Why Software Patents Exist: Legal Fees

Grok Headline matches for Why Software Patents Exist: Legal Fees

Legal fees hit Microsoft

Legal fees hit Microsoft 04/25/2004 06:57 AM
Australian IT Apr 25 2004 11:12AM GMT

SCO sees loss on legal fees

SCO sees loss on legal fees 12/22/2003 10:16 AM
The controversial Unix software company reports a loss for its fourth quarter based largely on hefty legal expenses it has accrued in its intellectual property war against Linux.

SCO's legal fees eat up profits

SCO's legal fees eat up profits 12/23/2003 08:29 AM
ZDNet UK Dec 23 2003 7:52AM ET

Microsoft disputes Mass. legal fees

Microsoft disputes Mass. legal fees 03/15/2003 10:47 AM

Software patents are bad for coders like
literary patents would be for writers

Software patents are bad for coders like
literary patents would be for writers 06/22/2005 01:49 AM
Cory Doctorow: Richard Stallman, creator of the Free Software movement, has written a tremendous essay for the Guardian on the risks of software patents. Richard undertakes a gedankenexperiment about "literary patents" and the impact they would have had on Victor Hugo as he sat down to pen Les Miserables.

Now consider this hypothetical literary patent: Claim 1: a communication process that represents, in the mind of a reader, the concept of a character who has been in jail for a long time and subsequently changes his name...

These patents would all cover the story of one character in a novel. They overlap, but they do not precisely duplicate each other, so they could all be valid simultaneously - all the patent holders could have sued Victor Hugo. Any one of them could have prohibited publication of Les Misérables.

You might think these ideas are so simple that no patent office would have issued them. We programmers are often amazed by the simplicity of the ideas that real software patents cover - for instance, the European Patent Office has issued a patent on the progress bar, and one on accepting payment via credit cards. These would be laughable if they were not so dangerous.

Link (Thanks, Phil and Eloisa!)

Judge Cuts Legal Fees in Microsoft Suit

Judge Cuts Legal Fees in Microsoft Suit 09/18/2004 01:34 AM
NewsFactor Network Sep 18 2004 5:23AM GMT

Calif. court cuts Microsoft legal fees

Calif. court cuts Microsoft legal fees 09/17/2004 12:34 PM
CNET News.com Sep 17 2004 5:03PM GMT

Calif. Judge Cuts Microsoft Legal Fees

Calif. Judge Cuts Microsoft Legal Fees 09/17/2004 01:00 AM
Boston Globe Sep 17 2004 4:39AM GMT

Microsoft: Legal fees in class-action
suit too high

Microsoft: Legal fees in class-action
suit too high 05/13/2004 09:16 PM
CNET May 14 2004 1:21AM GMT

Microsoft Blames Anti-trust Legal Fees
for Price Increases

Microsoft Blames Anti-trust Legal Fees
for Price Increases 05/15/2004 09:57 AM
Slashdot May 15 2004 2:15PM GMT

Judge Cuts Legal Fees in Microsoft
Class-Action Suit

Judge Cuts Legal Fees in Microsoft
Class-Action Suit 09/18/2004 04:07 AM
Enterprise Windows I.T. Sep 18 2004 7:18AM GMT

"BAD DAY IN COURT FOR BARBRA: STREISAND
PRIVACY CASE REJECTED BY JUDGE; PHOTO
IMAGES OF HOUSE NOT VIOLATION , MUST PAY
LEGAL FEES..."

