Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Biotech

Patents On Synthetic Life "Extremely Damaging" 171

Posted by kdawson from the that-gene-right-there-that-one's-mine dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Pioneer and veteran of genomics Professor John Sulston is extremely concerned about the patent applications on the first synthetic life-form. The patents were filed by the Venter Institute following the announcement of the first life-form to have a synthetic genome. Sulston claims the patent is excessively broad and would stifle research and development in the field by creating an effective monopoly on synthetic life and related molecular techniques. Prof. Sulston had previously locked horns ten years ago with Dr. Craig Venter over intellectual property issues surrounding the human genome project. Fortunately, Sulston won the last round and the HGP is freely accessible — Venter had wanted to charge for access, just as he now wishes to make 'synthetic life' proprietary."
Cellphones

Asus Planning Netbook With Slot-In Mobile Phone 75

Posted by kdawson from the floor-wax-and-dessert-topping dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Taiwanese manufacturer Asus is planning a netbook with a slot-in mobile phone that will double as a 3G communications module, according to a distributor. The arrangement is apparently meant to be an easy way to use the same SIM card and data account for both a phone and a portable computer. The phone module, from an Israeli company called Modu, is already on sale, together with an array of feature-phone shells and other devices that it's designed to slot into. There is some comparison being made with the iPhone and iPad — except that with the Modu approach, you can slot the phone into the netbook."

Submission + - "No Power for the Parliament" warns EPO examiners 2

Submitted by zoobab
zoobab writes: The Staff Union of the EPO (SUEPO) sent a letter to the President of the European Parliament, Jerzy Buzek, warning of risks for the European Parliament to be "circumvented" as a legislator when the EU will accede to the European Patent Convention (EPC). The European Patent Organisation is everything except a model of democracy: national patent offices are in power, there is no parliament involved in the decision making process, and diplomatic conferences are held behind closed doors. There are plans to create a central patent court in Europe, which would operate in a democratic vacuum, as it would not be counterbalanced by any legislative assembly, let alone the European Parliament. Such central patent court could also validate software patents via caselaw (as it was recently done with the Microsoft FAT patent by the German Supreme Court), and Microsoft, IBM or SAP are lobbying in Brussels not to reopen the software patent directive.

Comment Re:I don't get it... (Score 1) 141

by aim2future (#23487504) Attached to: IBM Patents Putting Handprints On Laptops

I don't know what this means. Patents have been around for 200 years and progress hasn't slowed by anyone's account.

Mine! Due to patents we are about 30 years behind. I anticipate that with patents this slow down will accelerate, until we merely reach a status quo

Moreover, this is hardly a "daydream" which seems to imply fanciful idea.

Actually, we are implementing this (generally speaking) "daydream" as a business model Wish-IT, Wish Innovation Technologies (R) (not yet released)

* Like a good slashdotter, I have not actually looked at the patent or RTFA.

Same here, as slashdotters we don't need to. It is funny though, as this last reply was first written to be funny, it is often like a good slashdot article is something you have waited for, and the actual article just confirms that it's here. (OK, this does not apply to this patent though, which just adds to the pile of stupid patents I'm aware of).
Patents

Submission + - Hard to apply for indefinite trademarks in US

Submitted by aim2future
aim2future writes: Although we are familiar with amazingly broad patents in US, the issue on broad trademarks seems to be the opposite. We have trademarks in Sweden and Europe and are now applying in other countries. To apply for a trademark in Europe is rather straightforward, you specify the classes and provide a description, and optionally some rules if it is a collective trademark. About the class descriptions we often use the example descriptions provided by the patent office. However, USPTO said that our descriptions were too indefinite and claimed that this was typical for trademark applications from Europe, where the example text is often just copied (which was true). Due to our services being broad, as they are consumer driven, and due to a continuous technology progress we can not anticipate what technology or methods to use. We can not say beforehand what type of method for transportation to use, what types of manufacturing processes for treatment of materials, what type of research or technological services to deal with.

