No, Microsoft didn’t really try to patent photons, but check out the the ironic twists described in this account of a recent US Supreme Court hearing. Here’s a summary (exaggerated a bit for effect): 1. Microsoft argues that software is not patentable, therefore it is not guilty of patent infringement. 2. The US Government argues on Microsoft’s behalf that software is patentable, but photons are not.
Introduction The information on this page was compiled from a series of posts on my blog in January, 2007 entitled "I'll take web sites for $200, Alex". The posts document what I learned during the creation of my first content managed web site. Note that some information and links that were current as of the original writing may now be out of date. ...
The title sums up the puzzling conclusion in a recent 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling (CA6 Grusenmeyer Decision.pdf) in a decision about a copyright infringement claim filed by Cleveland architect Jeffrey Grusenmeyer. Grusenmeyer had contracted to provide a “master plan” for Magnificat High School. The master plan was provided to Magnificat in hardcopy format, Magnificat paid the architect $15,000 as agreed in the contract, and the project was apparently concluded. Some time later, a Magnificat facility manager requested DWG files for “personal use”. Grusenmeyer asserted at the time that he retained all rights to the DWG files but agreed to provide them on the condition they only be used internally and not be further distributed. Fast forward to the eventual “request for proposal” for an anticipated new building at the school. Upon request, Magnificat provided the Grusenmeyer files to the defendants (a competing architectural firm), who then used portions of the files in their winning proposal. The defendants were aware that Grusenmeyer claimed copyrights to the files, but they used the files anyway. The appeals court notes that “[a]ccording to the individual DSC architects, such reliance on drawings of existing conditions is routine in the industry." In affirming the district court’s summary judgement in favor of the defendants, the appeals court noted that the contract between Grusenmeyer and his client (Magificat High School) provided that Grusenmeyer would “provide a master plan for the implementation of the capital improvements program, including plans, renderings, and perspectives suitable for use in presentation and future reference during master plan implementation.” They concluded that this “plain language” gave Magnificat permission to send the AutoCAD DWG files to Grusenmeyer’s competitor. The district court had previously ruled that Grusenmeyer’s drawings were not sufficiently original to warrant copyright protection, but the appeals court did not address the copyrightability issue at all, dismissing the infringement claim out of hand with their opinion that Grusenmeyer had already given Magnificat carte blanche copyrights to the files vis a vis the quoted clause in their contract – even though the files were never provided as part of the contract! I think the court erred in determining that the DWG files were subject to the terms of the master plan contract (its incorrect interpretation of the contract notwithstanding), but what I find really surprising in the ruling is the appellate court’s complete disregard of the plaintiff’s claimed and federally registered copyrights. The moral of the story If you are providing electronic files, don’t rely on copyright law alone to protect your intellectual property. This case reinforces the 3 C’s for protecting AutoCAD DWG files: copyright, contract, and CADLock. Update William Patry (Senior Copyright Counsel, Google Inc.) writes about this case at The Patry Copyright Blog: Make Sure the Contract is Signed.
I’m sure that by now all of you have heard about the latest “chain letter” circulating about the blogosphere. It sounds suspiciously like bloggers patting each other on the back. To wit, I’ve been “tagged” by Evan Yares (http://www.evanyares.com/display/ShowJournal?moduleId=399489&categoryId=31338). On principle, and just because I like to be contrary, I refuse to pass this one on, but I’ll go part of the way since there is some redeeming social value to the premise. The five: I was a difficult child. I ran away from home routinely before I started Kindergarten. I still have memories of the summer just before my third birthday of almost daily forays with my dog “Shep” into the woods adjacent to my parents’ property. Sometimes, after a dispute with my parents, I would take off deep into the woods plotting revenge. One day, after some altercation or other, I narrowly escaped my whip-wielding mother by diving under a barbed wire fence and racing into the woods before she could catch up. My mother spent hours searching for me, and finally spotted me hiding under some brambles. After rounding me up and taking me back home, mom tied me with a rope to a post outside our workshop until my father came home from work. When my father came home, he didn’t have the heart to punish me further.I was raised Amish. When I was 12, I installed a battery operated radio tuner in my basement workshop, and wired the output through a hidden network of wires (that included our hot water heating pipes as one side of the circuit) into a recessed wall outlet beside my bed so that I could listen to the radio discreetly from my bed through a small earpiece. Later I did something similar when my parents bought my first horse and buggy, by hiding the guts of a portable stereo under the seat.Amish children are expected to quit school after the 8th grade and begin working (traditionally on the family farm, although farming is becoming less common these days). I chose to continue my education by going on to high school while working evenings and summers to support myself. For this, I was ridiculed and called names in school, and my parents caught a lot of flack from their church elders for my actions (which they had very little control over). I chose not to go on to college after graduating in the top 5 of my class in high school.My first full time job was as a brick mason, following in my father’s footsteps. I did masonary and other construction work the last two summers of high school, and full time for a year or so after I graduated. One day a family friend called to ask if I would be interested in a “computer job” programming a CNC punch press. The company had unceremoniously fired the previous programmer and had nobody with the skills to replace him. My interview went something like “Do you know anything about computers?” “Yes.” “Can you start tomorrow?” It was at that company where I discovered AutoCAD, and the rest, as they say, is history.A few years ago, I played poker on a show broadcast across the United States on Fox SportsNet. The show was sponsored by UltimateBet.net (http://www.ultimatebet.net), an online poker site. The winner received 10 thousand dollars and a chance to play again for 200 thousand dollars. I got there by beating several thousand other players in a series of online tournaments. I placed third out of the six finalists at the table, so I walked away with nothing more than an all expense paid (and lavish) weekend in Los Angeles, not to mention the satisfaction of knowing my kids got to watch me on national TV.Go Buckeyes! ...
