Comments for IPcopy http://ipcopy.wordpress.com IP news, views & trivia Fri, 24 May 2013 13:46:28 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ Comment on Kim Dotcom and the Two-Factor Authentication patent: Inventor or not? by RC http://ipcopy.wordpress.com/2013/05/23/kim-dotcom-and-the-two-factor-authentication-patent-inventor-or-not/comment-page-1/#comment-2303 Fri, 24 May 2013 13:46:28 +0000 http://ipcopy.wordpress.com/?p=1304#comment-2303 An interesting aspect is that, contrary to what he claims, Mr. Dotcom clearly didn’t start pondering just now the idea of suing everybody in sight with that patent. Looking in the opposition file, Dotcom’s patent attorneys asked for the proceedings to be accelerated already in January 2010 because, according to them, “the patentee is considering legal enforcement of his US patent”. It’s here, in German:
https://register.epo.org/espacenet/application?documentId=EPV3JPRS0966J10&number=EP98100688&lng=en&npl=false

So, the “evil Yanks made me do it” defence doesn’t hold. Also, if he can’t afford to pay his defence in the criminal proceedings against him, it seems a little strange to threaten with patent litigation, which is a far more expensive game for everyone involved…

]]> Comment on Kim Dotcom and the Two-Factor Authentication patent: Inventor or not? by Does Kim Dotcom have original ‘two-factor’ login patent? « Technology News http://ipcopy.wordpress.com/2013/05/23/kim-dotcom-and-the-two-factor-authentication-patent-inventor-or-not/comment-page-1/#comment-2302 Fri, 24 May 2013 12:41:04 +0000 http://ipcopy.wordpress.com/?p=1304#comment-2302 […] Emily Weal during a IPCopy site points out […]

]]> Comment on Kim Dotcom and the Two-Factor Authentication patent: Inventor or not? by Kim Dotcom claims he invented two-factor authentication—but he wasn’t first | Padroni http://ipcopy.wordpress.com/2013/05/23/kim-dotcom-and-the-two-factor-authentication-patent-inventor-or-not/comment-page-1/#comment-2292 Thu, 23 May 2013 18:01:54 +0000 http://ipcopy.wordpress.com/?p=1304#comment-2292 […] Dotcom does have a US patent (using his original name of Kim Schmitz) on two-factor authentication, filed in 1998 and granted in 2000. He also used to have an equivalent patent in Europe. But Dotcom’s European patent was revoked in 2011 largely because AT&T had a patent on the same technology with a priority date from 1995. (Thanks to Emily Weal of patent law firm Keltie for pointing out Dotcom’s European patent travails in the IP Copy blog.) […]

]]> Comment on Kim Dotcom and the Two-Factor Authentication patent: Inventor or not? by Kim Dotcom claims he invented two-factor authentication—but he wasn’t first | http://ipcopy.wordpress.com/2013/05/23/kim-dotcom-and-the-two-factor-authentication-patent-inventor-or-not/comment-page-1/#comment-2291 Thu, 23 May 2013 16:37:00 +0000 http://ipcopy.wordpress.com/?p=1304#comment-2291 […] Dotcom does have a US patent (using his original name of Kim Schmitz) on two-factor authentication, filed in 1998 and granted in 2000. He also used to have an equivalent patent in Europe. But Dotcom’s European patent was revoked in 2011 largely because AT&T had a patent on the same technology with a priority date from 1995. (Thanks to Emily Weal of patent law firm Keltie for pointing out Dotcom’s European patent travails in the IP Copy blog.) […]

]]> Comment on Kim Dotcom and the Two-Factor Authentication patent: Inventor or not? by Kim Dotcom claims he invented two-factor authentication—but he wasn’t first | Inter Trust Service http://ipcopy.wordpress.com/2013/05/23/kim-dotcom-and-the-two-factor-authentication-patent-inventor-or-not/comment-page-1/#comment-2290 Thu, 23 May 2013 16:31:28 +0000 http://ipcopy.wordpress.com/?p=1304#comment-2290 […] Dotcom does have a US patent (using his original name of Kim Schmitz) on two-factor authentication, filed in 1998 and granted in 2000. He also used to have an equivalent patent in Europe. But Dotcom’s European patent was revoked in 2011 largely because AT&T had a patent on the same technology with a priority date from 1995. (Thanks to Emily Weal of patent law firm Keltie for pointing out Dotcom’s European patent travails in the IP Copy blog.) […]

]]> Comment on Kim Dotcom and the Two-Factor Authentication patent: Inventor or not? by Kim Dotcom claims he invented two-factor authentication—but he wasn’t first | Blog Post Directory http://ipcopy.wordpress.com/2013/05/23/kim-dotcom-and-the-two-factor-authentication-patent-inventor-or-not/comment-page-1/#comment-2287 Thu, 23 May 2013 16:05:13 +0000 http://ipcopy.wordpress.com/?p=1304#comment-2287 […] Dotcom does have a US patent (using his original name of Kim Schmitz) on two-factor authentication, filed in 1998 and granted in 2000. He also used to have an equivalent patent in Europe. But Dotcom’s European patent was revoked in 2011 largely because AT&T had a patent on the same technology with a priority date from 1995. (Thanks to Emily Weal of patent law firm Keltie for pointing out Dotcom’s European patent travails in the IP Copy blog.) […]

]]> Comment on Unitary Patent Package – Final texts by Unitary Patent Court Agreement – now with Contents section « IPcopy http://ipcopy.wordpress.com/2013/01/17/unitary-patent-package-final-texts/comment-page-1/#comment-2271 Wed, 22 May 2013 12:56:50 +0000 http://ipcopy.wordpress.com/?p=603#comment-2271 […] Agreement on a Unified Patent Court has been available for some time now (and can be found here). One thing that’s struck me as slightly odd is that the text of the agreement doesn’t […]

]]> Comment on The UK Patent Box – Reducing corporation tax by I feel the need, the need for speed – accelerated prosecution in the UK « IPcopy http://ipcopy.wordpress.com/2013/01/11/the-uk-patent-box-reducing-corporation-tax/comment-page-1/#comment-2264 Tue, 21 May 2013 08:48:50 +0000 http://ipcopy.wordpress.com/?p=542#comment-2264 […] reason why the superfast service may be of benefit, is for businesses to take adavatage of the UK patent box . The quicker a granted patent can be obtained, the earlier a business can theoretically take […]

]]> Comment on IP Hit or Miss? Armageddon – Science Miss but IP Hit? by Anonymous http://ipcopy.wordpress.com/2013/05/17/ip-hit-or-miss-armageddon-science-miss-but-ip-hit/comment-page-1/#comment-2257 Mon, 20 May 2013 09:23:25 +0000 http://ipcopy.wordpress.com/?p=1176#comment-2257 An additional issue is the fact that Thorton and Issacs’s characters have brought Stamper in to help them make the machine work. Evidently they were unable to acheive this on the basis of the disclosure of the patent in combination with their common general knowledge, so it sounds like his patent might have been invalid anyway.

]]> Comment on IP – Hit or Miss? Why Tony Stark might want to reconsider Pepper Potts as CEO by IP Hit or Miss? Armageddon – Science Miss but IP Hit? « IPcopy http://ipcopy.wordpress.com/2013/04/26/ip-hit-or-miss-why-tony-stark-might-want-to-reconsider-pepper-potts-as-ceo/comment-page-1/#comment-2245 Fri, 17 May 2013 14:38:55 +0000 http://ipcopy.wordpress.com/?p=187#comment-2245 […] IP – Hit or Miss? Why Tony Stark might want to reconsider Pepper Potts as CEO April 26, 2013 […]

]]>