La FFII France

Alcatel : rapports annuels et brevets

Gérald Sédrati-Dinet (gibus) — 2005-08-07T21:26:41Z

Dans ces rapports annuels, et notamment ceux qui, en tant que société cotée à Wall Street, ont l'obligation d'être remis à la Securities and Exchange Commission, Alcatel donne sa position globale en ce qui concerne les brevets. Il est intéressant d'analyser l'évolution de ces prises de position officielles.

Securities and Exchange Commission, Annual Report for the fiscal year ended December 31, 1997 :

Patents and Licenses

Alcatel Alsthom considers patent protection to be important to its businesses, particularly its telecommunications business, due to the emphasis on research and development and to intense competition. Alcatel Alsthom's patent rights are, in the judgment of the Company, adequate for the conduct of its business. Management does not believe that any single patent or group of related patents is material to the
business of Alcatel Alsthom taken as a whole.

Alcatel Alsthom has, in a number of cases, granted patent and know-how licenses to non-affiliated companies to manufacture products designed by one of Alcatel Alsthom's companies. Conversely, affiliates of Alcatel Alsthom have acquired patent and know-how licenses within certain technology areas. Management does not believe
that any such patents or know-how licenses are material to the business of Alcatel Alsthom taken as a whole.

Alcatel 1997 Annual Report - Company statements :

Alcatel has an exceptional patent portfolio. In 1997, the company applied for over 750 patents for its innovative processes, making it France's leading patent holder and one of the top companies to extend its patent coverage across Europe, the U.S.A., and Asia.

Securities and Exchange Commission, Annual Report for the fiscal year ended December 31, 1998 :

Patents and Licenses

Alcatel considers patent protection to be important to its businesses, particularly its telecommunications business, due to the emphasis on research and development and to intense competition. Alcatel files approximately 800 patent applications per year, and has a patent portfolio of approximately 5,000 patent families. Alcatel's patent rights are, in the judgment of the Company, adequate for the conduct of its business. Management does not believe that any single patent or group of related patents is material to the business of
Alcatel taken as a whole.

Alcatel has, in a number of cases, granted patent and know-how licenses to non-affiliated companies to manufacture products designed by one of Alcatel's companies. Conversely, affiliates of Alcatel have acquired patent and know-how licenses within certain technology areas. Management does not believe that any such patents or know-how licenses are material to the business of Alcatel taken as a whole.

Alcatel 1998 Annual Report - Alcatel worldwide :

Research and Development : At the Cutting Edge of Technology

Alcatel's research strategy focuses on three key areas : research, industrial and intellectual property, and standards. Amounting to EURO 2.8 billion in 1998, the R&D budget represented 13% of total sales.

Whereas 25 years ago, 80% of Alcatel's R&D work involved hardware and 20% software, today that proportion is reversed. The research effort targets eight major fields : software engineering, radio commu-
nications, network access, private networks, network architecture, space, optical systems and energy. Alcatel's opto-electronic components development and manufacturing unit is the world leader in lasers for wavelength division multiplexing.

Alcatel manages a portfolio of 5,000 types of patents and files an average 800 new patents each year. Research is concentrated within the Central Research Center (CRC), which employs 800 people in various sites around Europe and the U.S. Each of the Company's business divisions sponsors a major CRC department and ensures that research responds to market expectations. This management style
strengthens the ties between pure research and the R&D teams throughout Alcatel. Out of a total staff of 118,000, approximately 23,500 people work in R&D at Alcatel.

In 1998, Alcatel formed an opto-electronics entity in association with the French national telecom research laborator y, CNET. In addition, Alcatel and Thomson-CSF created a joint research laboratory devoted to software architecture.

Alcatel 1999 Annual Report :

Standardization, a major Group focus

As a strong supporter of standardization, Alcatel participates with the CRC [Corporate Reasearch Center] in a number of national and international standardization projects, backed by a group of specialists made up of some 400 experts working in the various product divisions. Alcatel thus enhances its technological portfolio of patents obtained by developing through standardised solutions. In 1999, Alcatel filed 850 new patents and had a total of 5,000 patent families.

Policy on patents and licenses

The Group's patent policy is characterized by the creation of a patent file, which enables it to maintain its technological lead in all the fields in which it is involved.

Patents are managed by Alcatel's intellectual property department, which is responsible for identifying inventions, acting as a clearinghouse for patent management and developing an active licensing policy.

Securities and Exchange Commission, Annual Report 2000 :

Our business and results of operations will be harmed if we are unable to protect our intellectual property rights from challenges or unauthorized third party use or if we become involved in litigation.

Like other companies operating in the telecommunications industry, we experience frequent litigation regarding patent and other intellectual property rights. Third parties have asserted, and in the future may assert, claims against us alleging that we infringe their intellectual property rights. Defending these claims may be expensive and divert the efforts of our management and technical personnel. If we do not succeed in any such litigation, we could be required to expend significant resources to develop non-infringing technology or to obtain licenses to the technology which is the subject of the litigation. In addition, third parties may attempt to appropriate the confidential information and proprietary technologies and processes used in our business, which
we may be unable to prevent.

Our business and results of operations will be harmed if we are unable to acquire licenses for third party technologies on reasonable terms.

We remain dependent in part on third party license agreements which enable us to use their technology to develop or produce our products. However, we cannot be certain that any such licenses, if at all, will be available to us on commercially reasonably terms.

Research and Development and Patents

We consider patent protection to be important to our businesses, particularly our telecommunications business, due to the emphasis on research and development and to intense competition. We filed 870 patent applications in 2000, and have a patent portfolio of approximately 5,000 patent families. We believe that our patent rights are adequate for the conduct of our business. We do not believe that any single patent or group of related patents is material to our business as a whole.

