[gui-talk] FWd: Braille Monitor Article: Freedom ScientificFilesPatent Infringement Suitagainst GW Micro

Sat Feb 7 00:28:25 UTC 2009

Also it's interesting that Freedom Scientific declined an interview to tell 
their side, doesn't sound like they're too confident then.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Don Moore" <don.moore48 at comcast.net>
To: "NFBnet GUI Talk Mailing List" <gui-talk at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2009 8:50 PM
Subject: Re: [gui-talk] FWd: Braille Monitor Article: Freedom 
ScientificFilesPatent Infringement Suitagainst GW Micro


> Note the FS CEO's thinly veiled threat to the NFB regarding support for 
> the Technology center?  Glad that they chose to publish this anyway.
>
> Along with everything else, sure smacks of aragance.
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Steve Pattison" <srp at internode.on.net>
> To: "Access-L" <access-l at access-l.com>; "GW Info" <gw-info at gwmicro.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2009 11:38 PM
> Subject: [gui-talk] FWd: Braille Monitor Article: Freedom Scientific 
> FilesPatent Infringement Suitagainst GW Micro
>
>
> From: Scott Erichsen pianoman at scotterichsen.com
> To: Vip-L vip-l at softspeak.com.au
>
> The following is from the National Federation of the Blind's Braille
> Monitor. It is quite comprehensive as far as it can be at this point.
>
> Begin article
> Freedom Scientific Files Patent Infringement Suit against GW Micro
> by Daniel B. Frye
> When two of the leading producers of access technology in the blindness
> field have
> differences that can apparently be resolved only in federal court, blind
> consumers
> deserve to know what is going on. How might the dispute affect this
> small
> market?
> Will the actions of either party influence consumer access to diverse,
> responsive,
> and competitive products in the U.S. and international blindness
> communities?
> Mindful of the importance of access technology to blind people and
> curious
> about
> the rationale and implications of the row that has developed between
> Freedom
> Scientific
> and GW Micro, we are reporting what we have discovered at this stage of
> the
> argument
> so that our readers will understand the issues involved in this
> litigation.
> Here
> is what we know at the moment:
> On July 15, 2008, Freedom Scientific--the company that developed and
> promotes the
> JAWS screen reader and the PAC Mate Omni as well as other blindness and
> low-vision
> products--filed a patent infringement lawsuit against GW Micro, a
> smaller
> access
> technology company known primarily for its rival screen-reading
> software,
> Window-Eyes.
> The Freedom Scientific lawsuit alleges that GW Micro has "willfully
> infringed" and
> has "induced" others to behave similarly with respect to its U.S. Patent
> No.
> 6,993,707,
> issued on January 31, 2006, for a "Document Placeholder" by "making,
> importing, selling,
> offering to sell and/or using within the United States computer software
> covered
> by this patent." The case was filed in the United States District Court,
> Middle District
> of Florida.
> As background, the Document Placeholder technology in question is the
> feature in
> both JAWS and Window-Eyes that allows a user to identify a particular
> place
> or bit
> of content on a Website and return to this same point on the Webpage
> (using
> a few
> simple key strokes) repeatedly while originally viewing the page or
> during
> subsequent
> visits. This technology is designed to make large and cluttered Websites
> more convenient
> and accessible for blind computer users.
> Both Dan Weirich and Doug Geoffray, the two principal executives at GW
> Micro, agreed
> to be interviewed for this article on the condition that their attorney
> be
> present
> to offer them legal counsel during the exchange. Mr. Weirich began by
> insisting that
> GW Micro is not guilty of violating Freedom Scientific's document
> placeholder method
> patent. While the GW Micro answer filed in response to the lawsuit on
> September 29,
> 2008, denies the allegations of willful patent infringement and contains
> six
> legal
> affirmative defenses in response to the Freedom Scientific claims, we
> will
> focus
> here on the basic arguments that most blind computer users will
> understand.
> First, GW Micro questions the very legitimacy of the document
> placeholder
> patent.
