Rue Juste Lipse, Rue Froissart, Rond Point Schumann, Rue de la Loi.

Finish: around 3:30 pm.

For more background information on the topics, visit the SUEPO homepage at http://www.suepo.org

Cynthia Matuszewski
SUEPO Press Office
(Staff Union of the European Patent Office)
Germanenstraße 45
D-86845 Großaitingen
Phone: +49 (0)8203 6453
Mobile: +49 (0)176 8606-8807
Fax: +49 (0)8203 6276
ed.enilno-t|ikswezsutam.aihtnyc#ed.enilno-t|ikswezsutam.aihtnyc

Review of the National Innovation System in Australia

Fri, 12 Sep 2008 12:04:11 +0000

The Australian report is ready. From the recommendations and summary document:

Also the number of researchers per thousand employees has declined substantially in the last decade and US patents granted per 1,000 population have plunged from 0.06 to 0.01 (1999-2003)

Intellectual Property is also critical to the creation and succesful use of new knowledge - particularly the 'cumulative' use of knowledge as an input to furtherm better knowledge. In this regard, particularly in new areas of patenting such as software and business methods there is strong evidence that existing intellectual property arrangements are hampering innovation. To address this, the central design aspects of all intellectual property needs to be managed as an aspect of economic policy. Arguably, the current threshold of inventiveness for existing patents is also too low. The inventive steps required to qualify for patents should be considerable, and the resulting patents must be well defined, as to mininise litigation and maximise the scope for subsequent innovators.

Recommendation 7.2

Patent law should be reviewed to ensure that the inventive step required to qualify for patents are considerable, and that the resulting patents are well defined so as to minimise litigation and maximise the scope for subsequent innovators.

Recommendation 7.3 puts the foxes in charge of the hen house but acknowledges the importance of an emphasis on economic policy.

Professional practioners and beneficiaries of the IP system should be closely involved in IP policy making. However, IP policy is economic policy. It should make the same transition as competition policy did in the 1980s and 90s to beeing managed as such.

Reports: REVIEW OF THE NATIONAL INNOVATION SYSTEM

Cisco: technology companies more often defendants in patent suits

Thu, 11 Sep 2008 09:39:22 +0000

IP-watch has an article (subscribers only on) the pseudo-"patent reform" in the United States, where the Mark Chandler, senior vice president of legal services and general counsel of Cisco Systems, was interviewed:

Knowles, Housel, and Mark Chandler - senior vice president of legal services and general counsel of Cisco Systems - agreed that if anything is to get done in the next Congress on patent reform, interested parties need to do more to come together on the more controversial issues. It is better for industries to hash it out themselves than let lawmakers muddle with the details, they concurred. "This is a sausage-making process" and whatever industry gets accomplished with the USPTO could look totally different once Congress gets done with it, said Chandler. "I certainly believe there's no one way to skin the cat and we should be able to find ways to work together toward more certainty in outcomes." Another problem with the patent system now, Chandler said, is that technology companies all too often find themselves as defendants in patent suits, and the number defendants being named in the suits has increased eight-fold in the last few decades.

Here is another statement from the same Mark Chandler:

What's driving the debate are arguments that patent litigation in the US is out of control. Holston says HP will spend $US75 million this year defending itself against patent cases. Cisco spends more each year defending itself in patent cases than in salaries for 150 people, Cisco general counsel Mark Chandler says. "It has become a real tax on innovation because of the litigation," Chandler says. "Any one of those cases can be $US5 million or $US10 million in litigation fees," says Tim Crean, chief intellectual property counsel for SAP, the world's largest business software maker. "When you add it up, there's a substantial burden."

He also said that money spent on litigation could be better spent on R&D:

Mark Chandler, Cisco: "As an innovator and large patent holder - our portfolio was recently rated No. 1 in the telecommunications world by the Patent Board - we certainly support strong laws that protect inventors' creativity and innovations and the companies and people who may ultimately own those inventions. Yet, we face a growing tide of patent litigation and an environment that is deterring innovation by siphoning resources that could be spend on research and development."

He also said that the number of lawsuits has been multiplied by 10 in 10 years time:

Cisco General Counsel Mark Chandler said the maker of communications equipment faced three lawsuits per year a decade ago, while today, the company has 30. Each can cost millions of dollars to fight.

