Patents | Bach Seat

Tag Archive for Patents

RB | October 16, 2010

Apple Wants to Patent Spyware

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is reporting that Apple, Inc., (AAPL) has filed a patent application for a “Systems and Methods for Identifying Unauthorized Users of an Electronic Device. ” The patent is for a device to investigate a user’s identity to decide if that user is “unauthorized.”

Information Apple plans to collect

The system can take a picture of the user’s face, “without a flash, any noise, or any indication that a picture is being taken to prevent the current user from knowing he is being photographed“;
The system can record the user’s voice, whether or not a phone call is even being made;
The system can determine the user’s unique individual heartbeat “signature”;
To decide if the device has been hacked, the device can watch for “a sudden increase in memory usage of the electronic device“;
The user’s “Internet activity can be monitored or any communication packets that are served to the electronic device can be recorded“; and
The device can take a photograph of the surrounding location to find where it is being used.

Who is the responsible party

The EFF believes that as a result of this new technology, Apple will know who you are, where you are, and what you are doing and saying, and even how fast your heart is beating. In some embodiments of Apple’s “invention,” this information “can be gathered every time the electronic device is turned on, unlocked, or used.” When an “unauthorized use” is detected, Apple can contact a “responsible party.” A “responsible party” may be the device’s owner or as the EFF points out the “responsible party may also be “proper authorities or the police.” Once an unauthorized user is identified, Apple could wipe the device and remotely store the user’s “sensitive data.” Apple’s patent application suggests it may use the technology not just to limit “unauthorized” uses of its phones but also to shut down a stolen phone.

However, the EFF says Apple’s new technology would do much more. The EFF believes that this patented device enables Apple to secretly collect, store, and potentially use sensitive biometric information about the user. This is dangerous in two ways according to the EFF:

It is far more than what is needed just to protect you against a lost or stolen phone. It’s extremely privacy-invasive and it puts you at great risk if Apple’s data on you are compromised. But it’s not only the biometric data that are a concern.
Apple does not explain what it will do with all of this collected information on its users, how long it will keep this information, how it will use this information, or if it will share this information with other third parties. We know based on long experience that if Apple collects this information, law enforcement will come for it, and may even order Apple to turn it on for reasons other than simply returning a lost phone to its owner.
Apple’s technology includes various types of usage monitoring — also very privacy-invasive. This patented process could be used to retaliate against users who jailbreak or tinker with their device in ways that Apple views as “unauthorized” even if it is perfectly legal under copyright law.

rb-

The EFF says this is a new business opportunity: spyware and what they are calling “traitorware.” The patent would allow Apple to find and punish users who tinker with their devices. The EFF says it’s not just spyware, it’s “traitorware,” since it is designed to allow Apple to retaliate against customers who do something Apple doesn’t like.

This patent is downright creepy and invasive — certainly far more than would be needed to respond to the possible loss of a phone. Spyware, and its new cousin traitorware, will hurt customers and companies alike — Apple should shelve this idea before it backfires on both it and its customers.

2011 in Review: Patents Misused to Stifle Innovation (eff.org)

Ralph Bach has been in IT long enough to know better and has blogged from his Bach Seat about IT, careers, and anything else that catches his attention since 2005. You can follow him on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter. Email the Bach Seat here.

Category: Uncategorized | Tags: 2010, AAPL, Apple, Biometrics, EFF, Electronic Frontier Foundation, IOS, iPhone, Malware, Patents, Spyware, Steve Jobs

RB | September 10, 2010

Comments Off

Microsoft Founder Sues GOOG, FB and AAPL

– Updated 12-13-10 – Physorg is reporting that a U.S. district judge tossed out the patent infringement lawsuit filed by Interval Licensing owned by Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen. The judge ruled that the suit failed to specify devices or products violating patents at issue in the case. A spokesman for Allen dismissed the ruling as a procedural matter and said that an amended complaint will be filed addressing the judge’s concern.

– Updated – Google responded to the suit by stating in court documents “Interval’s complaint is so devoid of any facts to support its infringement contentions that it is impossible for Google to reasonably prepare a defense.” According to VON | xchange Apple agreed and called on judges to “insist upon some specificity” before proceeding.

The UK’s Guardian is reporting that eleven major Internet companies including AOL, Apple, eBay, Facebook, Google, Netflix, Office Depot, OfficeMax, Staples, Yahoo, and YouTube are being sued by Interval Licensing. The firm, lead by ex-Microsoft founder Paul Allen is suing for alleged infringement of patents that relate to e-commerce and search. A copy of the complaint is available here (PDF). Notably absent from the list are Microsoft and Amazon.com. Amazon, the Seattle e-commerce giant just moved into a new headquarters campus developed by Allen’s Vulcan Inc. Interval is seeking damages and the end of the infringement. Among the patents being contested are:

6,263,507: “Browser for use in navigating a body of information, with particular application to browsing information represented by audio data.”
6,034,652 & 6,788,314 (really the same patent, involving continuations): “Attention manager for occupying the peripheral attention of a person in the vicinity of a display device.”
6,757,682: “Alerting users to items of current interest”
TechFlash has a deeper analysis of these patents.

Google and Facebook told the Guardian they will fight the accusations by Interval. “This lawsuit against some of America’s most innovative companies reflects an unfortunate trend of people trying to compete in the courtroom instead of the marketplace,” a Google spokesperson said in an emailed statement to the Guardian. “Innovation – not litigation – is the way to bring to market the kinds of products and services that benefit millions of people around the world.” Facebook spokesperson Andrew Noyes said: “We believe this suit is completely without merit and we will fight it vigorously.”