Did you know that Autodesk is offering a promotional upgrade price to AutoCAD LT users until January 19th? Check out http://www.adskhost.net/43404/solution.php. According to that web page, you can upgrade an AutoCAD LT 2004/2005/2006 license to any one of several AutoCAD 2007 based software offerings from AutoCAD 2007 to Inventor Series – for $1995. If you have an LT license, now might be a good time to upgrade it.
While the rest of you were busy enjoying the holiday break, I’ve had my nose to the grindstone. I had been looking for an opportunity to learn more about ASP.NET and web site content management, and the Autodesk vs. ODA web site that I started recently was a perfect opportunity. After 3 weeks of sometimes frustrating adventures, the new site is now live (although still not quite finished). Total cost of the site, including hosting for 2 years? About $200 and a lot of lost sleep. Over the next week or so I will be documenting some of the things I learned along the way.
‘Twas the week before Christmas, and all through the city Highways congested, tempers were tested; the sight wasn’t pretty The stores opened early, and stayed open late Registers rang, loudspeakers sang; as I tempted fate I proceeded with caution, threading the aisles Squeaking wheels, dubious deals; all the new styles I grabbed toys for the boys, and a gift for my niece Loaded my cart, doing my part; to help the Chinese I rushed to the checkout, avoiding a wreck Teeming masses, slow as molasses; all writing a check After walking a mile, got it all in my car Loaded for bear, gasping for air; I didn’t get far After dodging and weaving, with skill and deft Almost out, stuck en route; they’re all turning left! Happy Holidays Everyone!
Finally, the long awaited service pack 1 for Visual Studio 2005 is released! The service pack has been in the pipeline since soon after Visual Studio 2005 shipped last November, with release dates slipping month after month. The latest official release date was announced as “early 2007”. Perhaps this was an intentional attempt to alleviate some of the waiting pains with a suprise release (or maybe just the Microsoft rumor mill on autopilot). Be prepared for a long install. The download page warns that it could take an hour or more to verify digital signatures before the service pack installation even begins.
The recently filed lawsuit has been a hot topic lately, and I’ve been following it along with everyone else. As a little side project, I decided to create a parallel blog dedicated to the ongoing battle between Autodesk and ODA. The new blog is at http://www.cadcourt.com. The site is still a work in progress, but I hope you’ll check it out, and offer suggestions for improvements. Click on the Lawsuit Tracker link to view all the court documents in the case, and subscribe to the site’s feed to stay informed of new developments.
No matter the communication protocol used to transmit it, most information gets packaged into a file format for consumption. File formats are like virtual checkpoints along the information superhighway, and we would do well to pay attention to who is manning the gates. We’ve heard a lot of noise lately about the need for “open” file formats, but documenting a file format is not the same thing as relinquishing control of the format. The key consideration is who decides when and how the file format changes. This is a dirty little secret about file formats that you are not supposed to know. By controlling when and how a file format changes, an organization can maintain a mindshare monopoly over consumers of its file format – even when the format is “open”. It may be that the relative anarchy of the internet has given us a false sense of security. We happily use “open” formats like PDF, DWF, DXF, HTM, and others with relatively little concern about who controls them, but all of those formats (HTM perhaps to a lesser degree) are controlled by corporations whose allegiance is first and foremost to their shareholders. For example, PDF is “open”, but did you know that third party developers need a digital ID signed by Adobe in order to create forms-enabled PDF files that can be opened in the free Acrobat Reader? In April of 2006, Autodesk filed a trademark application for the word “DWG” when used to refer to DWG files. This may seem benign on the surface, but if successful it will give Autodesk more legal leverage in “defending” the file format. A few weeks ago, Autodesk filed a trademark infringement lawsuit (http://www.cadcourt.com/Docket/206cv01637AutodeskvODA.aspx) against the Open Design Alliance claiming that the ODA infringed their “AUTODESK” trademark by embedding the mark inside DWG files created with its DWGdirect libraries. Much has been written by the pundits about the pros and cons of the ODA lawsuit, and the Electronic Frontier Foundation predictably suggests that Autodesk is using trademark claims to stymie interoperability, but the bottom line is that the contention centers around a file format – a file format that Autodesk considers valuable enough to wage war over.
It may seem strange to some of you, but I consider myself an artist. Visual Studio is my canvas, and the keyboard is my paintbrush. This is why I wouldn’t survive in a stuffy corporate environment with committees, red tape, and politics. I’m a visionary, not a software engineer. I don’t like to plan every little detail; I’d rather start with a grand vision and just let the code go wherever my vision leads it. I confess this can be both a strength and a weakness. For example, I’ll spend two weeks refactoring perfectly working code because I don’t think it’s elegant enough. On the other hand, aesthetic beauty of structure and architecture is every bit as important in software as it is in other fields. It’s just that the benefits are intangible and more difficult to quantify. Perfectly working code, you say? I admit, that’s a bit of a rarity these days. It’s a rarity precisely because not many programmers consider programming as an art form. Real artists are never satisfied with their work; they never stop working toward absolute perfection of both form and function. This leads me to my real point. I have a favorite saying, “Have you made your mistake today?” Ironically, perfection can only be achieved by making mistakes. If you’re not making mistakes, you’re not learning. If you’re not learning, you’re not taking any risks. If you’re not taking any risks, you’re achieving mediocrity at best. Learn to make mistakes gracefully. Enjoy your capacity to learn and evolve toward perfection, no matter what kind of art you create.
This year I taught an ObjectARX class at AU. As usual, there wasn’t nearly enough time to cover all the things I wanted to cover. I’m still contemplating what I want to do differently next year in order to be able to spend more time on the subject without boring everybody to death. ...