BizJournals: McCain supports software patents

Tue, 09 Sep 2008 14:50:08 +0000

An article published in BizJournals.com titled "IP advisers agree U.S. patent office needs reform" mentions that McCain supports software patents. There was a debate last week on the 28th of August in Denver:

Ed Reines, a Silicon Valley intellectual property lawyer, and Ray Gifford, a partner at Kamlet, Shepherd & Reichert LLP in Denver, represented the McCain campaign. Arti Rai, a Duke University law professor, and Christopher Sprigman, a University of Virginia law professor, represented the Obama campaign on the panel, which was held Aug. 28 at the Westin Hotel.

[…]

Another hotly debated issue is whether software and business methods should be patentable. From the 1950s through the ‘70s, they weren’t. But the Supreme Court eased its position throughout the 1980s and in 1998, the Federal Circuit opened the door to business method patents through a ruling in State Street Bank v. Signature Financial Group.

Since then, a flood of patents has been issued for business methods, including some that critics call abstract and ridiculous. Patents on tax shelters, insurance-risk hedges and estate-planning methods have been particularly controversial.

The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit is expected to rule soon on a case that could tighten requirements for patentable subject matter, and possibly even prohibit software and business method patents. The case is widely known as the Bilski case.

Rai has signed a brief in the case arguing for a broad scope in what can be patented. But Obama co-sponsored a patent reform bill in 2007 that would have prohibited patents on tax-avoidance strategies, Reines noted. He suggested that McCain supports wide patentability on technology, including software. “Software is a very important industry, and Senator McCain believes we need to support our innovation economy critically,” Reines said.

The McCain side didn’t take a position on business method patents.

Remember our earlier post about Ray Gifford, president of Progress Freedom Foundation, a Washington lobby group who was working for the tobacco industry.

Banners now available in French

Tue, 09 Sep 2008 08:08:49 +0000

Thanks to a french translator we have the banners available in French. You can also submit banners translated in your language and we will put them on the banners page.

Here it is:

Version française

Vous pouvez mettre le code HTML suivant sur vote page web:

http://stopsoftwarepatents.org/">http://stopsoftwarepatents.wdfiles.com/local--files/banners/stopswpatents20080924fr-lite.png" border="0">

Version française petit

Vous pouvez mettre le code HTML suivant sur vote page web:

http://stopsoftwarepatents.org/">http://stopsoftwarepatents.wdfiles.com/local--files/banners/stopswpatents20080924fr-x60.png" border="0">

Examiners to demonstrate against broken governance of the EPO next 18th September in Brussels

Mon, 08 Sep 2008 09:57:53 +0000

Examiners of the European Patent Office will demonstrate against the broken governance of the Office next wednesday 18th September in Brussels (Start: 2 pm at Frère Orban, Rue de la Science, Rue Jaques de Lalaing, Chausée d’Etterbek, Place Jean Rey, Rue Juste Lipse, Rue Froissart, Rond Point Schumann, Rue de la Loi, Finish: 3.30pm). It seems that the management of the EPO is meeting in Brussels next 17th-19th September, probably behind closed doors, the EPO is such a transparent organisation.

Here is the announcement on the SUEPO website:

Strategic Renewal

On 17th-19th September 2008, the management team of the EPO will once again meet en masse (this time in Brussels) to discuss "Strategic Renewal". On September 18th, SUEPO has called for a strike of all EPO staff, many of whom will be travelling to Brussels to take part in a demonstration against the undermining of the European patent organisation by its governing body and management (see below).

The meeting in Brussels a follow-up to the prior meeting (in Prague) on 3rd-5th October 2007. Strategic renewal is the banner under which a change process is being pursued in order to re-analyse and redefine the European Patent System and the role of the EPO in the future. Further details can be found in the following:

SUEPO: Making EPO fit for the future (SUEPO solutions) or avoiding global warming (13/02/08).

IP::Jur: News From EPO Transforming Itself (EPO 2.0) (03/10/07).

SUEPO: Strategic renewal - Mis(s)Leading the EPO? (01/10/07).

IP::Jur: European Patent Network EPN - The Unknown Entity? (29/09/07).

It would appear that despite claims that nothing is pre-cooked, firm ideas already existed before any consultation as to the direction that the Office and Organisation should take:

IAM: A European perspective on global patent workload - by Ciarán McGinley (April/May 2007).

Denmark openly campaigned for the EPO to take a more background role already in 2006.

It seems that those discussions relates to the role of National Patent Offices in the EPO system.

In another article, SUEPO is also asking political leaders to resolve this broken governance:

At the EPO, staff are particularly concerned that the members of the Administrative Council are prevented from acting in the true interests of the European patent system and organisation due to the financial consequences of their decisions for the states they represent. In 2007, EPO staff held demonstrations in both Munich and Bern against the inappropriate governance structure. In May 2008, SUEPO sent a letter to the French President of the European Council, Mr. Sarkozy, appealing to him to address the matter (english translation).