"BAD DAY IN COURT FOR BARBRA: STREISAND
PRIVACY CASE REJECTED BY JUDGE; PHOTO
IMAGES OF HOUSE NOT VIOLATION , MUST PAY
LEGAL FEES..." 12/05/2003 03:19 AM

BAD DAY IN COURT FOR BARBRA: STREISAND
PRIVACY CASE REJECTED BY JUDGE; PHOTO
IMAGES OF HOUSE NOT VIOLATION, MUST PAY
LEGAL FEES

BAD DAY IN COURT FOR BARBRA: STREISAND
PRIVACY CASE REJECTED BY JUDGE; PHOTO
IMAGES OF HOUSE NOT VIOLATION, MUST PAY
LEGAL FEES 12/04/2003 08:26 AM
Looky, see this picture .. the smoking gun .. justice

thesmokinggun.com/archive/babshouse1.html
track this site | 6 links

PeopleSoft to tweak software fees

PeopleSoft to tweak software fees 12/04/2003 09:38 AM
CNET Dec 4 2003 8:48AM ET

No EU Software Patents

No EU Software Patents 12/17/2004 06:33 PM

Munich, Germany (23 November 2004). The three most famous European authors of open-source software have issued an appeal against software patents on NoSoftwarePatents.com. Linus Torvalds (Linux), Michael Widenius (MySQL) and Rasmus Lerdorf (PHP) urge the EU Council, which will convene later in the week, not to adopt a draft directive on software patents that they consider "deceptive, dangerous, and democratically illegitimate". They also call on the Internet community to express solidarity by placing NoSoftwarePatents.com links and banners on many Web sites.

It would be nice if someone with some serious design credentials would knock up some more aesthetically pleasing banners.

Software Patents Out, For Now

Software Patents Out, For Now 02/05/2005 09:46 PM
Patent legislation is one step further away from being passed in the European Union today. The Legal "Affairs Committee (JURI) said that the commission should re-submit the controversial directive. The Computer Implemented Inventions Directive" failed to receive backing from the government's elected MEP's.

The <a href="http://www.ffii.org/index.orig.en.html">FFII</a& gt;, a EU pressure group, described the decision as "a powerful statement from MEPs that the current Council text, and the logjam of concern it has caused, is simply not a sustainable way forward." FFII board member Jonas Maebe went on to say "The Commissioner can jumpstart the constructive dialogue by submitting a new and more balanced proposal to the European Parliament this time. By taking into account the countless new facts that have surfaced since the start of this procedure in 2002, the Commission has a great opportunity to reinvigorate the Lisbon strategy."

Poland had previously blocked the directive from coming in to being. It's opposed by groups who want to keep the EU free of copyrights on software, something common to the USA. They argue that rather than helping businesses protect their intellectual property, they act to stifle innovation. Supporters of the directive argue that EU legislation on copyrights is out dated and needs bringing into line with the US system.

The road ahead is un-clear; the commission has a variety of options that it can pursue. The most likely outcome with be a re-evaluation in a few months time. Critics of the directive say the extra time will allow countries more debate over the issue and give them another chance to fully assess its implications.

View: Previous coverage | FFII

Read full story...

EU Moves Toward Software Patents

EU Moves Toward Software Patents 05/07/2004 08:29 PM

Software Patents Off The Agenda In The
EU

Software Patents Off The Agenda In The
EU 12/22/2004 01:16 AM
This isn't a huge surprise given events of the last month, but the question of software patents has been removed from the agenda of the latest EU Council meeting, at the request of the Polish representative. It sounds like, hopefully, this issue is dying out in the EU, though, it's likely that supporters will keep pushing for it next year.

Software patents under attack

Software patents under attack 07/05/2004 06:25 AM
EFF goes after ten most wanted

"Software patents under attack"

"Software patents under attack" 07/05/2004 02:40 PM

EU software patents: how the vote was
won

EU software patents: how the vote was
won 05/19/2004 05:53 AM
No hanging chads, but still a close call

U.S. to EU on software patents: "We sold
out, you should too"

U.S. to EU on software patents: "We sold
out, you should too" 06/09/2004 10:26 AM
European free software advocates, Green Party activists, Socialists, economists, small business owners, and other radicals are working to keep the European Union from instituting U.S.-style software patents. But don't give up hope. The U.S. government and some of the biggest U.S. software vendors are working to bring those backward Europeans into the modern world, where software development can eventually be limited to responsible companies instead of being done by any-old-body with a computer and a good idea.

