GNOME hit by a patent troll - this is an attack not just on GNOME, but free software in general.

[Ashley MLP Fangirl]

source: https://www.gnome.org/news/2019/10/gnome-files-defense-against-patent-troll/

 

Quote

A month ago, GNOME was hit by a patent troll for developing the Shotwell image management application. It’s the first time a free software project has been targeted in this way, but we worry it won’t be the last.

 

Quote

Rothschild Patent Imaging, LLC offered to let us settle for a high five figure amount, for which they would drop the case and give us a licence to carry on developing Shotwell. This would have been simple to do so; it would have caused less work, cost less money, and provided the Foundation a lot less stress. But it also would be wrong.  Agreeing to this would leave this patent live, and allow this to be used as a weapon against countless others.

 

Quote

We want to send a message to all software patent trolls out there — we will fight your suit, we will win, and we will have your patent invalidated.

 

to do this the GNOME foundation needs funding, and they have set up a place where you can donate. 

Quote

To do this, we need your help. Please help support the GNOME Foundation in sending a message that patent trolls should never target free software by making a donation to the GNOME Patent Troll Defense Fund.

 

The Linux Gamer did an interview with Neil McGovern, the executive director of the GNOME foundation. a lot of questions are answered in that interview. 

 

 

my opinion: attacks like this are bad enough as it is when used against commercial software, but can kill a free software project instantly because these projects are often run by volunteers for the most part. this is terrible, and i'm glad the GNOME foundation is taking this to court. 

[Gegger]

wtf

 

this sucks, just gives more more reasons to use freeware

[LAwLz]

I hope GNOME wins. I was interested in who was suing GNOME so I looked it up.

Here is the actual patent, and to say it is vague is an understatement. This is legitimately what Rothschild got a patent for in 2008.

 

 

Quote

1. An image-capturing mobile device, comprising

a wireless receiver;

 

a wireless transmitter; and a processor operably connected to the wireless receiver and the wireless transmitter, wherein the processor is configured to:

 

receive a plurality of photographic images;

 

filter the plurality of photographic images using a transfer criteria wherein the transfer criteria is a subject identification of a respective photographic image within the plurality of photographic images, wherein the subject identification is based on a topic, theme or individual shown in the respective photographic image; and transmit, via the wireless transmitter and to a second mobile device, the filtered plurality of photographic images.

 

2. The image-capturing mobile device of claim 1, further comprising at last one display assembly.

 

3. The image-capturing mobile device of claim 1, further comprising at last one local electronic storage medium.

 

4. A method performed by an image-capturing mobile device, comprising:

 

receiving a plurality of photographic images;

 

filtering the plurality of photographic images using a transfer criteria wherein the transfer criteria is a subject identification of a respective photographic image within the plurality of photographic images, wherein the subject identification is based on a topic, theme or individual shown in the respective photographic image;

 

and transmitting, via a wireless transmitter and to a second image capturing device, the filtered plurality of photographic images.

It basically just says "transfer images wirelessly to a computer and sort them in some manner".

It doesn't even specify how they should be sorted, or how they should be transferred wirelessly.

[imreloadin]

On the bright side their donation page is doing quite well!

[porina]

7 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

It basically just says "transfer images wirelessly to a computer and sort them in some manner".

It doesn't even specify how they should be sorted, or how they should be transferred wirelessly.

I struggle with patent-speak, but that's roughly what my reading of it is. I'm nowhere near an expert on this, and only have indirect exposure as I do have my name on one patent I helped out on. The question is, when submitted, was this a novel and non-obvious idea? Actually, was 2008 when it was granted, or when it was applied for? There can be quite a gap. What we generally understand now might not be the case at the time. For context, the original iPhone was only released in 2007.

 

There may be another angle of attack, in that it may be argued to be overly-broad in scope. It is a balance a patent creator has to juggle. Too narrow, it wont apply to anything. Too broad, it can get thrown out.

 

While I personally don't like the way the patent system is used by some, it will be judged according to the rules in place.

[vanished]

11 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

I hope GNOME wins. I was interested in who was suing GNOME so I looked it up.

Here is the actual patent, and to say it is vague is an understatement. This is legitimately what Rothschild got a patent for in 2008.

 

 

It basically just says "transfer images wirelessly to a computer and sort them in some manner".

It doesn't even specify how they should be sorted, or how they should be transferred wirelessly.

Yeah I'm no lawyer but that's roughly how I'd read that too.  How on earth did they get that?  With this they'd be able to go after everyone including adobe, apple, Microsoft, and basically every photo manager out there that lets you copy from a device and view a collection with some filter criteria.  In fact, some of those products, namely iPhoto, existed already before this was granted so that just makes it more stupid.

