White Knight Charges Forgent
Posted by Mark Nelson on 16th November 2005 | Permanent Link
I’d never heard of the Public Patent Foundation (PUBPAT), but now I see that they are taking on Forgent and their ‘672 patent. PUBPAT claims they have prior art that invalidates the original Compression Labs patent.
This would be good news indeed, and published prior art is apparently what is going to be required to beat this one. The press release doesn’t say what the prior art is, unfortunately, but they do give a cogent explanation of why they are tackling the case:
“CLI is using the ‘672 patent to harass anyone that implements the Joint Photographic Experts Group (’JPEG’) format,” states PUBPAT’s Request for Ex Parte Reexamination of U.S. Patent No. 4,698,672. “CLI’s aggressive assertion of the ‘672 patent is causing substantial public harm by threatening this international standard on which the public relies.”
I won’t use this forum as a bully pulpit to fight software patents, but the ‘672 is a classic example of a problem with the system. Despite the fact that international standards bodies clear patent issues with all parties involved in the process, a maverick patent holder can emerge at any time and begin asserting rights over a technology. My guess is that Forgent has cleared close to 8 figures in US dollars on this so far. I would rather see those millions go to people who are making and selling products that use compression technology, as opposed to a company that produces nothing but lawsuits.