Who?

Right.

Taurus is the Wisconsin affiliate of Texas-based Plutus IP LLC.

Who?

Right again, because they don’t make anything but lawsuits.

CNNMoney sums them up beautifully:

The group’s very name — Plutus is the mythical Greek god of wealth — evokes the riches that are stake in a business that wrings revenue from patent portfolios via licensing deals and settlements, usually achieved by threatening or filing lawsuits.

Here’s the way it works: A law firm buys up unused patents on the cheap, sits on them until somebody makes something similar, sues them, settles for a million or so, goes on to the next litigation. Nice little racket, huh?

Often these patents are arguably "low-quality" or "obvious" and as such, won’t hold up in court, but large companies, such as the four mentioned above are willing to settle for a small amount to save on legal costs.

The suit comes at an interesting time as the House of Representatives is expected to vote soon on the Patent Reform Act, proposed to address overly-litigious patent farmers.

Interestingly, most of the lawsuits are filed in patent-suit friendly, Marshall, Texas, says the Coalition for Patent Fairness, which counts Google, eBay, and Microsoft among its members.

According to the website:

The number of companies caught up in patent litigation is large and growing: for example, the 218 infringement actions filed in Marshall, Texas, during the 28 months from January 2004 through April 2006 named 856 defendants, including more than 600 separate companies (some companies were named in more than one action).

Earlier this week, Google expressed why patent reform was important on its Public Policy blog:

Low-quality patents and escalating legal costs are currently hurting the ability of U.S. companies to compete globally, and that in turn hurts U.S. workers and consumers. Without a modernized patent system, U.S. companies are at a competitive disadvantage, spending resources on unnecessary litigation and unwarranted licensing instead of on innovation.

The Internet company late Monday began incorporating street-level photos from Los Angeles, San Diego and some Orange County cities into its Google Maps program. The additions expanded an online service that thrilled some digital-map buffs and freaked out privacy advocates when it launched in May in the San Francisco Bay Area, New York and three other cities.

Many privacy advocates have called for Google to blur out the faces of anyone caught in one of their photos. But what if someone tried to teach Google a lesson?

I’d like to see someone file a copyright suit for use of their face without their permission. Think about it. Google is taking your photo without permission – ok, so it’s in a public place – and then using that image commercially. In other words, they’re using your face to make money.

Google’s been subject to all manner of strange law suits. It would be interesting to see if someone files one for facial copyright infringement.

Comments

In FragranceNet.com Inc. v. FragranceX.com Inc., something about the plaintiff’s argument that a keyword ad is a trademark infringement didn’t smell right to the judge.

Sorry. Had to get it out. I odor know better. (I said it be free of legalese, not horrible puns.)

The judge in that case, along with others in the Second Circuit have been ruling against or overturning previous rulings that bidding on competitor keywords is an infringement.

In the Fragrance v. Fragrance suit, the judge disagreed that a keyword ad was "use in commerce," primarily because the support for that argument stood upon whether or not a company was passing off a competitor’s product as its own and whether a trademark gave a company the right to exist in isolation to avoid confusion.

Simpler, to paraphrase the judge: If you ask for a Coke and they bring you a menu of competing colas, that is offering a choice of drinks, not giving Pepsi and saying it’s Coke; If Burger King opens a store next to McDonald’s, it is competing for McDonald’s business, not pretending to be McDonald’s.

And so it goes with sponsored ads, says the judge.  

A legal system once tentative about taking on digital cases is braving the waters with more frequency. Most of the cases we’ve reported on have involved the statements of anonymous commentators, liability for which webmasters and bloggers have been repeatedly exonerated (or are expected to be). But these are different.

Banks v. Milum – Georgia

"Rafe Banks will never make one single move against me or this website because he knows that we have the witnesses to prove that he carried these drug dealer payoffs to [a] judge."

Those are the now famous last words of David Milum, of Forsyth County, Georgia, who owes Mr. Banks, Milum’s former attorney, $50,000 in compensatory damages. The first case the Media Law Resource Center is aware of that has actually saddled a webmaster with liability.

Milum was disappointed (to put it lightly) with Banks’ handling of his DUI case and fired Banks. When Banks refused to pay back the $3,000 retainer, Milum repeatedly accused Banks of bribing judges on behalf of drug dealers.

Milum couldn’t produce the witnesses he mentioned above.