Alcatel and the Optronics Division shall enter into a new Cross-License Agreement (which shall be an Implementation Agreement for the purposes hereof) with respect to technology and statutory IPRs to be created after termination of the GRA, relating to the Products. The rights of Alcatel under such Cross-License Agreement shall be in force for the lifetime of the pertinent IPRs. The rights of the Optronics Division under such Cross-License Agreement shall be in force until termination of this Agreement. The rights granted by each Party to the other Party are royalty free and without other compensation. The Cross-License Agreement shall provide for the following :

(a) non-exclusive, worldwide reciprocal rights for the Optronics Division on the one hand, and Alcatel and its Subsidiaries on the other hand, to use, make, have made, sell, lease or otherwise dispose of all IPRs of the other Party. For the Optronics Division the rights granted to it with respect to IPRs of Alcatel and its Subsidiaries will be limited to IPRs that are related to the Products.
(b) a right for Alcatel to sublicense statutory IPRs of the Optronics Division in the framework of general patent cross licenses that Alcatel has entered into and may enter into from time to time with third parties, subject to such cross-licenses containing a reciprocal license for the Optronics Division giving it rights to the IPRs of such third parties on reciprocal terms and conditions, which Alcatel shall undertake to negotiate in good faith on behalf of the Optronics Division.
(c) a reciprocal confidentiality commitment in relation to all proprietary information to be disclosed between the Parties in application of the Cross-License Agreement.

Alcatel 2000 Annual Report :

In 2000, Alcatel devoted Euro 2.8 billion to its R&D budget and filed
for 870 patents.

Patent and licensing policy

The Group's patent policy is based on a patent portfolio that gives it a technical edge in all the areas in which it is involved. Alcatel's Intellectual Property Department is responsible for managing this patent portfolio. Its role is to ensure that inventions are identified, to act as a patent management clearing house and to develop an active licensing policy.

Securities and Exchange Commission, Annual Report 2001 :

Our business and results of operations will be harmed if we are unable to protect our intellectual property rights from challenges or unauthorized third party use or if we become involved in litigation.

Like other companies operating in the telecommunications industry, we experience frequent litigation regarding patent and other intellectual property rights. Third parties have asserted, and in the future may assert, claims against us alleging that we infringe their intellectual property rights. Defending these claims may be expensive and divert the efforts of our management and technical personnel. If we do not succeed in defending these claims, we could be required to expend significant resources to develop non-infringing technology or to obtain licenses to the technology that is the subject of the litigation. In addition, third parties may attempt to appropriate the confidential information and proprietary technologies and processes used in our business, which we may be unable to prevent.

Our business and results of operations will be harmed if we are unable to acquire licenses for third party technologies on reasonable terms.

We remain dependent in part on third party license agreements which enable us to use third party technology to develop or produce our products. However, we cannot be certain that any such licenses will be available to us on commercially reasonably terms, if at all.

Intellectual Property

We rely on patent, trademark, trade secret and copyright laws both to protect our proprietary technology and to protect us against claims from others. We believe that we have direct intellectual property rights or rights under licensing arrangements covering substantially all of our material technologies. However, there can be no assurance that claims of infringement will not be asserted against us or against our customers in connection with their use of our systems and products, nor can there be any assurance as to the outcome of any such claims, given the technological complexity of our systems and products.

We consider patent protection to be particularly important to our businesses due to the emphasis on research and development and intense competition in our markets. We filed 876 patent applications in 2001, and have a patent portfolio of approximately 6,000 patent families. We do not believe that any single patent or group of related patents is material to our business as a whole.

Alcatel Recherche et Innovation :Maîtriser l'évolution et le changement permanents, C. Gregoire (Vice President, R&I) in Revue des Télécommunications d'Alcatel - 3^e trimestre 2001 Recherche et Innovation, p. 161 :

La participation à des organismes de normalisation de première importance, comme l'IETF, le 3GPP, l'UIT-T, l'ETSI et T1 et à des Forums comme le Forum WAP et le Forum DSL1 est primordiale pour être reconnue sur le marché, exercer son contrôle sur les droits de propriété intellectuelle (IPR) essentiels et obtenir l'adoption par le marché des produits de R&D.

[...]

Portefeuille de brevets

Enfin, les brevets jouent un rôle majeur dans la protection des nombreuses technologies innovantes d'Alcatel et font partie intégrante des processus de prise de décision de l'entreprise. Alcatel détient plus de 30 000 brevets, ce qui lui donne une force industrielle considérable sur le marché des télécommunications. Ce marché évolue très rapidement ; de nouvelles technologies apparaissent en quelques mois et rendent des produits innovants obsolètes en quelques années. Alcatel adopte une démarche obéissant à ses intérêts commerciaux, utilisant ses brevets comme source de revenus par le biais de contrats de licence ou comme leviers pour conclure des partenariats ou créer des joint ventures afin d'exploiter une technologie. Le département R&I est à l'origine du dépôt d'environ 200 brevets chaque année parmi les 900 déposés par les équipes de R&D d'Alcatel.

Securities and Exchange Commission, Annual Report 2002 :

Our business and results of operations will be harmed if we are unable to protect our intellectual property rights from challenges or unauthorized third party use or if we become involved in litigation.

Like other companies operating in the telecommunications industry, we experience frequent litigation regarding patent and other intellectual property rights. Third parties have asserted, and in the future may assert, claims against us alleging that we infringe their intellectual property rights. Defending these claims may be expensive and divert the efforts of our management and technical personnel. If we do not succeed in defending these claims, we could be required to expend significant resources to develop non-infringing technology or to obtain licenses to the technology that is the subject of the litigation. In addition, third parties may attempt to appropriate the confidential information and proprietary technologies and processes used in our business, which we may be unable to prevent.

Our business and results of operations will be harmed if we are unable to acquire licenses for third party technologies on reasonable terms.

