Comments on: Update on Blackboard v Turnitin http://mfeldstein.com/update-on-blackboard-v-turnitin/ What Michael Feldstein Is Learning About Online Learning...Online Thu, 20 Nov 2008 09:16:50 +0000 By: Disruptive Library Technology Jester :: Educational Patents, Open Access Journals, and Clashing Values http://mfeldstein.com/update-on-blackboard-v-turnitin/#comment-10546 Disruptive Library Technology Jester :: Educational Patents, Open Access Journals, and Clashing Values Fri, 10 Aug 2007 16:18:18 +0000 http://mfeldstein.com/update-on-blackboard-v-turnitin/#comment-10546 [...] Just this week the story got even more interesting. First, Desire2Learn reported on a major decision by the court in the Blackboard lawsuit: “Claim 1 is rendered invalid because of indefiniteness. Further, all dependent claims that rely on Claim 1 (in our case, Claims 2 through 35) are similarly invalid.” That leaves only Claims 36 through 44 in play. Second, Blackboard file a “preemptive” lawsuit against Turnitin (Internet-based plagiarism-detection service) that seeks to prevent Turnitin’s parent company iParadigms from suing Blackboard over potential claims that Blackboard may have violated iParadigms’ patents (a story from Chronicle of Higher Education [subscription required], Michael Feldstein’s analysis and iParadigms’ view). [...] [...] Just this week the story got even more interesting. First, Desire2Learn reported on a major decision by the court in the Blackboard lawsuit: “Claim 1 is rendered invalid because of indefiniteness. Further, all dependent claims that rely on Claim 1 (in our case, Claims 2 through 35) are similarly invalid.” That leaves only Claims 36 through 44 in play. Second, Blackboard file a “preemptive” lawsuit against Turnitin (Internet-based plagiarism-detection service) that seeks to prevent Turnitin’s parent company iParadigms from suing Blackboard over potential claims that Blackboard may have violated iParadigms’ patents (a story from Chronicle of Higher Education [subscription required], Michael Feldstein’s analysis and iParadigms’ view). [...]

]]> By: Michael Feldstein http://mfeldstein.com/update-on-blackboard-v-turnitin/#comment-10539 Michael Feldstein Fri, 10 Aug 2007 12:58:26 +0000 http://mfeldstein.com/update-on-blackboard-v-turnitin/#comment-10539 In legal terms, to "assert" a patent means to attempt to enforce it. This doesn't have to be a court filing; a letter from a lawyer counts.<br /><br />I'm not going to argue--pro or con--on the general merits or demerits of Blackboard as a vendor. You have both the right and the responsibility as the consumer to make your own judgments. <br /><br />My own concern is with the damage that assertion of edupatents does to innovation and choice in the market as a whole. I oppose their assertion, regardless of who is doing the asserting. <br /> In legal terms, to "assert" a patent means to attempt to enforce it. This doesn’t have to be a court filing; a letter from a lawyer counts.

I’m not going to argue–pro or con–on the general merits or demerits of Blackboard as a vendor. You have both the right and the responsibility as the consumer to make your own judgments.

My own concern is with the damage that assertion of edupatents does to innovation and choice in the market as a whole. I oppose their assertion, regardless of who is doing the asserting.

