tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6202145579049276235.post1974421418028697797..comments2020-02-10T05:07:37.679-05:00Comments on ITSSD Journal on Intellectual Property Rights: Dirt Flies As Small Inventor Continues to Get His Day in Court and PTO, Which Reaffirm Validity of His Private IP RightsITSSD Charitable Missionhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00790887154748866904noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6202145579049276235.post-89463053471184189872008-04-16T00:52:00.000-04:002008-04-16T00:52:00.000-04:00Itssd Blogmasater,I agree with everything you said...Itssd Blogmasater,<BR/><BR/>I agree with everything you said. If you look at the legislation you will see that it is in fact compensating Data Treasury for the taking, as required by the 5th Amendment. For a lot of money! Take a peekAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6202145579049276235.post-30376206366077545322008-04-14T22:58:00.000-04:002008-04-14T22:58:00.000-04:00Dear Anonymous,I understand your concern with pres...Dear Anonymous,<BR/><BR/>I understand your concern with preserving national security by keeping the federal banking system up and running. I can appreciate how that was no easy feat following the extraordinary tragedy that befell this nation on 9/11.<BR/><BR/>However, if the government exercises its sovereign right to take private property (in this case a patent subsequently determined by the PTO upon reexamination to be VALID under US federal law)for a bona fide public use (which arguably it did in this case, by providing the banks with free use of the patent), is the government not liable to the property holder for such taking??<BR/><BR/>Would not the government's act constitute a noncommercial government use of a privately owned patent within the meaning of 28 USC 1498, which then obligates the government to pay fair, adequate and 'just' compensation to the rights holder?? There is case law to this effect, is there not??<BR/><BR/>Yours truly,<BR/><BR/>ITSSD BlogmasterITSSD Charitable Missionhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00790887154748866904noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6202145579049276235.post-48047432276887081232008-04-14T15:45:00.000-04:002008-04-14T15:45:00.000-04:00I’ve read most of these DT stories before but this...I’ve read most of these DT stories before but this last one, from the Business Wire on Oct. 28, 2003, is new to me. It is also rather disturbing because it reveals some insight into the mind of DataTreasury. When Bush signed the bill, DT applauded. Now they are changing their tune. The question is: why? I can think of two possible explanations. First, DT didn’t expect banks to actually use their product. These seems strange if DT had actually read the bill before they applauded its passage. Second, DT is using a bait and switch approach to making money. Once banks were required to image checks, DT saw a virtual pot of gold in suing banks for doing anything with those imaged checks. This practice clearly contrary to the intent of the bill, and beacons patent reform in the worst way. This really makes DT look like a couple of guys out to do whatever necessary to make a buck. Which I’m beginning to believe more and more.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6202145579049276235.post-628072176335700862008-04-14T11:59:00.000-04:002008-04-14T11:59:00.000-04:00Targeting terror dollarsApril 14, 2008 By Asa Hutc...Targeting terror dollars<BR/><BR/><BR/>April 14, 2008 <BR/><BR/><BR/>By Asa Hutchinson - The tragic repercussions of Sept. 11 continue to cascade down to every corner of the country as we continue to strengthen our borders, transportation networks, critical infrastructure and intelligence. As we continue to strengthen our homeland security, though, we cannot fail to shore up our nation's financial infrastructures. <BR/><BR/>Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda leaders have repeatedly implored terrorists to hit targets that will adversely impact the American economy. The decision to attack the World Trade Center was meant to send a message regarding our economic security in the same way the decision to hit the Pentagon was meant to send a message about our military security. Consider this: While America was still in shock from the attacks on Sept. 11, the Federal Reserve was forced to spring into action to prevent the disaster from crippling our financial institutions. <BR/><BR/>Prior to September 2001, our financial system used commercial transportation to move cleared checks across the country from where they were redeemed to where the money was deposited. Immediately following the Sept. 11 attacks, airplanes across the country were grounded, leaving passengers — as well as the shipments of checks representing billions — far from their destinations. While this was certainly a troubling experience for stranded passengers, it also created a liquidity crisis for banks — and for our economy. <BR/><BR/>It is estimated that for every day the checks sat on the runway after Sept. 11, some $2 billion in funds given out by banks could not be reimbursed by the depositing bank. As a result, the Federal Reserve — as it had done in 1987 — was forced to inject liquidity into the financial system to avoid a total economic collapse. <BR/><BR/>In response, Congress passed the Check 21 Act in 2004 with the intent for banks to transfer digital images of checks instead of continuing to use the more vulnerable transportation system. Along with modernizing our country's financial systems, the law increased national security by insulating fund transfers from the catastrophic terrorist attacks witnessed on Sept. 11. <BR/><BR/>End of story? Not exactly. Now those banks that complied with congressional intent are facing lawsuits from a company claiming that they have infringed on its patents for the electronic transfer of checks. The company, Data Treasury, is suing the banks over alleged patent infringement, creating a roadblock to the implementation by banks of Check 21 and its strong public-policy goals. <BR/><BR/>Let's be clear: A company should be compensated for a competitor's infringement on its patents. The question, however, is whether Data Treasury has valid patents for having laid claim to commonly used processing methods that banks, financial institutions and others had been using for years. <BR/><BR/>The claim of the patent holder in this case, compared to the national-security needs of the nation, is further undermined when it becomes clear that the company in question neither invents new products nor sells them. To quote the New York Times, this is a company "whose only business, other than one client, appears to be suing other companies." ("Small Company is Specializing in Suing Banks," New York Times, Dec. 24, 2004) One issue that rises above the validity of the patents is the role of the federal government in prompting the private sector to take certain actions. When the government dictates to the private sector, inevitably the latter faces certain costs. This is why government interference in the private sector should be done with extreme caution. <BR/><BR/>In this case, due caution was given, but the enormous responsibility for the safety and security of American citizens outweighed the specific and narrowly tailored costs to the private sector. <BR/><BR/>To address this unintended obstacle to realizing its intent, the Senate Judiciary Committee introduced bipartisan legislation that passed unanimously last summer. The legislation would protect the financial system, respect legitimate intellectual property rights and prevent frivolous lawsuits by clarifying the regulation for the financial system, for national security purposes, to efficiently process checks and transfer funds. <BR/><BR/>As patent-reform legislation heads to the full Senate for a vote, it's critical this legislation be included. Speedy passage will ensure that we close critical gaps in our nation's financial security that should have been addressed years ago. <BR/><BR/>Asa Hutchinson, a former undersecretary at the Department of Homeland Security, is CEO of the Hutchinson Group and a partner in the Venable law firm.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com