Intellectual Property

We rely on patent, trade-mark, trade secret and copyright laws both to protect our proprietary technology and to protect us against claims from others. We believe that we have direct intellectual property rights or rights under licensing arrangements covering substantially all of our material technologies. However, there can be no assurance that claims of infringement will not be asserted against us or against our customers in connection with their use of our systems and products, nor can there be any assurance as to the outcome of any such claims, given the technological complexity of our systems and products.

We consider patent protection to be particularly important to our businesses due to the emphasis on research and development and intense competition in our markets. We filed 870 patent applications in 2002, and have a patent portfolio of approximately 6,000 patent families. We do not believe that any single patent or group of related patents is material to our business as a whole.

In August 2002, Alcatel completed the acquisition of the Telera Corporation. Telera's patented Voice Web software platform uses voice extensible markup language (VoiceXML) to enable service providers and enterprises to develop advanced voice applications that transform the telephone into a powerful tool to access Web-based information. All outstanding shares and rights to acquire shares of Telera Corp were exchanged for 15.1 million of Alcatel Class A American Depositary Shares (ADSs) for an acquisition price of € 79 million. This company is consolidated from August 1, 2002

Alcatel 2002 Annual Report :

Finally, the approximately 900 patents filed by the Group every year and our strong growth in licensing revenues, which were up +25% in 2002, as in the previous year, testify to the vitality of our Research and Development program.

Securities and Exchange Commission, Annual Report 2003

Intellectual Property

We rely on patent, trademark, trade secret and copyright laws both to protect our proprietary technology and to protect us against claims from others. We believe that we have direct intellectual property rights or rights under licensing arrangements covering substantially all of our material technologies. However, there can be no assurance that claims of infringement will not be asserted against us or against our customers in connection with their use of our systems and products, nor can there be any assurance as to the outcome of any such claims, given the technological complexity of our systems and products.

We consider patent protection to be particularly important to our businesses due to the emphasis on research and development and intense competition in our markets. We filed 750 patent applications in 2003, and have a patent portfolio of approximately 9,600 patent families. We do not believe that any single patent or group of related patents is material to our business as a whole.

Securities and Exchange Commission, Annual Report 2004 :

Intellectual Property

We consider patent protection to be particularly important to our businesses due to the emphasis on research and development and intense competition in our markets. We filed 700 patent applications in 2004, and have a patent portfolio of approximately 9,600 patent families. We do not believe that any single patent or group of related patents is material to our business as a whole.

Rapport développement durable 2004 ALCATEL :

Aujourd hui, 60 % des investissements de R&D sont consacrés aux logiciels, par exemple pour le développement de solutions de paiement, de messagerie ou de vidéo.

[...]

Une stratégie de valorisation des brevets

Ayant acquis une avance technologique, notamment dans les domaines des réseaux d accès DSL et des réseaux optiques, Alcatel protège et valorise ce patrimoine technologique. Une équipe dédiée a ainsi en charge la valorisation de son portefeuille de brevets, générant des revenus supplémentaires pour le Groupe.

[...]

Budget de recherche et développement 2004 : 1,6 milliard d euros, soit 13 % du chiffre d affaires annuel.
700 nouveaux brevets déposés en 2004

Statistiques sur les brevets logiciels d'Alcatel déposés à l'OEB

Gérald Sédrati-Dinet (gibus) — 2005-08-07T00:28:00Z

En nous basant sur le travail effectué par gauss.ffii.org pour recenser les brevets déposés à l'Office européen des brevets, qui sont supposés être des brevets logiciels, nous donnons ici les statistiques confirmant la place de premier plan qu'occupe Alcatel dans les détenteurs français de brevets logiciels.

Analyse de brevets logiciels

Gérald Sédrati-Dinet (gibus) — 2005-08-07T00:17:00Z

En nous basant sur le travail effectué par gauss.ffii.org pour recenser les brevets déposés à l'Office européen des brevets, qui sont supposés être des brevets logiciels, nous analysons ici quelques exemples de brevets confirmant qu'Alcatel est bien dans la stratégie d'obtenir un important portefeuille de brevets portant sur du pur traitement de données.

EP996266 : Procédé pour mettre à jour ou remplacer un site web (cf. webcam tour eiffel ou Time Square Cam

EP974907 : Procédé pour déterminer une organisation de données optimisée

Méthode sur du pur traitement de données. Quand bien même l'algorithme découvert serait génial, un brevet sur cet algorithme en empêche tout amélioration, optimisation, correction des trous de sécurité...

1. A method for determining an optimized data organization in at least one first memory of an essentially digital system comprising of at least said first memory and a second memory, acting as cache for said first memory, said optimized data organization being characteristic for an application to be executed by said digital system, said method comprising the steps of :

loading a representation of said application, said representation comprising at least of data access instructions on arrays ;
partitioning said arrays in a plurality of subarrays ;
distributing said subarrays over said first memory such that an optimal cache performance of said second memory is obtained ; and
said distribution of said subarrays defines said optimized data organization.

17. A design system for determining an optimized data organization in at least one first memory of an essentially digital system comprising of at least said first memory and a second memory acting as cache for said first memory, said optimized data organization being characteristic for an application, to be executed by said digital system, said design system comprising :

a memory store for storing a structure representing said application, said structure comprising at least data access instructions on arrays as well as for storing representations of said first and second memory ;
a first computing device for partitioning said arrays in a plurality of subarrays ;
a second computing device for distributing said subarrays over said first memory such that an optimal cache performance of said second memory is obtained ; and
a third computing device for outputting said distribution of said subarrays as said optimized data organization

19. The design system according to claim 17 or 18, wherein optimal cache performance is determined by the least number of conflict misses which would occur on executing said application on said digital system, further comprising a fourth computing device for at least estimating the number of conflict misses which would occur on executing said application on said digital system. The present invention also includes a computer program product comprising any of the method steps or combinations of these in the form of an executable computer program and stored on a computer usable medium.

