Fallout From Japanese Patent On Help Icon

MeridianOnTheLake writes "The Tokyo District Court has ordered the destruction of Ichitaro, a software product that is the only serious competitor in Japan to Microsoft Word, and has been on sale since 1985. The ruling is based on the claim of a competitor, Matsushita, that the use of a help icon to invoke a help function infinges on one of their patents. "We are a global enterprise and we are just following international practice to enforce our IP rights," Kitadeya (Matsushita) said." Here's more on the story, as covered by Bloomberg and The Japan Times.

Obvious Question

How about Microsoft? Is it too big to sue?

A surprising thing is Justsystem shares fell 3 yen, or 0.5 percent, to 600 yesterday - As if nothing happened?

cross licensing

Microsoft probably has a patent cross-licensing agreement with Matsushita, or at least they may have already forged an agreement (maybe as part of another deal). It actually stands to reason that Microsoft initiated all of this.

Where have I seen that before?

Matsushita declined to say whether it thinks any other software vendors may be infringing its patent.

Gee, do you think there might be any other software out there that uses a help icon? *cough* *coughwindowsmacoswordexcelaccesspowerpointwordper fect--* *sputter* *choke*

It's a shame

3 news stories and none of them explains what the patent really is about.

Does anybody know?

Re:It's a shame

http://japan.cnet.com/news/biz/story/0,2000050156, 20080442,00.htm [cnet.com]

I'll translate about as much as I can without getting into copyright trouble. The patent includes clicking on one icon displayed somewhere on your console, which attaches a special graphic to your mouse cursor. You then click on another icon or function on your console, and it brings up context-sensitive help. This is specifically distinguished from using context-sensitive help by pressing one special key or icon which is in a constant place, and also from each function embedding an explanation of what it does through other means which do not change the state of the mouse cursor.

The meat of the story is paragraphy #3, although the three screenshots on the front page are understandable even if you don't read Japanese. Due to quirkiness with derivative works law in Japan, tranlating their captions exactly could potentially lead to a lot of trouble. Suffice it to say that the first screenshot shows the offending icon, the second shows the mouse cursor changing as a result of clicking the icon, and the third shows the result of a second click on a generic interface function (an explanation pops up).

Re:It's a shame

Um, Windows 95, and maybe earlier, have this feature, as part of the OS.

http://ark42.com/freeimage/ShiftF1help.gif [ark42.com]

Now if only someone had patented "Clippy"

If only someone would sue Microsoft for Clippy, we could finally be rid of the biggest annoyance in Microsoft Office.

Re:Now if only someone had patented "Clippy"

Clippy may be liable under EPA guidelines, as it certainly pollutes desktops.

Re:Now if only someone had patented "Clippy"

If only someone would sue Microsoft for Clippy, we could finally be rid of the biggest annoyance in Microsoft Office.

• Personally I think the biggest annoyance by far in Microsoft Office is it's inability to open older versions of it's own .doc format properly, and the fact that Microsoft seems to make sure the current version of the .doc format won't work in older versions nearly every release. Meanwhile you have Wordperfect's .wpd format that hasn't changed since version 6 and works just fine.

• It's pretty sad when software can't even handle it's own proprietary format properly.

Re:Now if only someone had patented "Clippy"

The biggest anoyance is that it's not using a standard format for those files. If it were, not only would you have compatability within the product family; but with other families (Adobe, F/OSS, etc) as well.

• That's the ideal yes, but at a minimum it should be able to handle it's own proprietary format proprely, something MS Word fails to do. Even if it tried to use open formats, it'd probably screw them up so badly it couldn't open them up properly itself, much less anything else handle them.

• Frankly I believe Open Office handles older versions of .doc formats better than the current MS Word does.

  Note: I'm not just MS bashing, I use Word a lot myself, and this is a very frustrating bug to deal with. It gets old having to upgrade every time a new version comes out (gotta make sure I can read all the Word documents that come my way), and having to keep older versions around on a backup machine for when the current version opens an older version .doc and it's unreadable without a few hours of formatting.

Re:Now if only someone had patented "Clippy"

I actually hold the patent for Clippy but I'm too ashamed to sue anybody.

Re:You know, I'm getting a bit tired of this

As someone who does a LOT of PC support in addition to my main role as a sysadmin and network designer let me tell you that Clippy (and his often more annoying brothers and sisters) are still alive and well even in Office 2003. YOU may not see them because you or your sysadmin uninstalled him or deactivated him but I can assure you that he's still out there and kicking. Oh yeah and in case you haven't noticed MS SQL Server has a bigger piece of the paid database market then ever. SQL Server 2000 is actually pretty good and from what I've seen of the Beta SQL2005 is going to be even better. It might not be Oracle or DB2 but it's pretty darn good, and it's even affordable =)

It's not the thing, it's the method

If Ichitaro would have just used the standard Microsoft (that's the software platform they target) context-sensitive help, none of this would be an issue.