RMS On How To Fight Software Patents

RMS On How To Fight Software Patents 09/11/2004 06:37 PM

Maybe Software Patents Won't Kill FOSS
After All

Maybe Software Patents Won't Kill FOSS
After All 07/26/2004 09:22 PM

EU gives green light to software patents

EU gives green light to software patents 03/14/2005 04:52 PM
Without a clear mandate from its members, and in the face of outright opposition from a few of them, the EU finally acts in the US software industry's best interests and pushes forward software patents.

Software patents 'threaten Linux'

Software patents 'threaten Linux' 01/23/2004 02:19 PM
Open source advocate Bruce Perens says the real threat to Linux is not from SCO, but from software patents.

EU Ministers Approve Software Patents

EU Ministers Approve Software Patents 05/18/2004 04:12 PM
In a move that is likely to cause a lot more harm than good, the European Council has approved a dreadful plan to allow for software patents. The language of the plan has apparently removed an amendment that would have made the idea more palatable to open source supporters. ZDNet UK has more details. It's not a done deal yet, as it still needs to be voted on by the European Parliament - but it will be much more difficult to change the policy now. This is, once again, a case of people making political decisions rather than ones that will generally help the economy. Software patents will only tie up the patent and legal system and will do plenty to slow down innovation, rather than speed it up. Being able to invent something and being able to successfully sell it to the market are two completely different things. By saying that only those who invent a concept are allowed to sell it to the market, they are slowing down the ability for companies to successfully get new, useful products to market. With software patents, this is especially troublesome because it's very difficult to determine what in the software is actually patentable and very broad concepts that should never be locked up under a government granted monopoly end up that way.

An Insider's View of Software Patents

An Insider's View of Software Patents 08/01/2004 08:02 PM

Germany to Vote Against Software Patents
in the EU

Germany to Vote Against Software Patents
in the EU 05/16/2004 02:22 AM

Software patents and rebel MEPs

Software patents and rebel MEPs 06/08/2004 06:04 AM
Letters Voting record doesn't follow party line

Creative Pressures id Software With
Patents

Creative Pressures id Software With
Patents 07/28/2004 11:26 AM

Battle brews over Web software patents

Battle brews over Web software patents 01/27/2003 11:05 PM
International Herald Tribune Jan 27 2003 9:31PM ET

NewsForge On U.S. Advice To EU On
Software Patents

NewsForge On U.S. Advice To EU On
Software Patents 06/09/2004 05:40 PM

PwC: software patents threat to Europe

PwC: software patents threat to Europe 09/15/2004 05:53 AM
Few prepared for consequences

How to fight software patents - singly
and together

How to fight software patents - singly
and together 09/09/2004 12:21 PM
Software patents are the software project equivalent of land mines: Each design decision carries a risk of stepping on a patent, which can destroy your project.

EU software patents directive delayed -
again

EU software patents directive delayed -
again 09/24/2004 05:47 AM
Less action, more talk

UK firm patents software downloads

UK firm patents software downloads 06/16/2004 03:56 AM
BTG in talks 'with several firms'

Patents Harming Software Innovation

Patents Harming Software Innovation 09/02/2004 11:47 AM
It appears that there's a common theme emerging from those who understand how the patent system works. Lots of people have said it before, but here's yet another opinion piece explaining how software patents are killing innovation, by making it nearly impossible to build any new software product, without a huge liability risk. It points out, again, that true innovation isn't in coming up with the idea, but the application of the idea. Limiting the application to a single company that claims they got their first kills off many creative approaches to innovation, slowing down innovation and harming the overall economy. What's scary is that, for all the talk explaining this problem, almost nothing is actually being done to reform the patent system in the right direction.