EP1128695 : Système de télécommunications, méthode et logiciel pour administrer des relations utilisateur-service

1. Telecommunication system for managing user-service relationships for at least two users belonging to a user group and for at least a first service being provided by a service provider and at least a second service being provided by a service provider, comprising a memory for storing user signals defining users and for storing service signals defining services and for storing relationship signals defining user-service relationships, characterised in that in said memory per first user a first user signal and a first relationship signal defining a relationship between said first user and said first service and a second relationship signal defining a relationship between said first user and said second service are stored, and per second user a second user signal and a third relationship signal defining a relationship between said second user and said first service and a fourth relationship signal defining a relationship between said second user and said second service are stored.

2. Telecommunication system according to claim 1, characterised in that said user signals are first kind of signals, said service signals are second kind of signals and said relationship signals are third kind of signals, with said memory being coupled to a processor for processing at least two kinds of signals for user group purposes.

3. Telecommunication system according to claim 1 or 2, characterised in that said user signals are first kind of signals, said service signals are second kind of signals and said relationship signals are third kind of signals, with said memory being coupled to a processor for processing at least two kinds of signals for service provider purposes.

4. Method for managing user-service relationships for at least two users belonging to a user group and for at least a first service being provided by a service provider and at least a second service being provided by a service provider, by storing user signals defining users and by storing service signals defining services and by storing relationship signals defining user-service relationships, characterised in that said method comprises the steps of

storing per first user a first user signal and a first relationship signal defining a relationship between said first user and said first service and a second relationship signal defining a relationship between said first user and said second service,
storing per second user a second user signal and a third relationship signal defining a relationship between said second user and said first service and a fourth relationship signal defining a relationship between said second user and said second service.

5. Method according to claim 4, characterised in that said user signals are first kind of signals, said service signals are second kind of signals and said relationship signals are third kind of signals, with said method comprising the step of

processing at least two kinds of signals for user group purposes.

6. Method according to claim 4 or 5, characterised in that said user signals are first kind of signals, said service signals are second kind of signals and said relationship signals are third kind of signals, with said method comprising the step of

processing at least two kinds of signals for service provider purposes.

7. A computer program product directly loadable into the internal memory of a digital computer, comprising software code portions for performing the steps of claims 4, 5 or 6, when said product is run on a computer.

8. A computer program product stored on a computer usable medium for managing user-service relationships for at least two users belonging to a user group and for at least a first service being provided by a service provider and at least a second service being provided by a service provider, said computer program product comprising

computer readable means for defining users, computer readable means for defining services, computer readable means for defining user-service relationships, characterised in that said computer program product comprises computer readable means for per first user defining said first user and a first relationship defining a relationship between said first user and said first service and a second relationship defining a relationship between said first user and said second service, computer readable means for per second user defining said second user and a third relationship defining a relationship between said second user and said first service and a fourth relationship defining a relationship between said second user and said second service.

9. A computer program product stored on a computer usable medium according to claim 8, characterised in that at least two of said three computer readable means for defining users, services and user-service relationships, are processable for user group purposes.

10. A computer program product stored on a computer usable medium according to claim 8 or 9, characterised in that at least two of said three computer readable means for defining users, services and user-service relationships, are processable for service provider purposes.

EP1137225 : Commutateur de paquets et méthode de commutation

Logique algorithmique pure et revendication de programme.

1. A method of transmitting data traffic having a predetermined minimum transmittable element such as any one of a slot and a bit and being received from a number of prioritised sources comprising the steps of :

(a) setting the highest priority source with data traffic waiting for transmission as current transmission source ;
(b) transmitting the data traffic from the current transmission source until completion whilst monitoring the sources for waiting traffic, wherein if traffic is detected from a source with a higher priority than the current transmission source going to step (d) ;
(c) upon completion, going to step (a) ; and,
(d) completing transmission of the current minimum transmittable element and going to step (a).

2. A method according to claim 1, in which step (b) comprises the further steps of adapting the data traffic before transmission to include, where not already present, one or more reassembly indicators for use in reassembling the data traffic upon receipt.

3. A method according to claim 1 or 2, in which the minimum transmittable element for traffic of asynchronous and bit-synchronous protocols is a bit.

4. A method according to claim 1 or 2, in which the minimum transmittable element for traffic of slot-synchronous protocols is a slot.

5. A method of reassembling a number of traffic streams interleaved within a data stream into a respective output queue for each traffic stream comprising the steps of :

(a) clearing the output queues and selecting a first output queue for receiving the data stream ;
(b) passing the data stream to the selected output queue whilst monitoring the data stream, going to step (c) upon detection of a start indicator and going to step (d) if the end of a traffic stream is determined ;
(c) selecting a further output queue to receive the data stream and going to step (b) ;
(d) if the memory stack contains one or more identifiers of output queues, retrieving the top identifier from the queue, selecting the output queue corresponding to the identifier to receive the data stream and going to step (b), going to step (a) otherwise.

24. A computer program product comprising a number of computer executable instructions for executing the steps of any of claims 1 to 5.

EP1197877 : Terminal, unité de communication, méthode et produit logiciel

9. Method for use in combination with a terminal comprising a processor and a memory and comprising a browser function running via said processor and said memory for browsing a network and comprising a man-machine-interface for controlling said browser function, characterised in that said method comprises a step of generating an overrule signal for overruling said browser function.

10. Computer program product for performing a browser function in a terminal comprising a processor and a memory for running said browser function for browsing a network and comprising a man-machine-interface for controlling said browser function, characterised in that said computer program product comprises a generator function for generating an overrule function for overruling said browser function.

EP1274201 : Système de réseau, système de gestion, procédé et produit de logiciel d'ordinateur

Revendication explicite d'un algorithme et d'un programme mettant en œuvre cet algorithme.

2. Network-system according to claim 1, characterised in that said algorithm is defined by at least several constraints and several objectives.