Instead, they hired on an ex-Matsushita employee and he went on to use the Matsushita patented method for the help system. So they sued, as is their right.

This is not a problem with the patent system. However what it does bring up is "How much knowledge can you take away from your previous employer, even if all that knowledge is just in your head?" As we gain ground in technology, such to the point that Johnny Bnemonic-style memory expansion is possible, how can patent holders and companies owning "trade secret" IP be protected from information pirates?

Re:It's not the thing, it's the method

More to the point, as more and more of the things in the world become patented how are we to protect the people from the patent holders.

Re:It's not the thing, it's the method

I hate to be the one to defend software patents, because I really despise them, but in this case, as in most others, it's the infringing company that's getting hurt, and not "the people".

p.s. Of course, the people are getting hurt indirectly, as they are thus deprived of a choice in the marketplace.

Re:It's not the thing, it's the method

I hate to be the one to defend software patents, because I really despise them, but in this case, as in most others, it's the infringing company that's getting hurt, and not "the people".

p.s. Of course, the people are getting hurt indirectly, as they are thus deprived of a choice in the marketplace.

• So ultimately software patents screw over the public no matter what. While Matsushita may be in the right here, software patents are what created the mess and the public still loses. Just even more proof that software patents are bad ideas.

Re:It's not the thing, it's the method

Does anyone else smell the hand of Bill Gates, or is it just me?

Man, Bill Gates is to Slashdotters what Satan is to the evangelicals- this all powerful, ubiquitous incarnation of darkness, whom all evil acts in the world can be blamed on.

I mean, I'm not saying I disagree with that viewpoint or anything...

Re:It's not the thing, it's the method

IIRC, it depends a lot on how obvious the method is (you're not supposed to be able to patent things that are trivial), whether the solution is in the public domain (you can't patent public knowledge) and when the patent was filed with respect to the alledged copy.

It also depends some on the reason why the patent infringement is coming up now. For example, since the company affected is a competitor to Microsoft, did Microsoft pay Matsushita to launch the lawsuit? IANAL, but there may be a case for appeal, if it turns out that the lawsuit was in bad faith, and/or is an attempt by Microsoft to gain further control of the Japanese office market by paying Matsushita to eliminate the only serious competitor.

In general, the courts tend to frown on being used subversively as the "enforcers" of a protection racket.

I'm not saying that this is what is happening. What I am saying is that there are enough suspicious circumstances to warrant a closer look at this, and that the Japanese courts might be persuadable that this isn't as innocent as it appears.

As for the "what you know" problem - since any work "could" be tainted by any prior experience, it would be impossible for any technical person to be re-hired within the lifetime of any patent they may have come into contact with. AT&T argued a similar line, against the BSDers, arguing that since they'd come into contact with AT&T proprietary knowledge, they were tainted and therefore so was any/all their subsequent work.

This is one reason I don't agree with the existing concept of IP. Nobody could ever have more than one job, and once they quit/leave/get sacked, they could NEVER be re-employed. IMHO, that is not protecting anybody and is clearly excessive.

Therefore, it should not be possible to "taint" work with IP, merely by being exposed to it. There has to be a far more material breach, and one which isn't protected against IP claims in some other way (such as being obvious, public domain, etc).

Re:It's not the thing, it's the method

Gee, the whole topic makes me nostalgic. I was a pretty heavy user of Ichitaro many years ago. I think I started with Version 3, and I definitely remembering having Version 6 on a machine around 1995. However Word was already becoming pretty dominant in the market by then, and I really don't think they would care enough about JustSystems as competition to get involved in this. I think it's just sort of law of the jungle stuff ("jyaku niku kyo shoku" (weak meat strong eat) in Japanese), and probably with some revenge for seasoning. The guy in my office says they're going to appeal, so it's not yet over--but almost.

Not sure if anyone interested in the trivia, but here's a bit just in case... The old Ichitaro actually had a lot of elements copied from ancient WordStar, but the interface got pretty much tortured to death when they were trying to add a Windows-style menu system. I'm pretty sure some versions had both interfaces. They had originally been almost completely dominant in the software word processor market, but that was back when NEC had the lock on proprietary Japanese hardware. Their foundation was their Japanese input system, which was still better than Microsoft's for many years. That was called ATOK, and was also sold separately for use as an IME replacement. They tried to expand into integrated office suites about the same time Lotus was getting beaten out of that market. Later on they tried to become an ISP with a system called JustNet, but I think they eventually sold it to someone else. (But I did see a few of their boxes in a large computer store just this weekend, when I was visiting Akihabara.)

