Blackboard patents the LMS?
Posted by Greg on 02 Aug 2006 at 12:38 pm | Tagged as: learning management systems, lms, planetosl
Thanks to krimsly for passing this little tidbit along: http://mfeldstein.com/index.php/weblog/permalink/blackboard_patents_the_lms
Err … wot? Almost every system I’ve built or run for the past decade probably violates that patent. I was running distance ed courses on a FirstClass server for the State of Oregon in 1994. Prior to that, we had been running a text menu-based system on EIES2 for several years before migrating to FirstClass. I think I saw a post somewhere once about a mainframe/terminal distance ed system back in the late 60’s. Their claim, filed in 1999, is (if you’ll pardon the pun) patently ridiculous. In an interview with the Chronicle of Higher Education, Matthew Small, senior vice president and general counsel for Blackboard stated:
He [Small] said many e-learning companies could operate without infringing on the patent, though he declined to provide any examples. However, he also said that had Blackboard not merged with WebCT, then WebCT would have been infringing the patent.
I am certainly not a lawyer, but couldn’t WebCT itself be considered “prior art”? The WebCT product was developed in 1995-1996 and the WebCT corporation was spun off from the University of British Columbia in 1997. Mr. Small’s own quote identifies a product that existed commercially two years before they filed for the patent.
Apparently the lawsuits started before the ink was even dry on the USPTO documents: http://www.theinquirer.net/images/articles/blackboard.pdf
Demanding a jury trial in rural east Texas for a software technology patent infringement lawsuit? Come on, now.
So…does this extend to Arpanet as well?
This didn’t really work out so well for SCO. I’m doubting it’ll do very well for BB either.
Indeed. It can only end badly for BB. Why just be evil when one can be stupid and evil?
This is simply too outrageous to believe. I hope it has reverse public relation consequences for BB and ends up in mass defects from BB & WebCT to Moodle, Sakai and other open source CMS solutions. It will be hard for them to fight everyone if they don’t have the deep pockets they are building mostly from taxpayers. I am upset that Oregon continues to pour taxpayer money down the drain for inferior products because administration is not aware enough of recent advances in the quality of open source CMS solutions. And then BB wants to stifle or kill any ogg any competition, possibly including open source.
I am upset that Oregon continues to pour taxpayer money down the drain for inferior products because administration is not aware enough of recent advances in the quality of open source CMS solutions.
Thank you for posting, Greg. You’ll be happy to hear that OSU OSL and the Oregon Department of Education is currently working on an open source-based statewide K-12 distance learning system: the Oregon Virtual School District. I’m the lead developer on the project. One of the goals of the project is to put together a suite of tools that will enable educators anywhere in the K-20 spectrum to deliver online courses and bring online course materials into the classroom. To accomplish that goal in a cost-effective manner, we have made a conscious decision to use open source and free software: Apache, MySQL, Asterisk, Moodle, Drupal, Sakai, etc.
As a taxpayer, I feel this is the best possible use of our public dollars. As a public employee, I feel every system I develop while being paid using public money should be in the public domain and therefore be free and open. As an open source evangelist, I feel good that I’m helping bring open source into the public sector.
This is outrageous - this is where Patents are counter-productive and anti-innovation. I am sure there will be someone to appeal for a review, because this is an unteneable patent anyway.
I certainly hope this “someone” fellow has some deep pockets. I expect Blackboard will make it a very long and expensive fight.