The EPO is an technocratic organisation where the European Parliament has no voice, and where the National Patent Offices have a great influence on the governance of the organisation.

BSA lobbies Obama for software patents at the Democratic Convention in Denver

Sat, 06 Sep 2008 06:48:25 +0000

IP-watch tell us that BSA went to lobby Obama at the Democratic Convention in Denver with a list of principles, where the first one is "inspire creativity and innovation through strong, comprehensive, and enforceable intellectual property policies, including copyright, patent and trademark laws." Software patents are definitely on the top of the agenda of American multinationals. BSA does not have any small software company in its membership, and Microsoft is more active than the other members in using the association as a mean for its purposes.

Here are some extracts of the article:

At the Democratic Convention in Denver, the University of Colorado law school hosted a debate between two Obama IP advisers and two McCain IP advisers, while the Business Software Alliance (BSA) met with Democratic Representative John Conyers, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, about a list of principles signed onto by BSA member companies, the first of which is to "inspire creativity and innovation through strong, comprehensive, and enforceable intellectual property policies, including copyright, patent and trademark laws."

At the Republican convention, an intellectual property panel was moderated by BSA, which Senator Arlen Specter, R-Pennsylvania, attended along with a host of technology companies. Jack Krumholtz, managing director for federal government affairs at Microsoft, was a participant, as was a representative of Hewlett Packard. The Consumer Electronics Association culminated its 28-state "America Wins with Trade" bus tour in Minneapolis this week for the convention. It held a pro-trade rally that included US Commerce Secretary Carlos M. Gutierrez, Republican Reps. Kevin Brady of Texas, Roy Blunt of Missouri, and David Dreier of California.

McCain is not bad, and we hope he understands that patenting software ideas and concepts is like erecting a toll at every street:

While saying protection intellectual property "creates the incentives for invention and investment," McCain - who released his technology and IP stances just last month - thinks "too much protection can stifle the proliferation of important ideas and impair legitimate commerce in new products to the detriment of our entire economy."

Some patent sharks do not like his statement:

Intellectual Property Owners’ Association Executive Director Herb Wamsley said he hopes McCain will slightly revise his statement.

But both McCain and Obama still don't get the particularity of the software sector, which concentrates 75% of patent trolling (search into Troll Tracker archives and you will find the reference):

Both McCain and Obama agree the patent system is too litigious, in need of reform, and they support more resources to hire and train quality patent examiners at the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).

The tobacco lobbyists advising McCain are back:

Ray Gifford, an intellectual patent partner at Kamlet, Shepher & Reichert in Denver and former president of the Progress and Freedom Foundation, serves as an informal adviser to McCain. He said there has been a "worthwhile and spirited discussion" in the McCain camp on alternative dispute resolution, particularly fee shifting.

Invite the European Patent Office examiners to join the cause!

Fri, 05 Sep 2008 14:28:45 +0000

A lot of examiners of the European Patent Office are present on Facebook. Invite them to join the cause!

Especially we are interested how they find prior art in source code, or in binary code, especially in the light of the propaganda recently published by the EPO:

It is not the policy of the EPO to require or examine source codes […]. Moreover, given the length and complexity of source code listings, which can often stretch to hundreds of pages, it would be quite impossible to examine them.

Pompidou, the previous President of the European Patent Office, was also forbidding them to talk in public.

McCain senior advisor Carleton Fiorina

Thu, 04 Sep 2008 22:05:47 +0000

As we were a bit curious of the patent policy of the US candidates we came across a New York Times article of today:

As Carly Fiorina, the former chief executive of Hewlett-Packard and senior McCain adviser, chatted in one small circle, Mr. Johnson, 61, was at the center of another next to her, before he disappeared inside the suite with Mr. Davis.

Carly Fiorina is notorious for the simple world view that more patents mean more innovation. In fact innovation in her perception of the world is measured by the quantity of patents. In her usual self-promotion style (cultural differences, I admit) she wrote:

The force for change must be stronger than an organization’s natural inclination to preserve the status quo. This is why even a change agent CEO must have the support of a critical mass of employees. In 1999, HP was no longer among the top 25 innovators in the world. I challenged our engineers and inventors to innovate. By 2004, we were generating 11 patents a day, the highest rate of innovation in HP’s history, and had become the number-three innovator in the world. CIO

But the fact is. A company that wants to invest in patent lawyers can expand the number of patents it holds as it likes. Just reallocate resources to the legal department. And HP under Carly Fiorina did that, increased the number of patents it applied for dramatically. But does it mean more innovation?