EU Software Patents Directive Delayed
Once More

EU Software Patents Directive Delayed
Once More 09/24/2004 04:17 PM
A controversial software directive in the EU has been delayed once more. Daniel Cohn-Bendit, co-president of the Greens/EFA Group, told ElectricNews that "Officially, the council has experienced translation difficulties with the new official languages of the EU. In reality this file is returning to Coreper in order to allow the technical discussions between experts from the member states to continue."

The patent directive, part of the Lisbon agenda, was initially intended to form part of a frame work to make the EU the most competitive economic zone in the world by 2010. Intended to "tidy up" the EU's messy patent laws, the directive has became twisted from its original form. In its previous state, it would have allowed patenting of software and algorithms. Proponents of the directive argue that this is necessary to protect both big and small companies from competitors stealing their IP.

However, many others argue that the directive would stifle competition and cause more problems than it solved. If allowed/enacted, the directive would bring the EU into line with the US where the practise has caused dismay amongst software developers. Amazon's patenting of "one-click" buying is often cited as a good example of why the legislation is a bad idea.

View: More @ ElectricNews

Read full story...
Grok Description matches for Why Software Patents Exist: Legal Fees
GrokA matches for Why Software Patents Exist: Legal Fees

RSS Ads - The Business Model for RSS

RSS Ads - The Business Model for RSS 01/26/2004 02:19 AM
RSS Ads - The Business Model for RSS .. RSSAds .. Quote

rssads.com
track this site | 4 links

Plaxo's business model

Plaxo's business model 05/24/2004 01:46 AM

Start-up Plaxo sketches out business plan [CNET News.com - The Net]

OK - so now we know.

Whenever I've received an invitation to join Plaxo or to update my profile info, I've used as an excuse - the nebulous answers that Plaxo has given in the past as to their business model.

Well I guess I'll have to find a different excuse now.

I actually like the business model - charge for more advanced features - but the only feature they mentioned in this article was "better customer support".  That actually sounds like a charge for support" business model.  HHmmm maybe they should talk to Dave Sifry about that.

But then again - they only want $20 a year.  Geesh.  It costs more to look at naked pictures.  I guess they think lots of people will sign-up - but if it's like any other service, they'll only convert 5%.

So what's 5% of 2M?  100k users.  Times $20 a year.  That $2M a year.

Geesh hasn't Plaxo raised like over $20M now - or something like that?

What's wrong with the math here?

Plaxo Business Model

Plaxo Business Model 05/24/2004 12:50 PM
Plaxo is out trying to explain they have a business model and are addressing privacy concerns. A premium service at $20/month that includes support and, well, what else they are not saying or don't know yet. Techdirt: They're basically saying...

Overstock's Business Model

Overstock's Business Model 02/17/2004 01:15 PM
How does the company make money selling books and CDs at cost?

Plaxo Does Have A Business Model... But
Not Really

Plaxo Does Have A Business Model... But
Not Really 05/24/2004 03:05 AM
I'll admit that I have not been kind to Plaxo in the past. Ever since the service was first announced, it sounded like a bubble era pointless dot com. There was a lot of hype about the young founder (previously founded Napster!) and the "service" itself didn't seem like much of a product. At most, it was a feature of a larger product, and that larger product might just turn out to be something like Microsoft Outlook. If the system was remotely useful, you would think that Microsoft would just build it in to Outlook. However, it didn't even seem that useful. If anything, I expected it to be annoying - and has it ever been annoying. I now block all Plaxo requests, but for a while, the amount of Plaxo spam was ridiculous. Then, of course, there's the privacy question. While Plaxo now goes to great lengths to swear up and down that they keep your info private, they don't seem to understand the real privacy complaint: when your friends give your address to some 3rd party service, are they violating your privacy? It's a question that's not entirely clear. In the meantime, this was all made worse by the fact that Plaxo still didn't have anything remotely resembling a business model (shades of the bubble era again...). Well, now they claim they've solved that issue, and have announced that their business model is a $20/year paid version for which you'll get such great features as... well, they actually don't seem to know yet. You will get better customer support though. It always worries me when companies decide that better customer support is a premium "feature," because they've just set up the incentives to mean that they give the absolute worst customer support to anyone not in that tier. This doesn't seem particularly compelling. They're basically saying their new business model is that they'll annoy me less if I pay? No thanks...