6. Management-system according to claim 5, characterised in that said algorithm is defined by at least several constraints and several objectives.

10. Computer program product for running an algorithm in a management-system for use in a network-system comprising at least a first IP-network comprising first nodes, at least two of these first nodes being first edge-nodes, a second IP-network comprising second nodes, a transport-network comprising channel-switches for switching channels, and said management-system for managing networks in an overlay environment, characterised in that said management-system comprises a converter for converting IP-traffic-signals into transport-traffic-signals thereby assuming that both IP-networks are coupled via a star-network with said transport-network corresponding to a star of said star-network, and an optimiser for in response to said converting optimising a use of channels in said transport-network according to said algorithm, which algorithm is defined by at least several constraints and several objectives, with said computer program product comprising at least several constraint-functions and several objective-functions.

EP1274011 : Méthode et système pour guider et enregistrer une requête

Méthode de pur traitement de données et revendication de programme conforme à l'article 5-2 de la version de la directive donnée par le Conseil.

20. A computer program product stored on a computer usable medium or in a file for downloading over a computer network, comprising computer readable program means for causing a computer system to perform a method according to anyone of the preceding claims 1 to 10 when the program is run on the computer system.

EP1289189 : Système de gestion de réseau, réseau, procédé et produit logiciel

9. Computer program product to be run via a processor system comprising a processor and a memory for storing information parameters for managing a network comprising nodes, characterised in that said computer program product comprises an adapting function for, in response to a receival of new information parameters, with said memory comprising old information parameters, adapting information parameters in said memory via intermediate states.

10. Computer program product according to claim 9, characterised in that said computer program product comprises an optimising function for optimising said adapting.

EP1298647 : Dispositif et méthode pour transmettre et recevoir des signaux de parole, comportant un module de reconnaissance et un module de codage couplés

Revendication de procédé et de programme à la portée suffisamment étendue pour bloquer tout un secteur de la reconnaissance vocale.

7. A method for transmitting of natural speech comprising the steps of :

determining at least one speech parameter of a speech synthesis model,
recognizing the natural speech,
transmitting the at least one speech parameter and the data being representative of the recognized speech.

8. The method of claim 7 further comprising continuously determining the at least one speech parameter and / or determining the at least one speech parameter before the transmission by means of a user training session and / or using an initial value for the at least one speech parameter.

9. A method for receiving of natural speech comprising the steps of :

receiving of at least one speech parameter of a speech synthesis -* model and receiving data being representative of recognized speech,
means for generating a speech signal based on the at least one speech parameter and based on the data being representative of the recognized speech.

10. A computer program product for performing a method in accordance with anyone of the claims 7, 8 or 9.

EP1301018 : Méthode et appareil pour modifier un signal numérique dans un domaine codé

Exploitation d'un maquis de brevets.

1. A method for modifying a digital signal being represented by a set of parameter values of a speech and/or audio synthesis model
characterized by modifying the digital signal in the coded domain by modifying at least one of the parameter values in a way to replicate a wanted operation in the original domain.

13. A computer program product comprising means for performing a method for anyone of the preceding claims 1 to 10.

EP1300982 : Dispositif et procédé de géstion de réseau

9. Method for managing traffic signals in a network comprising nodes/links, which method comprises a first step of calculating solutions defining intermediate nodes/links situated between sources and destinations for transporting said traffic signals from said sources to said destinations via said intermediate nodes/links and comprises a second step of calculating route information per solution, with node/link parameter signals defining nodes/links and traffic parameter signals defining said traffic signals to be transported via nodes/links being stored in a memory, characterised in that said method comprises a third step of selecting a solution per situation, with said memory comprising node/link parameter signals and traffic parameter signals for several situations, and with solutions being calculated for each situation.

10. Computer program product for managing traffic signals in a network comprising nodes/links, which computer program product is to be run via processor coupled to a memory for storing node/link parameter signals defining nodes/links and for storing traffic parameter signals defining said traffic signals to be transported via nodes/links, which computer program product comprises a first function of calculating solutions defining intermediate nodes/links situated between sources and destinations for transporting said traffic signals from said sources to said destinations via said intermediate nodes/links and comprises a second function of calculating route information per solution, characterised in that said computer program product comprises a third function of selecting a solution per situation, with said memory comprising node/link parameter signals and traffic parameter signals for several situations, and with solutions being calculated for each situation.

EP1313244 : Dispositif et procédé de communication dans un réseau de communication mobile numérique

Tentative de monopoliser les logiciels permettant d'administrer un réseau de téléphonie mobile.

10. A computer program product comprising program means for
monitoring of network traffic of a digital mobile communication network, such as a UMTS network, selection of an interleaving length depending on network traffic, indicating of a selection of the interleaving length to an end-user communication device.

EP1315089 : Méthode et système de surveillance pour sécuriser l'affichage d'un diagramme graphique sur une unité d'affichage à matrices

Revendication de procédé et de programme, brevet trivial et étendu sur du traitement et de l'affichage de données. Seule la revendication 4 comprend un élément technique, qui n'est pas nouveau, ni l'objet d'une activité inventive.

1. A method for securing the display of a mimic diagram on a matrix display unit, the methods comprising the steps of :

displaying the mimic diagram on the matrix display unit with a background having a gray value,
cyclically varying the gray value between a first gray value and a second gray value.

2. The method of claim 1, whereby the gray value is varied from the first gray value to the second gray value in discrete gray value steps.

3. The method of claim 1, whereby the cycle-time of the cyclic variation of the gray value is between 0,2 seconds and 30 seconds, preferably between 20 seconds and 25 seconds.

4. The method of claim 1, whereby the matrix display unit comprises a thin-film-transistor (TFT) liquid-crystal display (LCD).

5. The method of claim 1, whereby the gray value is varied by about 10 percent on a gray value scale from black to white.