[porina]

Just now, Ryan_Vickers said:

In fact, some of those products, namely iPhoto, existed already before this was granted so that just makes it more stupid.

Prior-art defence if so  

[ARikozuM]

This is why I don't think patents should protect for more than 10 years.

You should have to do something with your patent. 

Your patent should be very specific and have a workable prototype/program where possible. 

 

Also, I donated to GNOME. Hoping they win.

[spartaman64]

3 hours ago, LAwLz said:

I hope GNOME wins. I was interested in who was suing GNOME so I looked it up.

Here is the actual patent, and to say it is vague is an understatement. This is legitimately what Rothschild got a patent for in 2008.

 

 

It basically just says "transfer images wirelessly to a computer and sort them in some manner".

It doesn't even specify how they should be sorted, or how they should be transferred wirelessly.

rip google photos because thats pretty much what google photos does

[vanished]

14 minutes ago, spartaman64 said:

rip google photos because thats pretty much what google photos does

I'm sure they know perfectly well that other huge companies (Apple, microsoft, google, etc.) all have products that directly infringe on this patent.  It's just that they also know if they were to dare poke a giant like that they'd be crushed in an instant.  Obviously a case of picking on the little guy hoping they can't defend themselves.

[williamcll]

Hopefully GNOME can also can get rothschild to pay the legal fees as well like what garmin did.

[Results45]

GOOD LUCK G.N.O.M.E.!!! All fingers crossed.                              

[mr moose]

Most patent information that is publicly available is just a overview ( sometimes missing crucial information).   maybe there is more to this underneath.  A good too a fro in the courts should uncover the reality.  It would be a shame if this software actually did infringe on a patent, it would make for a lot more work on the part of the OSS and FOSS to avoid being shut down.

 

 

[vanished]

3 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Most patent information that is publicly available is just a overview ( sometimes missing crucial information).   maybe there is more to this underneath.  A good too a fro in the courts should uncover the reality.  It would be a shame if this software actually did infringe on a patent, it would make for a lot more work on the part of the OSS and FOSS to avoid being shut down.

I would imagine that the supposed infringers (Gnome, etc.) would have been served with all the relevant details as part of due process for the case, so if they're choosing to fight it they must think that it's not valid, otherwise they would have agreed to change the code and settle or something cheaper.

[mr moose]

1 minute ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

I would imagine that the supposed infringers (Gnome, etc.) would have been served with all the relevant details as part of due process for the case, so if they're choosing to fight it they must think that it's not valid, otherwise they would have agreed to change the code and settle or something cheaper.

 

All people who are sued think they are unfairly being sued.   I can't find much information on this Rothschild company or the patent other than they tried to do it to Garmin and failed.  If they are indeed a patent troll then they seem to be doing it wrong.

[LAwLz]

13 hours ago, porina said:

The question is, when submitted, was this a novel and non-obvious idea?

Programs for sorting images existed before 2008. What might have been new was the "wireless" part, but even then... 2008 wasn't that long ago. Wireless standards like Bluetooth and WiFi did exist.

Just taking a program that already exists and is made by someone else and go "I want a patent for this but for doing it wirelessly", and also having it granted, seems like a broken system to me.

It's like me saying I want to patent a flying car, without actually specifying how. Then any flying car invented will be patent infringement.

 

This is what I hate about software patents. None of them actually specify how something is achieved or works. All of them just go "this is the result and nobody can do it except me". Look at any other kind of patent and you'll see that it is only software patents that are allowed to be written this way. Wanna patent a lock design? Then you need to specifically show how the lock is made, and your patent only covers that exact design. You can't patent "a device for blocking access to a room" without specificly how it's done.

Here we have a software patent going "transfer and sort images wirelessly" with no other details.

 

I think software patents should require the code to be disclosed. That is how the patent system was suppose to do. You get governmental legal protection in exchange for disclosing exactly how your invention works. You shouldn't be able to have it both ways.

 

Edit: Someone found some prior art which should invalidate the patent.

 

 

 

13 hours ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

How on earth did they get that?

Because the patent system is broken as hell.

 

 

47 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Most patent information that is publicly available is just a overview ( sometimes missing crucial information).   maybe there is more to this underneath.  A good too a fro in the courts should uncover the reality.  It would be a shame if this software actually did infringe on a patent, it would make for a lot more work on the part of the OSS and FOSS to avoid being shut down.

Here is the lawsuit for those interested.

That's where I found the patent number and the text for the patent, which I apparently forgot to link. Here is the patent itself.

 

 

37 minutes ago, mr moose said:

All people who are sued think they are unfairly being sued.   I can't find much information on this Rothschild company or the patent other than they tried to do it to Garmin and failed.  If they are indeed a patent troll then they seem to be doing it wrong.