Into the valley of the Business Model -
yee shall go

Into the valley of the Business Model -
yee shall go 04/14/2005 03:33 PM

MeetUp is now charging for organizing MeetUps.

$19 a month. I wonder how they came up with that number?

Jason Lefkowitz reports his feelings on this.

One good thing they did - they put their faces next to what they describe as "the bad news". Me - I don't consider it bad news.

There's a time for every social experiment to grow up, smell the mustard and get real. MeetUp has - congreats!

"Business Model" Explained

"Business Model" Explained 06/24/2004 08:07 AM
Two companies might do the same thing, but with very different business models.

The Blogware business model

The Blogware business model 07/07/2004 02:41 AM

I've been trying to get to know Roland Tanglao and Boris Mann and their company Streamline. Here's an interesting post I found on Roland's blog about Blogware's business model..

Here's Roland......

A must read for prospective Blogware resellers and for bloggers and people who don't understand why Blogware is not being heavily promoted by Tucows. Summary: it's all about the resellers. Resellers made Tucows #2 in domain registration and similarly resellers will make Blogware a big player in the hosted blog space.



From An Open Letter to Blog Sceptic:

QUOTE

5/3/2/1. Ditch the resellers/launch a hosted version/offer to specific verticals/promote it...

Never gonna happen.

Here's why: Internet services providers represent the most powerful distribution channel on the internet. No single company can compete with the marketing muscle of 30,000 ISPs** who sit right in front of end-users and assist them in making critical technology choices and guide them as they dive into the internet - usually for the first time. No other channel can put you in front of individuals and the Fortune 500 simultaneously and no channel can better address the fickle needs of their local markets in a more appropriate fashion.

To get a better sense of this, take a look at our track record with domain names. In 1997, we were (according to the most liberal definitions) #85 in the domain name registration market. Today we are solidly #2 and we've been there for a couple of years. How did we get here? We dealt exclusively with internet services providers to the exclusion of all other market opportunities and we nailed their service requirements. By choosing and sticking to our distribution model very early in the game (some would argue that it chose us) we were able to focus on very specific attributes of our products and processes and build some truly excellent structures around everything. In other words, because we weren't trying to be all things to all customers, we were able to do some very amazing things with some very specific customer segments. And they responded in spades.

Our resellers kick serious a*s in the market place. This because the Tucows way of doing things gives them  the luxury of being able to focus on very specific and important things. Think of every other blogging company out there. They each have to a) be technical experts, b) be sales experts and c) be marketing experts just to one unit to a customer. Now take a look at the symbiotic nature of the relationship between Tucows and its direct customers. Our resellers have to be sales & marketing experts and develop strong customer service skills and Tucows has to focus on maintaining world-class technical services. Who would you bet on, the jack-of-all-trades or the team of specialists?

The downside to this approach is that it lacks the glitz and glam that retail oriented services employ. You will never see a full out PR blitz from Tucows and Blogware will never be a household name.  All wasted money. Remember, we're not the marketing brains in this relationship. We're the technical muscle.

Does that mean that our resellers are idly sitting by doing nothing? Nope. Right now, they are working on developing the right messages to direct at very specific markets - some are doing the institutional angle, some are going after telecommunications firms, others are targetting specific home-user verticals and others still looking to make quick wins at the expense of those with existing market share... And what I've seen so far looks great. Think of this as true "end-to-end marketing" Marketing at the edges. Clue-train compatible distribution. Teamwork. Focus. Whatever you call it, it works.

