Patent Office Rejects Blackboard E-Learning Patent One Month After It Wins Lawsuit
from the interesting-timing dept
One of the more annoying things in patent lawsuits is watching the USPTO reject patents soon after a lawsuit concludes -- and having the judges in those lawsuits refuse to wait for the USPTO to weigh in. This is especially troublesome considering that so many patent re-exams result in rejected claims. It would only make sense for judges to wait until the Patent Office has had a chance to review the patent. As if to highlight that, late last week, the USPTO rejected all claims on a rather infamous "e-learning" patent held by Blackboard Inc. This comes just slightly over a month after Blackboard won a lawsuit using that very patent. It was known during the trial that the Patent Office had agreed to review it, but apparently, the judge didn't want to wait.Of course, Blackboard quickly came out with a statement saying this doesn't matter, it's already won the case, and it still expects an injunction to be issued preventing Desire2Learn from offering e-learning software. Blackboard is correct that this is just an initial rejection (meaning there are still responses and additional rounds to go), but it still seems rather weak to put out a statement saying that everyone should just ignore the rather significant questions the USPTO has just raised about the patent in question.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: e-learning, patent, rejection, uspto
Companies: blackboard, desire2learn, uspto
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
What happens to D2L?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What happens to D2L?
Personally, I think the original Judge in the case needs to be censured to ensure he/she doesn't allow something like this to happen again. If the facts are under contention, there is no valid reason for a case to continue.
EtG
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: What happens to D2L?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What about the judge?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What about the judge?
In this case the 'standard legal procedure' or whatever it is called should have been to recess the court until the Patent Office had reviewed the patent.
But what about other cases? There *are* some rulings that were 100% legal and right AT THE TIME of the ruling (this ruling was 100% legal, and not right) but now a days would be outright wrong.
Easy examples involve most civil liberties of anyone who is not a white male in the US. The technological examples are harder to find, but do exist.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: What about the judge?
What the heck is that suppose to mean? Don't through that out without proof or at the very least examples either way.
I am a white male and I know for a fact I do not get any favortism because of that. If anything I get penalized because of that. I.E. all the special business loans, student grants or loans and so on if you are a minority or female or both. Just wondering how is that not discriminatory?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: What about the judge?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No doubt...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
My comment was perfectly cromulant...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ignorance is no excuse
All it takes is one infringed claim for D2L to be hung. And the reality is that the USPTO routinely lobs hot cases into the appeals system to avoid being left in the hot seat. This does not mean that the patent is invalid and there is a 90% chance that all or part of the patent will be upheld.
Desire to Learn (D2L) is in my opinion another example of a Canadian company pirating American patent properties. They are taking jobs, tax base, and prosperity which belong to our people.
They remind me of a couple of other Canadian companies, namely RIM and Bodog, both of who have been caught with their sticky fingers in American company's patent cookie jars. Both have had those sticky fingers smashed by the courts.
That said, there are many legitimate Canadian companies who are true innovators and who do profit from America's patent system, a system which is widely recognized as the best in the world.
Ronald J. Riley,
Speaking only on my own behalf.
Affiliations:
President - www.PIAUSA.org - RJR at PIAUSA.org
Executive Director - www.InventorEd.org - RJR at InvEd.org
Senior Fellow - www.patentPolicy.org
President - Alliance for American Innovation
Caretaker of Intellectual Property Creators on behalf of deceased founder Paul Heckel
Washington, DC
Direct (202) 318-1595 - 9 am to 9 pm EST.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Ignorance is no excuse
Where do you come up with this crap ?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Ignorance is no excuse
Ronald, I have. And I've even pointed you to the research where you too might learn about the patent system.
Unfortunately for all of us, it appears that you've found a way to profit off of the existing broken system and have no interest in learning how it can be made much better for inventors and innovation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The “Little Person Syndrome”
My BS is based on in depth knowledge of how the patent system works from the perspective of independent inventors. It is unfortunate that inventors must suffer at the hands of intellectual property thieves and ignorant fools. It is also a shame that TechDIRT seems to have a disproportionate share of the latter and that the problem is driven from the top down.
Members of TechDIRT remind me of people on the public dole who come to have an entitlement mentality. Except in this case we have a bunch of people who are always late to the inventing party who think they should be able to take the fruits of other’s creativity and who rationalize that they are just as creative as the person who was there first. Personally I think it is a shame that many TechDIRT members wallow in self pity when they should be striving to become the FIRST to invent.
I have long referred to this affliction as the “Little Person Syndrome”. Not physically little, just mentally too lazy to invest the effort to succeed and temperamentally prone to resent those who are willing to actually accomplish something.
Ronald J. Riley,
Speaking only on my own behalf.
Affiliations:
President - www.PIAUSA.org - RJR at PIAUSA.org
Executive Director - www.InventorEd.org - RJR at InvEd.org
Senior Fellow - www.patentPolicy.org
President - Alliance for American Innovation
Caretaker of Intellectual Property Creators on behalf of deceased founder Paul Heckel
Washington, DC
Direct (202) 318-1595 - 9 am to 9 pm EST.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The �Little Person Syndrome�
You could have fooled us. And William Scott seems to indicate that you're abusing the system yourself to make money, not to help "independent inventors."
Members of TechDIRT remind me of people on the public dole who come to have an entitlement mentality.
Except that you're the one demanding a gov't handout in the form of a monopoly. We're the ones saying let the market decide. Which one seems more like an entitlement mentality?
Personally I think it is a shame that many TechDIRT members wallow in self pity when they should be striving to become the FIRST to invent.
Ronald, as a supposed (though, self-declared) "expert" on the patent system, I'm surprised at the above comment. After all, the patent system is not at all designed to protect those who were first to invent. It's designed to promote the progress. If the "first" to invent invents something that is obvious or hoards that invention and does not allow progress to be promoted, wouldn't you think that goes against the purpose of the patent system?
Not physically little, just mentally too lazy to invest the effort to succeed and temperamentally prone to resent those who are willing to actually accomplish something.
Ah, when in doubt, Ronald falls back on insults. Anyone who disagrees with him (even those with evidence and proof on their sides) must be unable to accomplish anything.
However, from the reports out there, it's unclear what you've accomplished, while many of us here have accomplished a great deal -- including building up large and successful companies.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Judge wait for the US Patent Office ... for up to
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Response to Ronald J. Riley
Who is Ronald J. Riley? He is a self-proclaimed "expert" on patent law without any university training in the legalities of this field. He is not a Ph.D. on intellectual property rights and is not part of any effective lobbying group that could seriously lead to change. Ronald J. Riley has created several inventor related organizations with several websites and has appointed himself "President" and "Director" of these little known groups. If anyone is seriously looking for legal advice on patent law or the USPTO, you should consult with a qualified legal professional. Ronald J. Riley may have read a couple of books about patent law, but he is not an attorney or anyone to be taken seriously on these matters.
The question is: how much money has he collected from unsuspecting "inventors" who believe what he says? Riley has never licensed a patent, has never made a dime in royalties and his organizations offer no financial assistance to inventors who truly have cutting edge intellectual property.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Blackboard Lawsuits?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]