The Guardian reports that these claims have led to accusations by some observers that Allen, who is worth a reported $13.5bn is acting as a “patent troll” – suing active companies via patents obtained by now-defunct or inactive companies which are not actively developing technology. However, David Postman, an Interval official, defended the lawsuit as necessary to protect its investment in innovation.”We are not asserting patents that other companies have filed, nor are we buying patents originally assigned to someone else,” he told the Guardian. “These are patents developed by and for Interval.” Allen is not a named inventor on any of the patents according to Bloomberg.

Allen co-founded Interval Research in 1992 to develop communications and computer technology. The firm was reportedly designed to be a pure research institute “done right” which would replicate Xerox PARC, but that it would actually commercialize the amazing ideas. At its largest, it employed more than 110 scientists and engineers, and filed patents covering internet search and display innovations, according to the lawsuit. Interval Research officially closed in April 2000 when its 300+ patents were taken over by Interval Licensing.

Apparently, Allen has support from another tech founder. TechDirt reports that Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak comes out in favor of “patent trolls” and patent holders suing companies who actually innovate. Woz told Bloomberg TV that patents somehow help out the small guy (Paul Allen, the 37th-richest person in the world?):

I think this lawsuit represents the idea that hey, patents, individual inventors, they don’t have the funds to go up against big companies. So he’s sorta representing some original investors. And I’m not at all against the idea of patent trolls.

The Bloomberg interviewer points out that Paul Allen is not the inventor and there’s no sign that the inventors on these patents would actually get any of the money should Allen succeed. Woz says that Allen “represents inventors.” According to TechDirt Woz seems uninformed about the patent world today. For example, the interviewer notes that dealing with patents has become a “cost of doing business” and Woz seems to think that’s a good thing:

Every tech company is very aware that patents are really the heart of our innovation and invention system and (a) that you have to have your own patent position and you gotta be aware that there might be others. And, yes, you might be infringing. It’s very awkward, because some patents are so general. It’s hard to say how they’ll be interpreted. There’s a lot of ambiguity in the system.

TechDirt notes the irony that in Woz’s autobiography iWoz, he talked about how much of a success Apple was without relying on patents at the beginning.

Patents on software and business processes have become a lightning rod issue for web companies. They claim that patents act as a financial drag on innovation and that the US Patent Office (USPTO) is especially poor at examining patent claims for “prior art” which would disqualify them, or that it awards patents on needlessly wide claims which mean that it is almost impossible for companies to use accepted web technologies without accidentally infringing on them.

One of the most notable was Amazon’s 1997 patent for its “1-Click” shopping system, which was, accepted and then rejected and finally passed by the USPTO in March 2010. Amazon has licensed the technology to Apple, among others. Other infamous software patent abuses include:

British Telecom attempted to claim a patent on the hyperlink; its claim collapsed in 2002 on the basis that the patent referred to a “central computer” – which the internet does not have.
SCO sued IBM, Red Hat, Novell. AutoZone and DaimlerChrysler for claimed patents rights that would cover significant parts of the free Linux operating system.

Category: Uncategorized | Tags: 2010, AAPL, AOL, Apple, Business, EBay, Facebook, FB, GOOG, Google, Netflix, Office Depot, OfficeMax, Patents, Paul Allen, Politics, Prior art, Staples, Yahoo, YouTube

RB | June 5, 2010

Comments Off

Aussies Strike Wi-Fi Again

Aussies Strike Wi-Fi Again Australia’s Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO) has filed suit in the U.S. District Court in Texas again according to an article on :Rethink Wireless. The Aussies have slapped AT&T, (T) T-Mobile, and Verizon (VZ), with patent lawsuits. The Australian science agency, emboldened by its settlements over Wi-Fi patents with Hewlett-Packard and Microsoft is now going after U.S. retailers.

According to the article, patent trolling is a lucrative business, for CSIRO. In 2009 CSIRO brought in about $205m in royalties largely because of a massive out-of-court settlement. CSIRO made a deal with 14 vendors including Microsoft, Intel, Dell, Toshiba, and HP (which I wrote about here). According to CSIRO’s annual report, this settlement helped turn its budgeted deficit of $34.2M into a profit of $122M. The CSIRO now claims 161 active patent licensees. Many licensees are connected to the patent issued in 1996, which CSIRO says includes all 802.11 Wi-Fi products.

Wi-Fi patent trolling plan

In the article, Nigel Poole, executive director in charge of commercialization at CSIRO says this is a deliberate plan. “There’s a legal strategy here that has been thought through very carefully and to a layperson, it looks like a pincer movement. You’ve got court action CSIRO says its proceeds from royalties are invested in new research, and presumably, that could lead to new patents and licensing claims.”

Broadcom and Atheros have counter-sued CSIRO on the behalf of the Wi-Fi industry to have the patent declared invalid.

rb-

Seems the Australians have gotten pretty good at patent trolling. Maybe they can build their entire broadband infrastructure on the backs of U.S. consumers. Too bad the U.S. government didn’t think of this first.

This should be a big test for AT&T. AT&T is testing Wi-Fi data offload for smartphone users by creating a giant pilot Wi-Fi hot zone in New York City’s Times Square. The pilot will offer its mobile broadband customers free access. It is widely believed that after the pilot AT&T may deploy more hot zones in other areas across the country.

Many of AT&T’s smartphones support auto-authentication at AT&T Wi-Fi Hot Spots. The automation makes it seamless for subscribers to connect to its 21,000 hot spots. AT&T’s Ralph de la Vega has indicated in the past that offloading data traffic onto Wi-Fi would play a large role in curbing its overwhelming data growth.

Category: wi-fi | Tags: 2010, AT&T, Australia, Broadcom, CSIRO, Patent troll, Patents, Wi-Fi, Wireless

Bach Seat