UNQUOTE

an alternate business model for gmail

an alternate business model for gmail 04/14/2004 05:12 PM
next, jason's going to start selling blogger accounts

The business model of the funny pages

The business model of the funny pages 12/04/2003 08:23 PM
When I was in college in the early 90s (B.W. -- before web), I used to subscribe to the daily newspaper just to get my comics fix every morning (back when Bill Waterson, Gary Larson, and Berkeley Breathed were king). Then the web came along and I had to suffer through the only (unfunny) cartoonist to embrace the web. But not anymore. With stuff like Comics-via-RSS and Comictastic I can fire up an app and start laughing every morning. I doubt I ever buy a newspaper again for the funny pages, and on top of that, these even let me avoid the lame ones I don't care about.

A Business Model For WiFi Aggregation

A Business Model For WiFi Aggregation 01/09/2004 09:50 PM
Robert X. Cringely's latest column discusses his idea for a killer WiFi aggregator business model that makes some sense - but could be very difficult from some significant reasons. He correctly points out the problems with current WiFi aggregator business models: they have way too little coverage and way too many players have their hands in the pie. For each dollar spent at a hotspot, a portion needs to go to the hotspot owner, the owner of the network and the aggregator (and potentially others) - and there just isn't that much money being spent at hotspots in the first place. His solution is that we need more hotspots, and the way to get more hotspots is to give away the equipment free. Basically, have a company that will give you free WiFi equipment in exchange for adding your hotspot to their network and giving you free access to the entire network. This way, he believes, an aggregator would quickly get to one million hotspots and pretty much guarantee the necessary level of coverage. The money, then, would come from others who pay the subscription fee to get on the network - and since the coverage is so great, and the aggregator no longer needs to share that revenue with the hotspots, people will be willing to pay up. Maybe. I'm certainly a fan of leveraging "free" in a promotion to build a business model, but not when that "free" is very costly. In order to get this going, the company would need to give away those million access points (and, probably, handle tech support for them) before they start making money. While you can bet they'd get a volume discount (and APs are getting cheaper every day), it's still a pretty big capital chunk to eat. Then, there are two other big problems I see. First, which he brushes off, most internet providers say sharing your connection is a violation of terms of service. Sure, there's the Speakea sy exception, but it's still not too common, and I'm not so convinced (as Cringely is) that they'll just rollover when they find out what's happening. The second problem is much more fundamental. I now have two choices if I want to use this fairly vast network of access points: (1) pay a monthly fee or (2) offer to host my own hotspot - where I get free equipment and free service. Guess what I'm going to do? Is there any reason not to get their free equipment just to get free access everywhere else? Who are the suckers who are actually going to pay for this service instead of just signing up to be a provider?

A new business model, driven by consumer
needs

A new business model, driven by consumer
needs 02/15/2004 01:03 AM
Boston Globe Feb 15 2004 5:15AM GMT

AXA challenges Google's business model

AXA challenges Google's business model 04/26/2004 11:03 PM
Sydney Morning Herald Apr 27 2004 3:40AM GMT

Meetup About Business Model Lessons

Meetup About Business Model Lessons 04/13/2005 02:55 PM
Meetup Inc. become something of an internet darling during the US Presidential campaigns, after people started using it for political organizing. The concept was straight-forward. Use the web to find like-minded individuals in a certain area who could (yup) "meet up" in person. What was unclear from the beginning, though, was how Meetup was ever going to make money. Originally, the plan was to get money out of the venues where the various meetups occurred. Apparently, that didn't work out, and now, Meetup is making news for its decision to charge each "group" $19/month to keep going. They certainly expect to lose many of their groups, and lots of people are already noting that the price seems quite steep for what were mostly small, informal gatherings. The real issue, though, is that it looks like Meetup has forgotten the first rule of internet-based business models: don't charge for something that was free before. It's very, very difficult to make that work (there are a few small exceptions). Generally speaking, though, if people expect something to be free, suddenly turning around and charging for it is seen as swiping the rug out from under them. They embraced your offering, in part, because it was free. You can charge for new and additional services -- but pissing off most of your users with surprise fees, after being sold on the free idea, tends to come back to bite many companies that have tried it. If anything, it tends to encourage competition to come in and offer what you used to offer... for free.