Patents must be published

You are forgetting that if you patent something, it is not a trade secret anymore. You don't need Bnemonic style memory: all you need to do is read the patent, which is your legal right. How would you otherwise know what you are not allowed to copy?
Software patents are just ridiculous.

Re:Patents must be published

It's very dangerous to read patents because while infringing on a patent is bad, infringing on a patent knowingly is double as bad (literally - I seem to remember double damages?). If it can be shown that you even glanced at the patent, whether you thought it applied or not, you are in trouble.

Re:Patents must be published

for fuck sake, it's Johnny Mnemonic.

Re:Patents must be published

We really need some sort of system so that people remember the spelling.

Re:It's not the thing, it's the method

This is not a problem with the patent system.

This is a problem with the patent system, for two reasons:

1. A patent should not be granted unless the idea being patented is not obvious. Having a standardised icon to invoke help is obvious.
2. A patent should not be granted unless the idea being patented is novel. I don't know when the alleged Matsushita patent was granted, but I was using an icon (a bitmap representation of a question mark, but hey - it may not be pretty but it's an icon) in 1986, and I know I wasn't the first - I'm pretty sure the Xerox STAR office software had a similar system, because that's where I think I filched it from.

Re:It's not the thing, it's the method

Thats why I strongly believe that abstract ideas and concepts should NOT be patentable.

Allowing a method to do something be patentable is absolutely stupid. Can you imagine if the doctor who developed organ transplant surgery patented all his findings and demanded huge royalties each time a transplant was carried out?

zerg

Open Source the offending software, then let them try to take down SourceForge!

as if more proof were needed

This is all the more reason to order the destruction of software patents.

Also from TFA: Does the Japanese patent system have no concept of "prior art"? The patent in question was granted in 1998, but the products in "violation" has been on the market since 1985 and 1987.

Re:as if more proof were needed

Were the infringing features added before 1998?

Re:as if more proof were needed

could anyone provide one where a software patent was indeed a good thing for an inovative feature?

I think the case of spreadsheets [wikipedia.org], which set precedence for software patents, is a good example of what you're asking. I imagine that software ought to have some of the same qualities of inventing physical things. If an inventor has spent an inordinate amount of time creating something innovative then he or she should be able to reap rewards from it and not have someone come along and rip off their plans and sell it themselves. Inventors should have the option of making a living solely from inventing, otherwise there would be a significant lack of development of technology.

However, many of the software patents that are being introduced that produce such a backlash are such trivial and unimaginative ideas. They actually don't improve technology, but rather hinder its progress, which is the exact opposite of what the whole patent system is meant to achieve. It's supposed to provide incentive for people to innovate, not create bureaucratic obstacles for them.

And there is also the fact that software in it's very essence is different from physical objects. Software can be quickly distributed from just a single copy, while physical inventions have to be manufactured one by one. Software evolves much faster, and subjecting the development of ideas for software to the same slow bureaucratic rules that apply to physical objects can hinder the overall efficiency of the development of software. But whatever the case, people have to be able to focus on creating ideas to improve technology as their main occupation for making a living, and patents are supposed to allow them to do that.

For those wondering...

This is relatively old news in Japan, and the makers of Ichitaro (Just System) have appealed to a higher court. Until a final ruling is made, Ichitaro will be on sale as usual. The court refused to make a preliminary injunction against the Ichitaro software, which Matsushita had requested.

That said, the patent itself isn't regarding a Help Icon. It is the function where you first click on the help icon/button, and then on the particular function you need help with.

In court, Just System insisted that the Matsushita Patent was for a help ICON, which is usuall an item on the desktop, much like a file or folder, whereas the Just System Ichitaro used a button. The second point was that the "help" key on a keyboard already performed said function, and taking the keyboard to a GUI analogy did not require any insight, but was rather an obvious move as more and more keyboard functions were moved to the GUI.

The lower court found that the "icon" was used loosely and would be found to include the buttons-with-pictures as found in Ichitaro. As for the keyboard-to-gui concept, the court found that it would take more than obvious insight to make the leap, thus it was a valid invention.

Quite obviously, Matsushita was quite pleased that the court bought their story, while Just System was quite pissed off. By appealing to a higher court though, they did not need to immediately follow the ruling.