6. The method of claim 5 the gray value being varied between black and eight percent.

7. The method of claim 1 further comprising cyclically shifting of the mimic diagram between a first and a second position on the matrix display unit, whereby the shifting is performed after a time interval, preferably in the order of eight hours.

8. The method of claim 1 further comprising displaying a regular pattern of geometric objects on the matrix display unit, the objects being spaced apart by at least twice the extend of a matrix column or a matrix row of the matrix display unit.

9. A computer program product for performing a method in accordance with anyone of the preceding claims 1 to 8.

EP1328062 : Ensemble en cascade de filtres d'ordre inférieur et méthode pour sa conception

Revendication de programme conforme à l'article 5-2 de la version de la directive donnée par le Conseil.

12. A computer program product comprising code segments which when executed on a computer generate a design of a plurality of cascaded filters described in accordance with any of the methods of claims 1 to 5.

13. A computer program product according to claim 12, stored on a data carrier.

EP1349342 : Procédé, unité de sorties, terminal, et produits de programmes informatiques de reconstruction d' un flux de données continu dans un point de reception d'un réseau à commutation de paquets

Revendication sur un procédé et un programme de streaming, les détails de l'algorithme n'étant pas décrits dans les revendications...

1. Method for reconstructing non-continuous packetized data of a continuous data stream (A5) like streamed media, voice, audio, or video from a data connection into a continuous data stream (A6) at the receiving point (B3, B4, B5) of a packet-based network (B1), comprising the steps of

providing of at least one estimation method (Figure 4 : « Estimation ») based on at least one characteristic value (Figure 5,6 : « Estimation ») concerning data connections (A3, B2) of the kind intended for,
gathering measurements of at least one value (Figure 5,6 : « Estimation ») characterizing the data connection,
evaluating a de-jittering delay for the data connection by predicted parameters (Figure 5,6 : « Estimation ») taking into account the at least one provided value and the at least one gathered value,
delaying and converting the data packets following the evaluated de-jittering delay (Figure 3, 4 ; Figure 5 : « Estimation », « Stream », « Receive »).

4. A computer program product including software code portions for performing steps of Claim 1 for a terminal (Figure 5).

5. A computer program product including software code portions for performing steps of Claim 1 for an output unit (Figure 5).

EP1311083 : Gestion de règles de conduite pour la fourniture de qualité de service

20. A computer program product for use with a server in a policy-based Internet Protocol network having devices, said computer program product comprising :

a computer usable medium having computer readable program code means embodied in said medium that, when used with the server, causes the server to effect policy processing for provisioning quality of service via a user interface, wherein the user interface provides a graphic user interface for the user to set up quality of service (QoS) provisioning across the network devices ;
a computer readable program code means for allowing the user to specify a priority to provision quality of service for data processing network devices via the graphic user interface to policy processing ; and
and a computer readable program code means for allowing a user to define and implement network policies for provisioning quality of service via the graphic user interface to the policy processing.

EP1363429 : Groupage logique de ports physiques en une interface logique pour augmenter la bande passante

This is a patent on obvious frequently used technology for routing equipement (what make the internet move TCP/IP packets move).

As you should know it is perfectly possible to route IP packet with a piece of software running in a standard piece of hardware (PC). Many firewall are indeed running with Linux iptable/netfilter and many internet router are working with OpenBSD and it's implementation of BGP/OSPF or using the old and buggy Zebra.

This look very much like CiscoSystem « EtherChannel » (like on the Catalyst Switch family) or a NortelNetworks « Trunk » (for NortelNetworks Passport 1000 and 8600 and BayStack equipement formely BayNetworks). The word « Trunk » and « Channel » are commonly used for that... however Cisco and Nortel usage of those word is conflicting.

Cisco « invented » the PAgP protocol/state_machine (Port Aggregation Protocol), later I guess a IEEE 802 sub-committee « invented » the LACP (Link Aggregation Control Protocol) to standardise this bundle of physicaly link to make a logical link. I guess this was focusing on Ethernet technology.

The same way that « multiple physicale build a logical » is used in Multilink PPP (Point to Point Protocol). That should have been standardised by IETF in some RFC (Request for comment).

There are also a lot of unamed bundeling of physical link to make a logical link in Cisco implementation of HDLC (when using 2 * 2M link to have more bandwidth).

What is « new » in Claim 1 and is more likely in noone of those de-facto (or de-jure) « standard » is the « hardware implementation » of « one or more processors ». Indeed that typicaly low end device have one processor that does all the work. Making EtherChannel or Multilink PPP work in a distributed (CPUs) environment is a bit less simplistic (but not to a man skilled in the art).

Most of the time the way to ballance the traffic on the physical link is not standardised. So it is up to the vendor to find out a good way to do it. Most will ballance on : * Destination IP (Claim 3) * Source IP * Destination IP (* could be a XOR function then a modulo the number of link) (Claim 6) * other

One of the common problem is that we want to have all the packet from A to B to use the same physical link (to avoid out of order delivery). This is most frequently archieved using the XOR trick where XOR + MOD as in Claim 6.

The hashing in Claim 4 is just a shortcut to speedup the decision process so that you fastly know wich physical port to take. Hashing just mean a mapping from a bit space (IP address space 2^32) to a small space (number of physical link space).

I don't know what they want with « indexing a first table to determine a second table associated with said logical interface » in claim 2 and 8 but obviously you must have a table of all the logical interface. And for each logical interface you must have a table of all the physical interface that belong to it. How else would you implement this... I don't know it sound to obvious.

The « blade » reference in Claim 5 might indicate that they are talking about a distributed (or modular) architecture where a physical blade hold one or many physical interface. So when you need to send a packet out you need to know Blade#/Interface#. This is very typical.

Claim 19 perfectly describe a distributed router architecture as you can find in Nortel (Bay Network) router (ASN BN) but without switch fabric as it is a BUS technology. You can find the same thing (with switching fabric) with the Passport 1100 and 8600 Switch family from Nortel Networks.