]]> By: Leonard Low http://mfeldstein.com/update-on-blackboard-v-turnitin/#comment-10487 Leonard Low Thu, 09 Aug 2007 21:44:16 +0000 http://mfeldstein.com/update-on-blackboard-v-turnitin/#comment-10487 Actually, iParadigms isn't "asserting" their patent - at least, not in the legal sense of the word.  According to their press release, they were simply in business negotiations with Blackboard and were never intending to sue.It just feels like Blackboard is being the schoolyard bully.  On the one hand, they patent broad ideas in educational technology and wield them aggressively against Desire2Learn; on the other hand they claim their own business partners' ideas as their own - according to Claim Three, they seem to feel that the terms of the Blackboard partnership agreement gives them an unlimited license to their partners' intellectual properties in perpetuity.  Any company would have to be mad to partner Blackboard under those terms, unless, of course, the agreement also gave them a license to all of Blackboard's intellectual property in perpetuity... but unfortunately, the agreements seem ridiculously lopsidedin Blackboard's favour.Basically, Blackboard are staking their claim on all successful educational technologies - the fundamental workings of the learning management system, as well as all of the ideas their so-called partners bring by their association with Blackboard - either patenting them as their own, or asserting that such technologies are licensed to them in perpetuity.This kind of poor conduct isn't going unnoticed by the educational community at large.  Every one of the 5 tertiary institutions here in Canberra used to be a WebCT user.  Since Blackboard's patent suit against Desire2Learn, four of us have been re-evaluating our relationships with Blackboard - with two completely ruling Blackboard products out of consideration.This latest move by Blackboard does nothing to improve its credibility in our community. Actually, iParadigms isn’t "asserting" their patent - at least, not in the legal sense of the word.  According to their press release, they were simply in business negotiations with Blackboard and were never intending to sue.It just feels like Blackboard is being the schoolyard bully.  On the one hand, they patent broad ideas in educational technology and wield them aggressively against Desire2Learn; on the other hand they claim their own business partners’ ideas as their own - according to Claim Three, they seem to feel that the terms of the Blackboard partnership agreement gives them an unlimited license to their partners’ intellectual properties in perpetuity.  Any company would have to be mad to partner Blackboard under those terms, unless, of course, the agreement also gave them a license to all of Blackboard’s intellectual property in perpetuity… but unfortunately, the agreements seem ridiculously lopsidedin Blackboard’s favour.Basically, Blackboard are staking their claim on all successful educational technologies - the fundamental workings of the learning management system, as well as all of the ideas their so-called partners bring by their association with Blackboard - either patenting them as their own, or asserting that such technologies are licensed to them in perpetuity.This kind of poor conduct isn’t going unnoticed by the educational community at large.  Every one of the 5 tertiary institutions here in Canberra used to be a WebCT user.  Since Blackboard’s patent suit against Desire2Learn, four of us have been re-evaluating our relationships with Blackboard - with two completely ruling Blackboard products out of consideration.This latest move by Blackboard does nothing to improve its credibility in our community.

]]> By: Michael Feldstein http://mfeldstein.com/update-on-blackboard-v-turnitin/#comment-10450 Michael Feldstein Thu, 09 Aug 2007 13:35:55 +0000 http://mfeldstein.com/update-on-blackboard-v-turnitin/#comment-10450 Keep in mind that iParadigms is the one asserting the patent. This looks very messy all around.<br /> Keep in mind that iParadigms is the one asserting the patent. This looks very messy all around.

]]> By: Leonard Low http://mfeldstein.com/update-on-blackboard-v-turnitin/#comment-10419 Leonard Low Thu, 09 Aug 2007 05:13:22 +0000 http://mfeldstein.com/update-on-blackboard-v-turnitin/#comment-10419 Is Blackboard Inc. acting up <strong>*again*</strong>?  Having looked over the facts as presented by Blackboard, they certainly do appear to be interpreting their contract with iParadigms very broadly indeed.According to Count Three of their complaint, they're asserting that if any company forms a partnership with Blackboard, such partnership grants Blackboard an unlimited implied or express license over their their partners' products for perpetuity... and not just to use a copy of those products, but to commercially sell them as their own ("an implied or express license to practice the '301 patent").Having appalled their customers and the wider education community with their assertion of an overly broad patent against Desire2Learn, it seems to me that Blackboard will alienate members of their own development community with their latest claims. Is Blackboard Inc. acting up *again*?  Having looked over the
facts as presented by Blackboard, they certainly do appear to be
interpreting their contract with iParadigms very broadly indeed.According
to Count Three of their complaint, they’re asserting that if any
company forms a partnership with Blackboard, such partnership grants
Blackboard an unlimited implied or express license over their their
partners’ products for perpetuity… and not just to use a copy of
those products, but to commercially sell them as their own ("an implied
or express license to practice the ‘301 patent").Having
appalled their customers and the wider education community with their
assertion of an overly broad patent against Desire2Learn, it seems to
me that Blackboard will alienate members of their own development
community with their latest claims.

]]>