IM Interoperability: It's the Business
Model, Stupid

IM Interoperability: It's the Business
Model, Stupid 08/09/2004 11:40 PM
Microsoft's recent deal with the three major IM services demonstrates that business dealings, not competing technology protocols, are driving the big battle for interoperability.

Online Business Model for a Band?

Online Business Model for a Band? 04/02/2005 04:02 PM

Attacking the Spammer Business Model

Attacking the Spammer Business Model 11/17/2003 07:47 PM
Stephen Samuel asks: "Spammers spam because it's an 'easy way to make money'. They send out millions of spams knowing that 99.995% of them will be ignored, but ...

New Business Model, Or Smoke And
Mirrors?

New Business Model, Or Smoke And
Mirrors? 04/08/2005 06:26 PM
Jonathan Schwartz of Sun is out giving his talk again about how subscription fees are the way of the future for buying anything. One of his favorite examples (he's used it for quite some time) is that people will buy cars the way they buy mobile phones, where the device/car itself is free or close to fee, but there's a regular subscription fee that's locked in (he also likes to talk about how people will download "horn-tones" for their car, but that's a different story). He goes on to point out that for a car, this fee would be $220 -- noting that the carmakers have already thought about this. Beyond asking the obvious question (um which car are we talking about here -- because I imagine that a BMW is going to cost me more per month than a Hyundai), isn't this already how many people buy cars? It's called a loan or a lease. They buy the car with a little bit of money down, but pay regularly to cover the rest of the cost of the car. In fact, I'm sure, for some people and some cars, the amount is somewhere around $220. So, this isn't particularly amazing. It's not even new. It's just taking an existing business model and changing what you call everything. Who knew it was so easy to be considered a visionary?

The Phantom Looking More Real, New
Business Model Still Questionable

The Phantom Looking More Real, New
Business Model Still Questionable 05/10/2004 01:30 PM
As expected, Infinium Labs is using E3 as its coming out party to prove that they do, in fact, have a product. You may recall this is the company that has faced lots of doubt about whether or not its gaming console really existed. The company started to look a bit more respectable by hiring a CEO who helped develop the X-Box, but quickly lost a lot of goodwill by suing one of the sites that questioned the legitimacy of the company. Now, they're making a big push to prove that they exist. Wired News has an article about the company saying that instead of pushing it as competition to gaming consoles, they're targeting "occasional" or "lapsed" gamers and offering the system as a service. That is, if you agree to pay $30/month for two years you get the hardware "free" and access to the basic level of downloadable games they offer. Of course, it's not really free, but the hardware fee is baked into that monthly fee. Of course, it looks like they still don't have any publishers officially signed up. The games they're displaying at E3 are only for display at E3 and might not actually be available when the device/service launches in November. As anyone in the gaming business will tell you, if you don't have good publishers signed up early, the gaming device will fail. Infinium seems to believe they'll be able to sign up enough publishers now that they can demonstrate the device publicly and build some buzz. You'll also notice that the box looks entirely different than it did just a few months back when people were doubting that it really existed. More importantly, you have to wonder about the business model and the target market. They say they don't want hardcore gamers, because they'll already have a console and a PC with all the games they want. However, you have to wonder why the occasional or lapsed gamer wants to pay $30/month if they don't really play games that often. On top of this, the games they'll offer at that basic level of service are older games. As Infinium points out, this may help get publishers on board by offering them a new revenue stream for old games, but that also means that your offering users old games. I guess they're hoping that these lapsed video gamers won't notice that they're playing old games, but it doesn't seem like the most compelling pitch to a lapsed gamer: come back to gaming, but get locked into a two year, $30/month contract, and we'll let you play a few old games that you can probably pick up for a couple dollars in the bargain bin!