You can also find this in the Cisco world with hardware like Cisco 12000 router or the Catalyst 6500 = Cisco 7600 router.

From an Alcatel point of view it look like a XyLan switch (an aquisition of Alcatel) wich has a distributed architecture and an ATM-like switching backplane.

This patent application should be rejected because of obvious prior art !!!

What is obvious here is that they claim the methode then it's software and hardware and partially software and hardware implementation.

Alcatel

Gérald Sédrati-Dinet (gibus) — 2005-08-06T23:53:00Z

Alors qu'en 2002, Alcatel se plaignait encore des dommages que les brevets logiciels causaient à l'entreprise, son département juridique est l'un des partisans les plus fervents de la brevetabilité du logiciel pur. Cet article analyse quelques uns des brevets du « champion français des dépôts de brevets logiciels à l'OEB », montrant que loin d'être indispensables pour le développement de véritables inventions dans le domaine des télécommunications et de l'électronique grand public, il s'agit bien de revendications sur de pur traitements de données et sur des programmes d'ordinateur « en tant que tels ».

Sommaire

Introduction

En 2002, le géant français des télécoms a publié un papier dans lequel il se plaint sans ambages des effets négatifs des brevets ainsi que de l'insécurité juridique et de la diversion de ses fonds de la R&D vers les contentieux.

D'un autre côté, Alcatel, en tant qu'acteur mondial des télécoms, détient un important portefeuille de brevets logiciels et son département des brevets exerce un lobbying actif sur les reponsables politiques pour s'assurer que les efforts de brevetage d'Alcatel seront récompensées en Europe de la même manière qu'ils le sont aux États-Unis. Jonas Heitto, avocat en brevets pour Alcatel, formé au Max-Planck-Institut de Munich, semble être présent à toutes les réunions sur le sujet à Bruxelles et dans certaines capitales. Il n'est pas le seul. Alcatel a participé à la « Consultation » menée par la Commission européenne en 2000 en son nom propore ainsi qu'au sein d'associations informatiques comme l'ANIEL espagnole.

Alcatel a récemment pourquivi une stratégie de « fabless compagny » (société sans usines), i.e. délocalisant autant de production que possible vers des sous-traitants de pays où la production est bon marché (par ex. en Chine) tout en gardant les quelques activités (services financiers et juridiques et un peu de R&D) sur son siège social en France et/ou aux Bahamas/Bermudes, selon l'endroit où les taxes sont les moins chères. On dit que les brevets sont utiles pour mettre en œuvre cette stratégie et transférer ses fonds vers les paradis fiscaux. Dans son explication pour sa proposition de directive sur la brevetabilité des logiciels, l'eurodéputée Arlene McCarthy cite Alcatel en exemple et met l'accent sur le fait que les brevets sont indispensables pour protéger l'industrie en Europe à une époque où l'on observe des coûts de production élevés.

Nous examinons ici scupuleusement la stratégie d'Alcatel concernant les brevets et en particulier ses dépôts de brevets logiciels à l'Office européen des brevets. La plupart des développements d'Alcatel se situent dans le domaine du logiciel et récemment, Alcatel a annoncé se focaliser plus que jamais sur la « prochaine génération de standards de communication et d'applications Internet ».

Alcatel gêné par les brevets logiciels

Alcatel, rapport annuel sur l'activité pour l'année fiscale 2001

Comme les autres sociétés opérant dans l'industrie des télécommunications, nous avons de fréquents litiges concernant les brevets et autres droits de propriété intellectuelle. Des tiers ont prétendu à notre encontre, et pourront prétendre à l'avenir, que nous enfreignions leurs droits de propriété intellectuelle. Se défendre contre ces plaintes peut coûter cher et détourner les efforts de nos personnels techniques et de gestion. Si nous ne réussissons pas à nous défendre contre ces plaintes, nous pourrions être obligés de dépenser des sommes considérables pour développer une technologie qui n'enfreindrait pas de brevets ou pour obtenir des licences de la technologie objet du litige. De plus, les tierces parties pourraient essayer de s'approprier des informations confidentielles et des technologies et procédés commerciaux propriétaires utilisés dans nos sociétés, ce dont nous ne pourrions nous prémunir.

Cela nuira à nos sociétés et nos résultats d'opérations si nous ne sommes pas capables d'obtenir des licences pour des technologies tierces dans des termes raisonnables.

Nous demeurons dépendants en partie de la cession de licence de la tierce partie qui nous permette d'utiliser la technologie tierce pour développer et produire nos produits. Cependant, nous ne pouvons pas être certains que de telles licences seront disponibles pour nous dans des termes commerciaux raisonnables ou disponibles tout court.

Les brevets logiciels seraient indispensables à Alcatel ?

Alcatel, champion français des brevets logiciels

Voir les Statistiques sur les brevets logiciels d'Alcatel déposés à l'OEB.

Quels types de brevets demande Alcatel ?

Voir l'Analyse de brevets logiciels.

Liens

CEOs call on EU to promote innovation

Gérald Sédrati-Dinet (gibus) — 2005-07-03T22:00:00Z

In a joint letter to European political leaders, the CEOs of Alcatel, Ericsson, Nokia, Philips and Siemens , together with EICTA, the European industry body, have called on politicians to promote innovation, employment and investment ahead of the European Parliament's vote this week on the proposed Directive on the Patentability of Computer Implemented Inventions. Rudy Provoost, President and Chairman of EICTA and CEO of Philips Consumer Electronics, Serge Tchuruk, Chairman and CEO of Alcatel, Carl-Henric Svanberg, President and CEO of Ericsson, Jorma Ollila, Chairman and CEO of Nokia, Gerard Kleisterlee, President and CEO of Philips and Klaus Kleinfeld, President and CEO of Siemens warned that amendments to the Directive proposed by the European Parliament risk negatively impacting on Europe's digital technology industry, employment in Europe and investment in research and development (R&D) for the technologies of the future.