I tried looking it up as well and from what I can tell they are currently involved in 6 patent lawsuits (them suing others) and have done so 42 times in the past.

Here is a list of companies that have been used by Rothschild in the past:

Spoiler

Currently being sued:

• Cyberlink.com
• Magix Computer Products
• QNAP
• Zoner
• GNOME
• Slomin
• Vivient

Have been sued in the past for using this patent (US8437797B2 - Wireless image distribution system and method

• Apple
• Canon
• HTC
• LG
• Microsoft
• Panasonic
• Samsung
• Sony
• Ricoh
• Badoo
• Foursquare
• Grindr
• MeetMe
• Photobucket
• Skout
• TangoMe
• Yahoo/Tumblr

 

Then here are some other companies have been sued by Rothschild for other patents:

• Bindo Labs
• iConnect
• Lightspeed
• Microbiz
• Smartsc
• Easton Sports
• Sony
• Zepp Sports

 

[vanished]

1 minute ago, LAwLz said:

[...] Because the patent system is broken as hell. [...]

Yeah I suppose I shouldn't be surprised.  I'll never forget the guy on Shark Tank who claimed to have a patent for putting wires (headphones, etc.) through a hole in clothing.

[mr moose]

9 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Programs for sorting images existed before 2008. What might have been new was the "wireless" part, but even then... 2008 wasn't that long ago. Wireless standards like Bluetooth and WiFi did exist.

Just taking a program that already exists and is made by someone else and go "I want a patent for this but for doing it wirelessly", and also having it granted, seems like a broken system to me.

It's like me saying I want to patent a flying car, without actually specifying how. Then any flying car invented will be patent infringement.

 

This is what I hate about software patents. None of them actually specify how something is achieved or works. All of them just go "this is the result and nobody can do it except me". Look at any other kind of patent and you'll see that it is only software patents that are allowed to be written this way. Wanna patent a lock design? Then you need to specifically show how the lock is made, and your patent only covers that exact design. You can't patent "a device for blocking access to a room" without specificly how it's done.

Here we have a software patent going "transfer and sort images wirelessly" with no other details.

 

I think software patents should require the code to be disclosed. That is how the patent system was suppose to do. You get governmental legal protection in exchange for disclosing exactly how your invention works. You shouldn't be able to have it both ways.

 

Edit: Someone found some prior art which should invalidate the patent.

 

 

 

Because the patent system is broken as hell.

 

 

Here is the lawsuit for those interested.

That's where I found the patent number and the text for the patent, which I apparently forgot to link. Here is the patent itself.

 

 

I tried looking it up as well and from what I can tell they are currently involved in 6 patent lawsuits (them suing others) and have done so 42 times in the past.

Here is a list of companies that have been used by Rothschild in the past:

  Hide contents

Currently being sued:

• Cyberlink.com
• Magix Computer Products
• QNAP
• Zoner
• GNOME
• Slomin
• Vivient

Have been sued in the past for using this patent (US8437797B2 - Wireless image distribution system and method

• Apple
• Canon
• HTC
• LG
• Microsoft
• Panasonic
• Samsung
• Sony
• Ricoh
• Badoo
• Foursquare
• Grindr
• MeetMe
• Photobucket
• Skout
• TangoMe
• Yahoo/Tumblr

 

Then here are some other companies have been sued by Rothschild for other patents:

• Bindo Labs
• iConnect
• Lightspeed
• Microbiz
• Smartsc
• Easton Sports
• Sony
• Zepp Sports

 

How many of those have they won? 

 

There must be more to this company than what we see,  it looks like they not only lose but have to pay costs as well and have been doing this for quite some time.  When will they go broke?  I don't think this is conventional patent trolling. because on the surface it looks like this:

 

49 minutes ago, mr moose said:

 If they are indeed a patent troll then they seem to be doing it wrong.

 

2017 failure, and they failed to sue Garmin for other stuff too.

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20170614/13184837590/appeals-court-sticks-trolling-stupid-patent-winner-with-43000-legal-fees.shtml

[LAwLz]

Just now, Ryan_Vickers said:

Yeah I suppose I shouldn't be surprised.  I'll never forget the guy on Shark Tank who claimed to have a patent for putting wires (headphones, etc.) through a hole in clothing.

I loved Mark Cuban in that episode.

 

"This is what's killing this country. We get dumb ass patents that people then turn around and sue when it's just common sense stuff."

[LAwLz]

21 minutes ago, mr moose said:

How many of those have they won? 

I'm not sure.

But it's worth remembering that lawsuits are not always about winning or losing. If you send out a threat of a lawsuit to 100 companies, not all 100 of them will take you to court. If your fees are low then 90 of them might pay you directly. The remaining 10 might take you to court but in that case you've already gotten the money from the other 90.