Two years ago HP shareholders "forced" Fiorina out.

"The stock is up a bit on the fact that nobody liked Carly's leadership all that much," said Robert Cihra, an analyst with Fulcrum Global Partners. "The Street had lost all faith in her and the market's hope is that anyone will be better."

I recently noticed that SUN Microsystems announced to abandon its patent inflation strategy as over-patenting was not worth the investment. It is difficult to assess the strategic value of a mine field and you don't find good data how much profit is generated by patents, which patents generate profit or benefit for the company and which are not worth the investment. In most companies investments in patents follow a rule of thumb. Large holders seek profit with patent portfolios like hunters with a shotgun aim for a flock of birds.

Stopsoftwarepatents - new forum threads

For Sale Brand New Apple Tablet iPad 64GB (Wi-Fi + 3G) $280usd

For Sale Brand New Apple Tablet iPad 64GB (Wi-Fi + 3G) $280usd

Now on sale Apple iphone 4G 32GB...$240,Nokia N8 $230,BlackBerry Pearl 3G 9105---$230

On sale Brand New Apple Tablet iPad 64GB (Wi-Fi + 3G)$280, Apple iPhone 4G 64GB$240

On Sale Brand New HTC Desire$220, T-Mobile HD2$200, Nokia N8$210

For Sale Brand New Nokia X6 32gb Unlocked

For Sale Brand New Apple Iphone 3gs 32gb Unlocked

Buy Apple iPhone 4G 64GB $200, iPhone 3GS 32GB $180, Apple iPad $190, HTC EVO 4G

Exclusive offer: Buy iphone 3Gs/Blackberry bold 9650/ipad cash on delivery.

FFII: World Day preparations #ssp09 - answer like your minister

Background

Links

Contact

About the FFII

IBM says software patents drive OSS development

What's wrong with the United Patent Litigation System (UPLS)?

Q1: What particular element of the United Patent Litigation System (UPLS) proposal has initiated concern regarding software patents?

1. Centralisation

2. Legislator

3. Trusted patent judges

4. No judicial review by the ECJ

Q2: If software patents are enabled by the UPLS, what might be the effects on how computer programmers work? Please give examples

1. Higher total costs of litigation

2. EU-wide injunctions to stop a software product

3. Out of court settlements for most of European players

4. Loss of legal certainty

Q3: Aside from the software patents element, what is your perspective on the UPLS as a whole?

Q4: What advantages and disadvantages can you foresee if the UPLS is implemented?

Advantages

Disadvantages

The Bilski test was invented by IBM

USPTO refuses to disclose Bilski's pending patent application

Patent expert Alison Crofts says EPLA is pushed by pro-software patents lobby

European Patent Office refuses spanish amicus brief against software patents

FFII: European Commission pushes for software patents via a trusted court

Background

Links

Contact

About the FFII

Conference on "Make software patents work for SMEs"

Stallman: "The EPO is a corrupt and malicious organisation which should not exist"

FFII and EPO announce "Binaries-As-Prior-Art"

FFII and EPO announce "Binaries-As-Prior-Art"

Background Information

Links

Contact

About the FFII

Believe to achieve.

Believe to achieve.

Commission says the Community Patent is all about Software Patents

Slashdot: Jury Rules That H.264 is Not Patented

90% of companies suing Google are patent trolls

"Council seeks to legalise software patents with the Community Patent" says French expert

EPO lobbying for a Central Patent Court

Chocolate coins for EPO cash cow

Obama proposes patent reform

ACTA - fuel for patent trolls?

German television 3sat has a reportage about software patents

USPTO does not like killing business method patents?

Bilski not touching the issue of software patents

Bilski: Be prepared for huge lobbying in Congress?

Will the patent system trigger financial collapse in 2008?

StopSoftwarePatents wallpapers for your desktop background

National Public Meeting on Software Patents in India (4th October, Bangalore)

Netherlands Patent Office goes Open Source

Microsoft wins against Alcatel-Lucent 457

1337

Government in New Zealand pushes for Software Patents

Adobe's position on software patents has changed?

Political backing

Dr Flocke: "50% of the applications are made by only 3% of the applicants"

"Alison demission" shout EPO examiners in Brussels

Bilski case for October

Conference Knowright2008: Software authors lost their rights

Kiel Conference with talk about software "patent dirt"

Details

McCain wants to hire Microsoft's CEO Steve Ballmer

EPO examiners take the streets in Brussels asking to "Save the EPO"

StopSoftwarePatents T-shirts arrive tomorrow