We need advice. Either trademarks in US are intended for very specific products, or trademark rules in US are not adapted to consumer driven innovation, development, manufacturing or other beforehand indefinite services. Can slashdotters with experience of trademarks in US possibly help us? How can we possibly express this for USPTO without giving ridiculous examples, which will anyway be insufficient?
_________________________________________________________________________

In our case we used the examples for classes 39, 40 and added some specifications to class 42, which became [39) Transport; packaging and storage of goods; travel arrangement. 40) Treatment of materials. 42) Scientific and technological services and research and design relating thereto; industrial analysis and research services; design and development of computer hardware and software; legal services]. These, our European descriptions, fit our planned activities well.

As USPTO had indicated that our services needed to be more specific we made an attempt as is described below, however this tends to become somewhat ridiculous, and USPTO still did not accept this, they have suggested some amendments but these made us suspect that they haven't fully understood what we are aiming for.For class 39 they said that e.g. "transport by Internet, space" is unacceptably indefinite. Applicant must further describe the services intended because goods cannot be transported via Internet or space. Applicant must list the type of carrier services that are classified in international class 39. The attorney is unable to offer acceptable wording because their exact nature is unclear. For class 40 they said our description was beyond the scope of our international registration as we had added "waste treatment" there from some example we found.
  • 39) Transport by air, rail, truck, boat, Internet, space; freight forwarding; postal services; express delivery of goods; packaging and storage of goods, namely, software, electronics, optics, electrical devices, mechanical devices, vehicles, chemicals, drugs, clothes, molecular devices, nano materials and composition of the named goods; archiving and storage of electronic data; travel arrangements.
  • 40) Waste treatment by processing and refinement of goods and materials, namely, metals, plastics, liquids, wood, paper, electronics, optical devices, electrical devices, mechanical devices, vehicles, chemicals, drugs, clothes, houses, molecular devices, nano devices, nano materials, construction materials as well as information.
  • 42) Scientific and technological services and research and design relating thereto, namely, research and development for new products for others, engineering services performed for others, namely, developing manufacturing specifications for products in the nature of electronics, optical devices, electrical devices, mechanical devices, foods, chemicals, drugs, clothes, prefabricated houses, molecular devices, nano devices, nano materials, construction materials, and compositions of the named products.
Software

Submission + - McAfee warning over ambiguous open source licenses (informationweek.com) 1

Submitted by
willdavid
willdavid writes: "Article by Paul McDougall in InformationWeek: McAfee frequently cautions other companies about the latest bugs and computer viruses, but the security software maker is now warning that its own business could be in jeopardy — not from some form of malware but from the fact that its products rely heavily on open source software. In its recently published annual report, McAfee warned investors that the "ambiguous" license terms governing the open source software it uses "may result in unanticipated obligations regarding our products. "To the extent that we use 'open source' software, we face risks," McAfee warned. http://www.informationweek.com/shared/printableArticle.jhtml?articleID=205207799"
Microsoft

Submission + - SIS allows Microsoft to affect OOXML votes! (neurologic.se)

Submitted by
aim2future
aim2future writes: "Microsoft has caused last minute changes to the SIS (Swedish Standards Institute) committee, voting about OOXML. Changing an expected NO to a YES.

"The word for today is "disenfranchisement" ... An attempt to fraudulently disenfranchise a voter is despicable wherever it occurs ... misrepresenting the rules and procedures in order to prevent another party from exercising their right to vote ... is universally deplored."... From Computerworld blogs
If you read swedish: here is an article about Microsoft's raid Microsoftkupp mot formatomröstning and here is a list of companies that Microsoft got into the committee last minute"

SCO to Unix developers, We want you back 427

Posted by ScuttleMonkey from the buying-friends dept.
NoGuffCheck writes "CRN is reporting that Darl McBride is looking to get Unix developers back onboard with cash incentives for completing training in SCO's new mobile application kit; EdgeBuilder. It doesn't stop there; there's a 12-cylinder BMW or $100,000 dollars for the development of the best wireless application."

Google Admits Compromising Principles in China 459

Posted by samzenpus from the sorry-about-that dept.
muellerr1 writes "Google co-founder Sergey Brin admitted that it had adopted 'a set of rules that we weren't comfortable with' in their Chinese activities. Though it doesn't yet sound like they're admitting to actually doing evil, it does appear that they are thinking about pulling out of China rather than compromise their 'do no evil' motto."

Slashdot Top Deals

There are two ways to write error-free programs; only the third one works.

Close