Barrett-Jackson Auction Company, LLC v. ThumbCo – Arizona

David Clabuesch, a Michigan judge, was hoping his 1970 Hemi Barracuda would fetch upwards of a million dollars at an Arizona muscle car auction. When the car sold for just $300,000, Clabuesch wasn’t happy.

When I say he wasn’t happy, I mean that he chained the wheels after the auction, put up a sign that saying the sale was void, and accused the auctioneer of quick-gaveling the sale.

Though Clabeusch didn’t actually post anything on line (from what I gather), chat rooms and blogs had a field day talking about the auction. As such, Phoenix-based Barrett-Jackson sued Clabeusch on the grounds that his claims were damaging the company’s reputation.

Judge Clabuesch is preparing a lawsuit of his own.

Yoon v. Carney – California

ACLU activist Joanne Yoon’s job was, basically, to keep a close eye on the San Diego Minutemen while they held their rallies. The San Diego Minutemen don’t like her much. In fact, they’re kind of mean.

Through mass-circulated emails and blog posts, members of the Minutemen group, who’ve taken the responsibility upon themselves to monitor the US’s border with Mexico, called Yoon an "anorexic ACLU slut" and "a skank" who sleeps with "those little brown Border Hoppers" daily.

If untrue, those statements jump the line of opinion, and land square in the realm of libel.

Crusaders against the video game industry have based their platform on the assertion that titles such as those from the Grand Theft Auto franchise directly contribute to violent behavior in children that play them. Jack Thompson is one of the most vocal proponents of the anti-GTA camp and has filed numerous lawsuits against Take Two, the distributor of the franchise, in order to prevent the games from being released.

Ars Technica’s Nate Anderson chronicles the history of litigation between Thompson and Take Two:

Thompson has, in the past, "brought suit on behalf of the State of Florida, dismissed it, filed again, sought a temporary restraining order, and then failed to pursue that motion," says the complaint. Such lawsuits come at "unpredictable times and under unpredictable circumstances" and can disrupt Take Two’s relationships with retailers, who can also get dragged into these battles (Thompson at one point sued Best Buy, Wal-Mart, Target, GameStop, and others in the battle over Bully).

As a result, Take Two is as mad as hell, and they aren’t going to take it anymore.

In an attempt to cut of Thompson at the pass, Take Two has taken the initiative and filed a lawsuit of their own this time, citing that the game crusader has blatantly misused Florida’s “nuisance” laws to further his own anti-game agenda; efforts which, incidentally, have proven fruitless thus far.

As one would expect, Thompson wasted no time in responding to the suit. Here’s an excerpt from the rebuttal statement he made to Ken Fisher:

This lawsuit, filed in US District Court for the Southern District of Florida, is, without a doubt, the single dumbest thing I have ever seen any lawyers do in my thirty years of practicing law–while in continuous good standing to do so with The Florida Bar, I might add, the shock radio and video game industry’s efforts notwithstanding.

Thompson goes on to express unwavering confidence that he has the upper hand in this situation, and will lower the boom on Take Two when he files his legal response against the distributor this week.

In a legal whirlwind between the parties that has no apparent end in site, I’m forced to conclude that the only real winners that will emerge from the dust are the lawyers, who are no doubt salivating at the seemingly endless streams of legal fees pouring into their wallets.

The three-time all star for the Cleveland Cavaliers announced on Monday that he would be participating in a venture from MSN that will portray the basketball phenom’s journey from humble beginnings to athletic fame and fortune, all in a storybook format geared toward children and teens.

LeBron.msn.com will give people the opportunity to explore LeBron’s road to athletic achievement, his dedication to basketball and academics, his devotion to his team, friends and family, and his role as a community activist and people’s champion. The site includes interactive content, including a blog, that will provide fans with the opportunity to share his experiences and encouraging messages to users all across the world.

“I’ve always wanted to have a place where kids can see all aspects of my personality — where I can really talk with them about where I came from, what I do and how I achieve my goals,” James said.

“Working with MSN on LeBron.msn.com allows all my fans across the globe to share in my journey. My goal is to inspire people to achieve their goals and be part of something bigger than themselves.”

“LeBron is one of the great icons in American sports today. His commitment to his sport, community and fans is truly inspiring, and this collaboration provides a fantastic opportunity for MSN customers,” said Joanne Bradford, corporate vice president of Microsoft Corp. and chief media officer of MSN.

“The rich networks of MSN and Windows Live will help LeBron advance his brand identity to collaborate and connect with millions of people around the globe in personalized and exciting ways.”