> Weirich told the Braille Monitor
> that this technology--albeit in a more primitive form--has existed and
> been
> used
> by various access technology companies since 1999, well before Freedom
> Scientific
> acquired its patent in January 2006. In their answer GW Micro suggests
> that
> Freedom
> Scientific may have misled the government in applying for this patent by
> alleging
> that this technology was new and innovative, when in fact some version
> of it
> had
> existed for almost seven years before the patent was issued. In the
> first GW
> Micro
> public statement about this lawsuit, issued on August 15, 2008, Weirich
> said, "As
> many of our users know, our screen reader--Window-Eyes--has had the
> capability of
> returning to a specific line within a Webpage since version 3.1, which
> was
> released
> over nine years ago, well before Freedom Scientific's alleged
> invention."
> Weirich
> went on to note, "The implication in a recent Freedom Scientific press
> release that
> GW Micro is benefiting from Freedom Scientific's investment at no charge
> is
> simply
> not accurate nor in line with GW Micro's tradition of success and fair
> play."
> Second, both Weirich and Geoffray point out that the method, design, and
> functionality
> of GW Micro's document placeholder feature are quite different from
> those in
> Freedom
> Scientific's JAWS product. According to Weirich, the technology that
> Window-Eyes
> relies on will allow the user of this screen-reading software to return
> to
> his or
> her place even on a constantly changing Webpage; GW Micro officials
> explain
> that
> the Freedom Scientific version of this technology relies on counting
> lines
> on a Webpage
> and may not be able to return to a specific location on a Webpage that
> is
> often updated.
> Further, Weirich and Geoffray emphasize that their version of the
> document
> placeholder
> technology has nothing to do with HTML tags; instead they rely solely on
> Windows
> MSAA tags to make their version of this technology function.
> More important than GW Micro's technical legal defenses may be the sense
> of
> inequitable
> treatment to which Weirich and Geoffray feel they have been subjected.
> In
> discussing
> the basis and motivation for the lawsuit, Weirich said: "Both Doug and I
> have worked
> in the blindness access-technology field for over twenty years; GW Micro
> has
> been
> in business since 1990, and we had both worked for other companies
> before
> our time
> here. Throughout these years it has always been customary for
> access-technology companies
> to innovate and develop much of the same functionality in our blindness
> products.
> When returning from a tradeshow in July, I arrived to learn of the
> lawsuit.
> We had
> no preliminary discussions with Freedom Scientific about its
> concerns--no
> discussions,
> no warnings, no courtesy calls asking us to stop use of the technology,
> no
> indication
> at all was ever received from Freedom Scientific about this issue until
> the
> lawsuit
> arrived on our doorstep. I just had a neighbor share the news with me
> that a
> tree
> on the border of our property was dead. Similarly, I would have expected
> in
> a small
> market like the blindness access technology community that some
> collegial
> exchanges
> might have occurred before moving directly to litigation." Weirich went
> on
> to say,
> "One of the things about this lawsuit that troubles me so much is that
> we
> are all
> compelled to spend precious resources--precious resources that largely
> come
> from
> rehabilitation and other government funds--on this lawsuit. We at GW
> Micro
> would
> rather spend these resources on product development or other projects
> that
> will directly
> benefit our consumers."
> When we asked Weirich and Geoffray what they thought had really
> motivated
> this lawsuit,
> they were both at a loss to give a definite answer. Weirich speculated
> that
> perhaps
> GW Micro's increasing success and market share in the screen-reader
> competition may
> have proved threatening to officials at Freedom Scientific. Weirich
> added
> that he
> knows nothing about Freedom Scientific's finances, but he suggested by
> implication
> that perhaps troubles on this score may have motivated the lawsuit.
> In closing, Weirich asked that the Braille Monitor
> report that "GW Micro is not going anywhere. We plan to stick around and
> provide
> quality services and products to our customer base. This lawsuit is just
> a
> bump in
> the road. This legal action will not prevent us from making further
> enhancements
> to Window-Eyes."
