• Home
  • About
  • Presentations
  • Projects
  • C.V.
Browse: Home / The Rest / Jim Farmer's Eyewitness Account of the Blackboard Patent Trial

Jim Farmer's Eyewitness Account of the Blackboard Patent Trial

By sleslie on February 28, 2008

http://mfeldstein.com/an-eye-witness-account-of-the-trial/

Through a combination of resignation towards what seemed a pre-determined outcome and pre-occupation with Northern Voice when it was announced, I managed to miss most of the recent hair-pulling that the ridiculous finding in Blackboard’s favour prompted. And thank goodness too, my hair couldn’t have stood it ;-)

But I did go read Jim Farmer’s extended eyewitness account of the trial which Michael Feldstein graciously posted over at e-Literate, and I thoroughly advise you too as well, as much for what it portends for the future of high tech patents as what it says about this particular judgement.

It is not difficult to see a picture here (and I want to be clear here, because I think Jim did a fine job being as impartial as possible, that these are my interpretations) of not just “Justice for Sale” but “Patent Law Judgements as Economic Diversification Program.” It’s bad enough to have to read this about Blackboard’s (god how I even cringe to write that name) expert witness:

“Expert witnesses always are asked about their fees. When asked how much he had earned, Mark Jones was unable to give an answer. He said he had spent “hundreds of hours” and gave his rate as $325 per hour. (I thought he said $375, but court documents have the lower amount). He also said he had received $170,000 in fees from Blackboard before the end of 2007 as his [IRS Form] 1099 showed. It is likely he will have been paid more than $300,000 for his testimony when the trial is complete.”

But the picutre of an economically challenged town with a propensity to trust the government (in this case the Patent Office) gearing up to become a high tech patent rocket docket should send shivers up your spine (well, at least unless you are totally jaded about the state of justice in the land, which I can’t say I’d blame you for being.)

Go read for yourself. But all I can help thinking is – did we honestly think it was going to go any other way? And how far along are you on your open source CMS? (or even better, on your loosely coupled teaching platform?) – SWL

Posted in The Rest | Tagged blackboard, blackweb, Desire2learn, dickheads, patents

No responses to “Jim Farmer's Eyewitness Account of the Blackboard Patent Trial”

  1. charlie
    charlie
    February 28, 2008 at 8:32 pm | Permalink

    “And how far along are you on your open source CMS? (or even better, on your loosely coupled teaching platform?)”

    Yes. This worries me a little, although I wonder how effectively they can prosecute those of us using tools other than open source LMS’s such as Sakai and Moodle? For instance, since I use Drupal which is a more general content management system, I’m the one putting the pieces together–plugging in the modules–and configuring the system so that it becomes an LMS. That would seem to make me or my institution liable, not Drupal. It would be worse than the RIAA file sharing suit PR fiasco for Blackboard to go after single teachers or individual institutions.

  2. pipwerks.com » Blog Archive » More on the Blackboard vs Desire2Learn verdict
    pipwerks.com » Blog Archive » More on the Blackboard vs Desire2Learn verdict
    February 28, 2008 at 11:22 pm | Permalink

    [...] Scott Leslie was as incredulous as me when reading Jim Farmer’s account of the trial. From Scott’s post Jim Farmer’s Eyewitness Account of the Blackboard Patent Trial It is not difficult to see a picture here (and I want to be clear here, because I think Jim did a fine job being as impartial as possible, that these are my interpretations) of not just “Justice for Sale” but “Patent Law Judgements as Economic Diversification Program.” It’s bad enough to have to read this about Blackboard’s (god how I even cringe to write that name) expert witness: Expert witnesses always are asked about their fees. When asked how much he had earned, Mark Jones was unable to give an answer. He said he had spent “hundreds of hours” and gave his rate as $325 per hour. (I thought he said $375, but court documents have the lower amount). He also said he had received $170,000 in fees from Blackboard before the end of 2007 as his [IRS Form] 1099 showed. It is likely he will have been paid more than $300,000 for his testimony when the trial is complete. [...]

« Previous Next »

Technologies for Learning, Thinking and Collaborating

Search

Tags

authoring BCcampus blogs CMS conference constrained-search copyright Creative-Commons dickheads Edutools elearning2.0 evaluation firefox google humour IMS interoperability learning-design Learning Objects library lms loosely-coupled loosely-coupled-teaching LOR mashup mashups Moodle music network-learning northern-voice OER OLNet open-education open-textbooks open_source PLE presentations reusability RSS SCORM sharing social_learning standards twitter wordpress

Recent Comments

  • Wayne Mackintosh on Open Textbook Authoring Tools Part 1 – Mediawiki
  • Scott M on Open Textbook Authoring Tools Part 1 – Mediawiki
  • Open Textbook Authoring Tools Part 1 – Mediawiki on The Moving Target of Open “Textbooks”
  • sleslie on The Moving Target of Open “Textbooks”
  • dkernohan on The Moving Target of Open “Textbooks”

Archives



My Favourite Reads

  • Abject Learning
  • Bavatuesdays
  • Clint Lalonde
  • CogDogBlog
  • D'Arcy Norman
  • David Kernohan
  • eLiterate
  • Flexknowlogy
  • FreeLearning
  • Gardner Writes
  • iterating towards openness
  • Joss Winn
  • Leigh Blackall
  • Mike Caulfield
  • Nancy White
  • Network Effects
  • OLDaily
  • OUseful
  • Ruminate
  • The EdTechie

SaveOurNet





Creative Commons License
Edtechpost by Scott Leslie is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 2.5 Canada License.
Cite

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries RSS
  • Comments RSS
  • WordPress.org