LinkedIn finally launches their business
model

LinkedIn finally launches their business
model 02/01/2005 08:42 PM

After 18 months - at 1.7 people Reid Hoffman is finally revealing his plan in a preview of his LinkedInsight jobs system.

Good luck Reid!

VOIP will change the business model of
the Bells

VOIP will change the business model of
the Bells 11/13/2003 03:08 AM
It may not happen this year or next but VOIP is going to start having a serious impact on the...

Model your business processes using
using BPML (XML Journal)

Model your business processes using
using BPML (XML Journal) 07/17/2002 01:55 AM

eBay's Business Model Patent Mess
Returns

eBay's Business Model Patent Mess
Returns 03/17/2005 03:26 AM
In 2002, someone who claimed he came up with the idea for online auctions and patented it before eBay existed sued the company for patent infringement. As we pointed out at the time, this was exactly what patents were not supposed to do. Here's a case where different people came up with similar ideas. One actually did something with it and built a real company, while the other didn't do anything with it at all, other than run to the patent office. Yet, the company that did something gets sued. That discourages companies from actually innovating. The companies that really do something open themselves up to lawsuits. While a court later tossed out the online auction patent for being too vague, they did award the guy nearly $30 million for his patent on "direct buying" online (yes, he actually patented that). Both sides appealed, and the court has found that, not only did eBay violate the direct buy patent, but it's bringing back the online auction patent as well, saying a lower court needs to check that out again.

Strong business model key to Dell's
striking evolution

Strong business model key to Dell's
striking evolution 09/22/2004 06:36 AM
Financial Post Sep 22 2004 10:26AM GMT

Micropayment Company Adjust Business
Model Away From The Internet

Micropayment Company Adjust Business
Model Away From The Internet 06/28/2004 05:22 AM
We've discussed multiple times why micro payments are overhyped for content online. Despite being told repeatedly by companies in the space that this time will be different, it looks like one such company (Peppercoin - which has been one of the loudest defenders of the "age of micropayments") is already discovering they need to adjust their business model. The cool thing about the way Peppercoin works is that it basically aggregates a bunch of purchases and creates a "representative sample" to lower the transaction fee paid to the credit card provider. The problem with using Peppercoin for internet content is the fact that most people don't want to pay for content -- especially when there are other options and the mental transaction costs are high. However, that doesn't change the fact that Peppercoin reduces credit card fees -- which is useful if only applied to a market where people already are willing to pay for things. So, that appears to be where Peppercoin is headed: away from internet transactions (though, they still claim that this will be a big space) and towards real world situations where tiny transactions rule, such as arcades.

Seeing the graphs from the trees - the
business model of the web is the same as
its underlying structure

Seeing the graphs from the trees - the
business model of the web is the same as
its underlying structure 03/14/2005 04:33 PM
It seems like a small thing, but day after day I can't help thinking that there is a distinct pattern...

YOUR FAILED BUSINESS MODEL IS NOT MY
PROBLEM sticker/tee design

YOUR FAILED BUSINESS MODEL IS NOT MY
PROBLEM sticker/tee design 04/12/2005 11:50 AM
Cory Doctorow: This sticker/t-shirt design -- YOUR FAILED BUSINESS MODEL IS NOT MY PROBLEM, with a Creative Communist logo -- is pretty sweet. Link (via Akma)

Suit targets heart of Google business
model

Suit targets heart of Google business
model 04/25/2004 11:33 PM
Boston Globe Apr 26 2004 4:17AM GMT

* Yahoo-Kimo plans shift to fee-based
business model

* Yahoo-Kimo plans shift to fee-based
business model 12/26/2003 11:28 PM
Taipei Times Online Dec 26 2003 10:41PM ET

ASC X12 releases draft XML reference
model (E-Business Standards Today)

ASC X12 releases draft XML reference
model (E-Business Standards Today) 07/24/2002 01:00 PM

Why Software Patents Exist: Legal Fees

The following phrases have been identified by the grok system as matching this entry: "business model patents" nonprofits