Comments on: One Line of Argument Against the Blackboard Patent http://mfeldstein.com/one_line_of_argument_against_the_blackboard_patent/ What Michael Feldstein Is Learning About Online Learning...Online Fri, 05 Dec 2008 03:22:06 +0000 By: Paul Bacsich http://mfeldstein.com/one_line_of_argument_against_the_blackboard_patent/#comment-433 Paul Bacsich Tue, 08 Aug 2006 12:57:15 +0000 727093476#comment-433 Michael, I think this is a very fruitful line of enquiry. My own familiarity of this kind of product is mostly with FirstClass, where that is how we then at the Open University mapped a generic system into the teaching needs of the time. (See the entries for the early 1990s on JANUS and the OU at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_virtual_learning_environments). Even though FirstClass had origins in education its functionality was articulated in terms of very broad groupware principles, which was one of its attractive features when we selected it all those years ago - and indeed it was used at the OU and elsewhere outside educational parameters. (Anyone remember OneNet?) What would be very useful would be if members of the Lotus Notes community could do the same. As Wikipedia and other sources document, Notes-based e-learning systems first became popular also in the early-mid 1990s. There are probably other systems too - WebBoard comes to mind in view of its connection with Ufi and other Sheffield-based activities - and CAUCUS...? Paul Bacsich Michael, I think this is a very fruitful line of enquiry. My own familiarity of this kind of product is mostly with FirstClass, where that is how we then at the Open University mapped a generic system into the teaching needs of the time. (See the entries for the early 1990s on JANUS and the OU at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_virtual_learning_environments). Even though FirstClass had origins in education its functionality was articulated in terms of very broad groupware principles, which was one of its attractive features when we selected it all those years ago - and indeed it was used at the OU and elsewhere outside educational parameters. (Anyone remember OneNet?)

What would be very useful would be if members of the Lotus Notes community could do the same. As Wikipedia and other sources document, Notes-based e-learning systems first became popular also in the early-mid 1990s. There are probably other systems too - WebBoard comes to mind in view of its connection with Ufi and other Sheffield-based activities - and CAUCUS…?

Paul Bacsich

]]> By: Captain C. http://mfeldstein.com/one_line_of_argument_against_the_blackboard_patent/#comment-432 Captain C. Tue, 08 Aug 2006 06:18:15 +0000 727093476#comment-432 It's possible that a re-examination of the patent is impossible for the moment, if US Patent procedures are anything like those in Australia. In Australia, if there is legal action pending on a patent, the patent cannot be re-examined until proceedings are completed. See here for my blog entry extracting the relevant parts of the Australian Patent Examiners Manual: http://blackfate.edublogs.org/2006/08/07/australian-patent-examiners-manual-online/ It would be good to check for similar provisions in the US Patents system, which may help us to focus on the actions which we can take immediately (such as filing prior art on Blackboard's pending applications) to prevent their remaining applications reaching sealed status (where they are not only more difficult, but quite costly, to challenge). It’s possible that a re-examination of the patent is impossible for the moment, if US Patent procedures are anything like those in Australia. In Australia, if there is legal action pending on a patent, the patent cannot be re-examined until proceedings are completed. See here for my blog entry extracting the relevant parts of the Australian Patent Examiners Manual:

http://blackfate.edublogs.org/2006/08/07/australian-patent-examiners-manual-online/

It would be good to check for similar provisions in the US Patents system, which may help us to focus on the actions which we can take immediately (such as filing prior art on Blackboard’s pending applications) to prevent their remaining applications reaching sealed status (where they are not only more difficult, but quite costly, to challenge).

]]> By: Alfred Essa http://mfeldstein.com/one_line_of_argument_against_the_blackboard_patent/#comment-430 Alfred Essa Mon, 07 Aug 2006 18:51:29 +0000 727093476#comment-430 This is exactly the right approach I believe for establishing prior art. What Blackboard patented is the application of existing groupware systems and methods to the learning environment. I don't think it's necessary strictly speaking -- though I am not a lawyer --- to show that groupware concepts were used in learning to establish prior art. All that's necessary is that "a person of ordinary skill", given the groupware concepts available at the time, could have applied them in a different context. The patent would then be obvious and, therefore, illegitimate. This is exactly the right approach I believe for establishing prior art. What Blackboard patented is the application of existing groupware systems and methods to the learning environment. I don’t think it’s necessary strictly speaking — though I am not a lawyer — to show that groupware concepts were used in learning to establish prior art. All that’s necessary is that “a person of ordinary skill”, given the groupware concepts available at the time, could have applied them in a different context. The patent would then be obvious and, therefore, illegitimate.

]]>