Whether you think this was fair game or not, keep in mind that this is pretty much what Microsoft did too with Win95 and IE. Keep the court case going long enough that the Win95/IE bundle was no longer relevant.

Re:For those wondering...

That said, the patent itself isn't regarding a Help Icon. It is the function where you first click on the help icon/button, and then on the particular function you need help with.

In court, Just System insisted that the Matsushita Patent was for a help ICON, which is usuall an item on the desktop, much like a file or folder, whereas the Just System Ichitaro used a button. The second point was that the "help" key on a keyboard already performed said function, and taking the keyboard to a GUI analogy did not require any insight, but was rather an obvious move as more and more keyboard functions were moved to the GUI.

This is yet another demonstration of how important patents are in the world of computer software. They are here for a reason and that is to protect those companies that spend their money on research and development. Surely Matsushita spent a lot of their resources in developing this advanced help technology and deserve a lot more than seeing some other company make unauthorized use of it. It doesn't matter wether Just System wrote from scratch their own implementation because they are plainly copying an IDEA, which surely is a great loss for whoever came up with it.

We should also thank patents because they help make courts throughout the world a better place. When we spend our time fighting for our rights to make exclusive use of certain icons and functions we do not have the time to commit serious crimes. An even further step could be to bring to court more trivial matters like unauthorized clicking of buttons by end users.

Patents also teach us about the importance of being selfish. Don't get me wrong: usually being selfish is seen as a bad thing; but to some extent you have to worry about yourself as well. I really appreciate it that our governments are starting to realize how important it is to have full control over anything you might have ever thought.

Ideas need to be protected.

we're not alone

Proof that the US patent and court systems arent alone in their noncompetitive lunacy.

Hopefully Nintendo does not sue /. for use of that Linux penguin icon, which is an obvious ripoff of Super Mario 64's snow level character.

Dear Godzilla

In the enclosed envelope is a map of all Japanese Patent Offices.
They told me to tell you that your mother is a dishonorable dirty woman.

attatchment [jpomap.png]

Even more filler?

By gosh the summary's innacuracy is comparable to Microsoft marketing propaganda. The article does not state clearly "that the use of a help icon" was the cause of the dispute. It does say

The dispute centered on the way that a help function works in the Ichitaro and Hanako software. The way the software presents information violates Matsushita patent number 2,803,236, which was registered with the Japanese patent office in 1998, according to Matsushita.

The Gnome pics, now this? filler for nerds, stuff that doesn't happen?

Re:Even more filler?

The English-language article wasn't as detailed as the Japanese reports. You know how you can hit shift-F1 in MS products and you get the arrow with a question mark which you then use to get help on a subsequent element on the screen... well this is the same except that you can click an icon as an alternative to shift-F1. There are some screen shots at the bottom of this Japanese-language article: http://japan.cnet.com/news/biz/story/0,2000050156, 20080442,00.htm [cnet.com]

Destroyed?

Good to see we're still finding reasons to destroy content just like the warmer moments of various regimes throughout time. What a waste.

Re:some interesting ideas on patent law

"...the associations that collect royalties for musical performances and pay these to the composers."...

Because what we really need is another RIAA!

RIAA != ASCAP/BMI/SESAC.

RIAA are evil bastards who exploit musicians, degrade the art of music, and will be first against the wall when the revolution comes.

ASCAP et. al, while flawed in execution, are based on a good idea: songwriters should get a cut when someone makes money off a song they wrote. If I sell a CD with a cover of "Tangled Up in Blue", or play it at a gig at my local tavern, these are the guys who make sure Dylan gets his nickel out of the profits. (Google for "songwriter royalties performance mechanical" [google.com].) However - and this is key - if I'm playing for fun not profit, Bob doesn't get a penny.

For years I've been suggesting that royalties for copying recordings ought to work the same way - share for free, but if you're selling the artist gets a cut.

Follow the Money....

Just a moment of googling "kitadeya microsoft" and bingo [panasonic.co.jp]. Here's a snip:

"Matsushita Electric, in close cooperation with Microsoft, will develop a high-performance personal computer suited to the advanced image-processing demands of the 21st century," said Dr. Yoshitomi Nagaoka, vice president of Matsushita Electric's AVC Company..."

Who stands to profit if this software is knocked off the market?

Japanese Tongue Twister About Patents

Tokyo tokkyo kyoka-kyoku kyou kyuukyo kyoka kyakka.

Translation: The Tokyo patent office hurriedly rejected the permission today.

Re:Prior Art?

It was filed in 1989, which is what counts. The fact that it floated around in the patent system until issue in 1998 shows how good the company is at playing the system.