Add to Del.icio.us | Digg | Reddit | Furl

This means that if you post malicious or defaming information or write something of that nature about someone online that you can not be sued for it. Only the source of the defaming information can be at fault. For example, if someone in my comments posts something bad about George Bush I won’t get in trouble but the source could be tracked down and sued for defamation. Granted, that is an extreme case.

This move will help help to protect the freedom of speech online as well as ensure that companies like Amazon, AOL and Yahoo don’t get sued for libel for pointless things that they have no control over. It also protects blogger who reposts information that they received from a source or information they obtained by other means. They can’t directly be sued unless they are the direct source of the malicious information.

The decision was made in California Supreme Court and decided in the case of Rosenthal who was being sued for posting a piece to two newsgroups about a doctor and the defamation of his character through supposed health frauds. The lawsuit accuses Rosenthal of republishing the information after being warned it was untrue and defamatory. In reversing an appellate court’s decision, the state Supreme Court ruled that the Communications Decency Act of 1996 provides broad immunity from defamation lawsuits for people who publish information on the Internet that was gathered from another source.

Comments

Tag:

Add to Del.icio.us | Digg | Yahoo! My Web | Furl

Bookmark WebProNews:

Dustin Brewer is a web and graphic designer with a passionate interest
in everything that is technology. He currently is the webmaster and
editor for tech filter, a technology news web site, as well as a writer
for Gadgetell– a similar web site about technology news with a strong
focus on new gadgets.

It’s all good natured, of course. Or is it?

The proximate trigger for these reflections is the rough treatment that a summary of Andrew McAfee’s Harvard Business Review article Mastering the Three Worlds of Information Technology has gotten from the local heroes at Slashdot.

McAfee’s piece is one of those noble attempts to put a framework around enterprise information technology that goes beyond technology to show how IT fits within the broader landscape of organizations and to help non-technical managers understand how to apply it to the business. It is the kind of bridge-building effort that you would assume would be welcomed by the both sides of the corporate digital divide.

Not so, apparently. The Slashdoters were inflamed, offering such useful ripostes as “Lucky we have commentary Academe to put us people that actually work in IT onto the proper path. Possibly he would be equally open to our suggestions on how universities should operate” and “I am not the only ubergeek that thinks the IT people should be the high paid personnel and the management asshats should be the underpaid paper pushers that we all know they are. If I had a company all the managers would have to have undergrad degrees in CS or something before they were allowed to get their MBAs.” There were a lot more comments, most of them negative.

So much for detente. As fellow Enterprise Irregular Thomas Otter puts it:

There is something rather teenage about how software developers of a certain type react to those from outside the clique who dare stray on their turf, even unwittingly. They are mean, cutting, churlish, they think it is cool to be abusive and rude, but in fact, it is merely a poor guise for insecurity. I have lots of respect for people with deep technical prowess, but little respect for those that use that prowess to insult others.

The reasons for the resentment between the two camps (and frankly it comes mainly from the IT side) are not hard to guess. Suits make more money and can go further up within organizations. Many geeks are indeed brighter in pure IQ terms but they tend be smart in an abstract, mathematical, reclusive sort of way which, translated into corpspeak, means that have “poor people skills.” Not all, but many.

Can the geeks and suits ever get along? Sure, when utility computing becomes the norm and the geeks are working and competing with each other for promotions instead of accountants and marketers.

As for McAfee, the man who inadvertently started the latest saga in this never-ending war, he seems somewhat bemused:

I was eager to see what progress could be made around my ideas after they were put in front of the Slashdot community. And I’m sorry to learn that the answer is not much,’ apparently because the article’s ideas aren’t novel enough to merit consideration or debate. If that’s the case, I hope I’ve at least done the world’s IT professionals a service by writing something they can give to their colleagues on the business side to facilitate communications with them.

Comments

Tag:

Bookmark WebProNews:

Jerry Bowles has more than 30 years of varied experience as a writer, editor, marketing consultant, corporate communications director and blogger. For the past 20 years, he has produced and written special supplements on new technologies for a number of magazines, including Forbes, Fortune and Newsweek.

http://www.enterpriseweb2.com

This is NOT the YouTube generation. Although they sure talk about it and talk about MySpace (one speaker suggested that everyone should have a MySpace page for each of their products).

It’s interesting to see the difference between this audience and the folks who showed up at the Podcasting Expo last week. There was a lot more energy there. But a lot less money and power. This room reeks of power. That room reeked of creativity and fun.