> Lee Hamilton, president and chief executive officer of Freedom
> Scientific,
> declined
> the Braille Monitor's
> repeated requests to be interviewed for this article. We even offered to
> conduct
> Hamilton's interview in the presence of Freedom Scientific's attorneys,
> but
> this
> did not sway his decision. In a December 19 email response to our
> interview
> request,
> Hamilton offered the following:
> Thank you for the invitation, which I received on Tuesday of this week,
> to
> contribute
> our perspective to your forthcoming article. As you can appreciate, it
> was
> necessary
> to seek advice from our legal counsel before responding, and I have only
> just received
> that advice.
> As you are aware, when it was clear that this issue might become a
> matter of
> public
> interest, we published a press release outlining our need to protect our
> investment
> in research and development for the benefit of our shareholders and
> customers. I
> understand you have a copy of that press release. Our legal counsel has
> advised that
> it would be imprudent for us to comment further at this time. It is my
> belief that
> our press release provides a clear summary of our reasons for taking the
> action we
> have, and this should be useful in balancing your article.
> As you will no doubt be aware, we have a close and highly valuable
> working
> relationship
> with the NFB. This is manifested in our regular meetings with the
> International Braille
> and Technology Center and our active participation at NFB state and
> national
> conventions.
> We value the NFB's role and function highly. Please be assured that we
> are
> not offering
> any further comment to any media on this matter at this time; in no way
> is
> this a
> refusal to speak specifically to an NFB publication on the matter.
> In the absence of any further comment from Freedom Scientific about its
> lawsuit,
> we reprint the press release that it offered when the action was first
> announced.
> Here it is:
> Freedom Scientific Files Patent Infringement Suit
> (St. Petersburg, Florida - July 24, 2008) Freedom Scientific has taken
> steps
> to protect
> one of its patented technologies by filing suit against GW Micro, Inc.,
> according
> to Dr. Lee Hamilton, president and CEO of Freedom Scientific.
> "Freedom Scientific invests more in research and development than any
> other
> company
> in the blindness technology industry," said Dr. Hamilton. "We have a
> talented, experienced
> team of developers and testers, many of whom are blind themselves. They
> develop innovative
> solutions to the access issues faced by those with vision impairments
> and
> then turn
> those ideas into products that make a difference. Along the way, Freedom
> Scientific
> files patents to protect the investment it makes in developing new
> technologies."
> Freedom Scientific follows the standard business practice of filing
> patents
> for good
> reason. Not filing for and then enforcing patents would stifle
> innovation.
> If Freedom
> invests resources into developing new technologies only to find that
> other
> companies
> can benefit from our investment at no charge to them, then there would
> be no
> incentive
> to invest. Those with vision impairments would be the poorer for that in
> terms of
> independence and employability.
> This practice is by no means new in this industry. Freedom Scientific
> itself
> already
> pays for the use of patented technologies pertaining specifically to
> assistive technology.
> There you have the press release. At present this lawsuit remains at the
> preliminary
> stages of litigation. The parties have not yet even commenced discovery.
> Motions
> from both parties have been filed in a battle to determine the federal
> venue
> in which
> this case will be tried. GW Micro would like the case moved to the
> federal
> district
> court in Indiana; Freedom Scientific continues to urge that the case be
> tried in
> the federal courts in Florida.
> We will report further developments in this case as they emerge. In the
> meanwhile
> it will be for consumers to draw their own inferences and conclusions
> about
> the ethical
> and legal positions that Freedom Scientific and GW Micro have espoused
> and
> adopted
> in this case. Is GW Micro being subject to legal bullying tactics from a
> larger and
> more powerful player in the blindness access-technology field? Is
> Freedom
> Scientific
> genuinely working to champion the cause of creativity and innovation for
> the
> long-term
> benefit of blind consumers by suing its primary competitor in the
> screen-reading
> software industry for infringement of its patents? Only time will tell.
> End Article
>
> Regards Steve
> Email:  srp at internode.on.net
> Windows Live Messenger:  internetuser383 at hotmail.com
> Skype:  steve1963
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> gui-talk mailing list
> gui-talk at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gui-talk_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
> gui-talk:
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/gui-talk_nfbnet.org/don.moore48%40comcast.net
>
> _______________________________________________
> gui-talk mailing list
> gui-talk at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gui-talk_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
> gui-talk:
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/gui-talk_nfbnet.org/n0oxy%40charter.net