MacOS 7 as prior art?

The short description of the patent sounds very much like the help system that appeared in several incarnations on MacOS.
AFAIK the bubble help gave context sensitive information on GUI elements after activating it with a button.
Apparently MacOS 7 came out two years before the patent was filed. Here's a screenshot [emuunlim.com] of MacOS 7 with the help icon and a copyright notice.

Ichitaro and JustSystem

I hate to say it, but this really is a minimal event for the overall market-- no one I know has used Ichitaro for years. MSWord is fully entrenched here, and will be for the forseeable future.

In regards to Open Source alternatives such as OpenOffice, they are sorley lacking in Kanji conversion, dictionaries, and layout flexibility. I know that Turbo and Others put effort into this, but progress is slow...

Re:Ichitaro and JustSystem

is really is a minimal event for the overall market

Being allowed to successfully sue over a help icon is not a minimal event. Bad judgements like these are used as precedents in later cases regardless of the importance of the initial trial. Many a bad law has been formed on the basis of a neighbour's hedge.

TWW

Re:Ichitaro and JustSystem

I hate to say it, but this really is a minimal event for the overall market-- no one I know has used Ichitaro for years. MSWord is fully entrenched here, and will be for the forseeable future.

The issue is not Ichitaro. The issue is being able to develop software without having to look over your shoulder at the big corporations with their patent portfolios all the time. If decisions like this are allowed to stand, then small businesses cannot create software - because if anything they produce is any good, they will be sued out of existence by corporations with portfolios they can't match.

It's my view that software patents should not be allowed at all. But if they are going to be allowed the bar for non-obviousness and novelty has to be very high indeed.

Publicly disgrace company

Matsushita, which sells its products under the Panasonic brand

I certainly won't be buying anything Panasonic for a long while. I hope that by making it a public disgrace for a company to endanger 78% of the installed office environments in Japan (think what loss of productivity would occur if they spread enough FUD to make those people buy thier product, and install it, and learn it?).

Japan has a very honourable work ethic in terms of employee/employer relations, they value the company, so the political fall out over this may yet to come.

May as well face it, this is the future

We'll be seeing more and more of these, as the great Land Rush of IP patents continues. Equating intangibles with property is like creating a whole new world, ready to be staked out and fenced off like the American West in the 1800s. Eventually, creating something new and innovative without a battery of lawyers or a big corporation behind you will be as quaint a notion as walking out into the wilderness and setting up a farm.

Time to call your broker

When the most popular word processor can be shut down because of a help icon, it's obvious that any innovators in US and Japan will be sued into oblivion by no-longer innovative companies that wish to maintain status quo. Other countries that don't recognize software patents will write superior, cheaper programs and non-software US businesses will eventually lobby their way into buying them despite patent violations. Remember the thing about outsourcing and foreign sweatshops?

Time to sell AMZN and MSFT. They are protecting themselves to death.

Screenshots

The dispute centered on the way that a help function works in the Ichitaro and Hanako software. The way the software presents information violates Matsushita patent number 2,803,236...

Can anybody get a screenshot of what exactly they are arguing over since it's not just an icon?

Some screenshots of the offending icon

Scroll down past the Japanese description and you can see some pics of the offending icon in this link: http://japan.cnet.com/news/biz/story/0,2000050156, 20080442,00.htm [cnet.com]

One missing fact... ok a few

What are Japanese patent laws? And what is the actual patent? No one knows either of these things. Japanese law may not have the "Non-obviousness" or "inventive step" clauses that America does. 2nd if it is an issue of an icon being used to access help a simple fine and software patch to remove the icon and change the access to help to something other then a button/icon.

The Microsoft/Matshusita link is tenuous, what computer hardware/software company has not worked with Microsoft at some point on a collaboritive project? Sony? IBM? DELL? Compaq/HP? Using the logic that was put forth earlier anyone Apple sues could be construed as being motivated from M$...

Lets see if anyone can get some real info on this. Instead of conjucture from a few short news blurbs that contradict each other.

What would happen if...

The "icon" used was in fact the ISO or SI (or whatever) standard glyph for "information". You know the one, the white lower case 'i' on a blue background. It isn't help, it is information. Therefore it isn't a help button.

*destruction*?

All they have to do is take out the help icon and replace it with a menuitem. I'd hardly call that "destruction" (unless they meant the destruction of inventory).

I hardly think a company would really give up a product like this, most people arn't as lazy as CmdrTaco (who took downhis JavaInvaders game rather then change the name to JInvaders or something to avoid infringing Sun's trademark.)