 

Small businesses don't want to go into legal action against some large company. It becomes a lose-lose situation for the small company.

Go to court and fight it? Costs a ton of time and money (lawyer fees).

Just pay the demanded sum? Probably not insignificant but not as much as the lawyer fees.

 

Remember, in the US there is no "loser has to pay the other parties court cost and attorney fees" rule. That means that regardless of if you win or lose, going to court will cost you money in the US.

 

 

As for Rothschild, I don't think they are struggling for money.

The Rothschild family is wealthy as fuck. I am not sure which family member is behind the company suing, but I believe there are several members in the family which has billions (with a B) of dollars at their disposal.

[spartaman64]

4 hours ago, LAwLz said:

I'm not sure.

But it's worth remembering that lawsuits are not always about winning or losing. If you send out a threat of a lawsuit to 100 companies, not all 100 of them will take you to court. If your fees are low then 90 of them might pay you directly. The remaining 10 might take you to court but in that case you've already gotten the money from the other 90.

 

Small businesses don't want to go into legal action against some large company. It becomes a lose-lose situation for the small company.

Go to court and fight it? Costs a ton of time and money (lawyer fees).

Just pay the demanded sum? Probably not insignificant but not as much as the lawyer fees.

 

Remember, in the US there is no "loser has to pay the other parties court cost and attorney fees" rule. That means that regardless of if you win or lose, going to court will cost you money in the US.

 

 

As for Rothschild, I don't think they are struggling for money.

The Rothschild family is wealthy as fuck. I am not sure which family member is behind the company suing, but I believe there are several members in the family which has billions (with a B) of dollars at their disposal.

insert conspiracy theories Kappa if this is the same Rothschild im thinking of

[LAwLz]

3 hours ago, spartaman64 said:

insert conspiracy theories Kappa if this is the same Rothschild im thinking of

It is. Or well, it is one of the Rothschild people, not the entire family. More specifically it is Leigh Rothschild.

I think that anyone who looks into him, believer or non-believe of the conspiracy theories, will agree that he is not exactly a nice person when it comes to patents.

His formula is:

1) Come up with very broad patent.

2) Sue hundreds of companies

3) Get brought to court by some of them, and lose.

4) Go back to step 1.

 

 

For example he sued Coca Cola because he has a patent for "personalized beverage mix".

When the case was about to be moved from the Florida court to another state Rothschild argued that he lived and operated his businesses from Florida and therefore the court case should stay there. However, when he sued Garmin he stated that he has a "principal office" in Texas and therefore that lawsuit should have been done in Texas.

 

Wanna know why you probably can't find a lot of info regarding "Rothschild Patent Imaging LLC" online? Because Leigh has created dozens of limited liability companies (LLCs) for each lawsuit he does. That means that even if he gets brought to court and loses, or someone counter sues, Leigh himself can not be affected. At most he loses the assets he has put into the shell company itself, which in these cases are just the patents he is using to sues.

That is to say, he can not lose money on this. He might have billions in the bank but if someone counter sues over his stupid patents, his own wealth is completely protected.

"Rothschild Patent Imaging" was created specifically to use this patent in lawsuits.

[TechyBen]

23 hours ago, porina said:

I struggle with patent-speak, but that's roughly what my reading of it is. I'm nowhere near an expert on this, and only have indirect exposure as I do have my name on one patent I helped out on. The question is, when submitted, was this a novel and non-obvious idea? Actually, was 2008 when it was granted, or when it was applied for? There can be quite a gap. What we generally understand now might not be the case at the time. For context, the original iPhone was only released in 2007.

 

There may be another angle of attack, in that it may be argued to be overly-broad in scope. It is a balance a patent creator has to juggle. Too narrow, it wont apply to anything. Too broad, it can get thrown out.

 

While I personally don't like the way the patent system is used by some, it will be judged according to the rules in place.

It's software. No idea in it is novel in software. Soooo... they use court to argue decide who/how/what is society willing to do.

[SenKa]

23 hours ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

Yeah I'm no lawyer but that's roughly how I'd read that too.  How on earth did they get that?  With this they'd be able to go after everyone including adobe, apple, Microsoft, and basically every photo manager out there that lets you copy from a device and view a collection with some filter criteria.  In fact, some of those products, namely iPhoto, existed already before this was granted so that just makes it more stupid.

Theres no case here, it's a patent troll trying to scare GNOME devs in to some quick cash and it won't work.

[TechyBen]

3 minutes ago, SenKa said:

Theres no case here, it's a patent troll trying to scare GNOME devs in to some quick cash and it won't work.

[Obvious troll and scam is obvious]

Intelligent people: It *might* be a valid patent!

World and dog: Patent you say? [laughs in peasant]