I’m seeing this “geek vs. suits” separation more often lately.

Yesterday I went to lunch at a country club over on Sand Hill Road. They wouldn’t let me in because I was wearing jeans. “Excuse me?” I said in my head. After all, it was people in jeans (denim, they called it) who made the products and services that made all those VCs so rich that they could have a private club to hang out at and play golf at.

They made me sit outside for lunch. Which was just fine. My host (who helped fund the country club) and I had a good laugh about that.

It reminded me of the time when I worked the counter at LZ Premiums in San Jose. A guy came in with ratty jeans and a T-shirt. I treated him the same way I treated all the suits that came in. He noted that and bought a nice camera system. Later, after he kept coming back in and buying a lot of stuff, I learned he was worth hundreds of millions of dollars. Said that I was the first sales guy who treated him well, which is why he brought his business back to me.

Last night I saw it again. I wore my standard jeans and T-shirt to a press meeting hosted by Become.com (a cool shopping search engine, they released a research report that found that people liked their shopping search engine better than Google). Everyone else was dressed up.

I’m gonna put my jeans on and hang out with the geeks this weekend at Code-Camp in Silicon Valley. No Beck, but no suits either.

The real action in the valley is still with the folks who wear jeans and T-shirts. No matter how much all the suits try to avoid that.

When did Silicon Valley go all suity on me? It’s certainly a sign that we’re back in a bubble. In 2001 when everyone was unemployed I rarely saw suits. Now that the money is back I’m seeing a lot more suits.

Not a good sign.

Tag:

Add to Del.icio.us | Digg | Yahoo! My Web | Furl

Bookmark WebProNews:

Robert Scoble is the founder of the Scobleizer blog. He works as PodTech.net’s Vice President of Media Development.

Go to Scobleizer …

I know I have spent a fair amount of time (and money) shopping online, and usually, because of heavy advertising and branding, I choose a few recognizable retailers and go directly to their websites. But now I’m curious. I need a new suit for an upcoming meeting – so let’s see if any of those well-known retailers know how to get me through the virtual front door. I search for “women’s business suits” and “women’s suiting” on Google. To keep this study relatively simple, I only consider the top ten results for my searches.

For the term “women’s business suits” I get some recognizable name brands in the paid results, including Ann Taylor and Liz Claiborne. But on the natural side, I get some interesting results. The first natural listing for “women’s business suits” is www.vintagevixen.com, which seems to specialize in vintage clothing for women. Not what I am looking for when meeting potential clients. The second result seems to be a sort of online department store: www.nextag.com. Again, I am WAY to impatient to even physically shop in a department store; I’m not interested in shopping online in one either.

The rest of the results include information about how to shop for women’s business suits, and plenty of price comparison sites and such. Exploring the natural listings is like walking a shopping mall that’s missing the popular anchor stores. Not interested. Sorry. I apologize for the inability to widen my perspective on brands, but where are J.Crew, Banana Republic, and other mid-priced brands? I know I will like these suits, I know they fit me, and I know their quality.

Frustrated with these results, I search “women’s suiting” (Actually, I’m cheating because I know this is what J.Crew calls its women’s suits – I am testing them). Okay, they pass – J.Crew is the first natural result – although I am sure this has nothing to do with SEO. Looking down my list of natural results, I see JCPenny, Blue Fly (seller of overstocked and outdated designer threads), some comparison shopping sites, and a little further down the list, Target. My paid results include, who else but Ann Taylor – and another site called Ladies Church Suits.

Now, my only problem with this is that the term “women’s business suits” is searched almost 100% more often than “women’s suiting“!

Again, branding is an important consideration when speaking of online shopping sites, however, it’s not the complete picture. Many, many retail firms do have good branding and recognition within their industry, but also would like to increase their customer base. SEO can do this!

I am confident in J.Crew’s ability to increase its online recognition. After a quick analysis of J.Crew’s site, I find that basic, common knowledge SEO tips could help the situation. The site has technical issues that could hinder a proper site crawl, but I say there is potential. Regardless, my first suggestion would be a simple investigation into what keyword terms people are actually searching and go from there.

Until then J.Crew, please, please keep making jeans that fit me.

Add to Del.icio.us | DiggThis | Yahoo! My Web | Furl

Oneupweb is the only two-time winner of the ClickZ award for “Best Search Engine Engine Marketing Firm”. StraightUpSearchs blog authors include experts from Oneupwebs natural SEO, pay-per-click campaign management, research, marketing, design, and sales departments.