In the letter, the CEOs state their support for a balanced legal framework to ensure that Europe remains a competitive region for high value R&D. They also highlight the importance they attach to the ability to patent computer implemented inventions.

Rudy Provoost, President of EICTA and CEO, Philips Consumer Electronics commented : « It is a myth to think that this Directive favours large companies over small. EICTA represents 10,000 small, medium and large companies in Europe, with over 2 million employees. These companies , working together, form an ecosystem of innovation that is indispensable to the EU's main objective of creating jobs and growth. »

Serge Tchuruk, Chairman and CEO of Alcatel, commented : « Europe has a long tradition of innovation. European inventors need to be able to protect their innovation in order to maintain worldwide leadership in high technology sectors such as telecommunications. »

Carl-Henric Svanberg, President and CEO of Ericsson, commented : « It is incredibly important that we get a favourable legal framework because this will direct our work going forward in R&D. If we are not able to patent our computer implemented inventions, the digital technology industry, and also Europe as a region, will have difficulty sta ying competitive. »

Jorma Ollila, Chairman and CEO of Nokia, commented : « We need to be able to protect the huge investments that we make in Europe, in order to be globally in a strong position vis-à-vis our major competitors. This Directive goes to the heart of our competitiveness. »

Gerard Kleisterlee, President and CEO of Philips, commented : « Europe has been at the forefront of advances in digital technology. We need to continue to innovate or we will lose customers and market share. This is only possible if we can reward innovation and secure our investment in R&D. »

Klaus Kleinfeld, President and CEO of Siemens, commented : « Digital technology is at the heart of our society and computer implemented inventions play a vital role in many applications. There is no justification for denying the inventors of computer implemented inventions the same rights to patent their creations as are enjoyed by inventors in other, more traditional, fields. »

For further information :
Mark MacGann, EICTA : +32-473-496-388
Richard Jacques, Brunswick : +44-7974-98-2557

Notes for editors

CII Directive

In our digital era, computer-implemented inventions (CII) are at the heart of all digital technology and are a very significant force behind innovation in Europe in many industry sectors spanning healthcare, telecommunications, mobile phones, motor vehicles, aviation and consumer electronics. These computer-implemented
inventions will continue to boost Research and Development (R&D) and secure employment in Europe, as long as patents can adequately protect them. Patent protection currently exists and would be maintained by the political agreement achieved by the Council in May 2004 on the CII Directive, and adopted as a Common Position by the Council on 7th March 2005. A number of amendments have been proposed to the Directive that would act to exclude important fields of high tech innovation from patent protection. EICTA's members, together with other key industry sectors, would be unable to sustain current levels of R&D investment in the face of increased copying from overseas. This would prevent European industry from competing internationally, damaging future economic growth and leading to significant job losses.

Alcatel

Alcatel provides communications solutions to telecommunic ation carriers, Internet service providers and enterprises for delivery of voice, data and video applications to their customers or employees. It brings its leading position in fixed and mobile broadband networks, applications and services, to help its partners and customers build a user-centric broadband world. With sales of €12.3bn in 2004, Alcatel operates in more than 130 countries and employs 56,000 worldwide.

Ericsson

Ericsson is the largest supplier of mobile systems in the world and supports all major standards for wireless communication. The world's 10 largest mobile operators are among its customers, and some 40% of all mobile calls are made through its systems. Ericsson provides total solutions - from systems and applications to services and core technology for mobile handsets. With Sony Ericsson, it is also a top supplier of complete mobile multi-media products. Present in more than 140 countries, Ericsson achieved net sales of €14.3bn and a net profit of over €2bn in 2004.

Nokia

Nokia is a world leader in mobile communications, driving the growth and sustainability of the broader mobility industry. It connects people to each other and the information that matters to them with 'easy-to -use' and innovative products like mobile phones, devices and solutions for imaging, games, media and businesses. It provides equipment, solutions and services for network operators and corporations. With 50,534 employees worldwide, Nokia achieved net sales of €29.3bn and a net profit of €3.2bn in 2004.

Philips

Royal Philips Electronics of the Netherlands is one of the world's biggest electronic companies as well as the largest in Europe, with 160,900 employees in over 60 countries and revenues of EUR 30.3 billion in 2004. Philips is currently number one in the global markets for lighting, electric shavers and DVD recorders ; and number two in medical diagnostic imaging worldwide.

Siemens

Siemens is a global powerhouse in electrical engineering and electronics. The company has 440,000 employees working to develop and manufacture products, design and install complex systems and projects, and tailor a wide range of services for individual requirements. It provides innovative technologies and comprehensive know-how to benefit customers in 190 countries. Founded more than 150 years ago, the company is active in the areas of Information and Communications, Automation and Control, Power, Transportation, Medical, and Lighting. In 2004, Siemens had sales of €75.2bn and a net income of €3.405bn.

EICTA

EICTA, founded in 1999, is the voice of the Information and Communications Technology and Consumer Electronics Industries in Europe. It comprises 53 major multinational companies and 34 national industry associations from 24 European countries. In all, EICTA represents more than 10,000 companies all over Europe with more than 2 million employees and EUR 1000 billion in revenues.

Patents4Innovation

For further information on the breadth of industry in favour of a Directive based on the EU Council's Common Position, please visit www.patents4innovation.org.

Contact press alcatel.com

Voir en ligne : Communiqué original sur le site d'Alcatel

5 PDG de géants des télécoms signent une lettre contre les amendements du Parlement européen

Gérald Sédrati-Dinet (gibus) — 2005-02-25T23:00:00Z

Les dirigeant d'Alcatel, Ericsson, Nokia, Philips et Siemens ont signé, le 7 novembre 2003, une lettre à destination de la Commission européenne et du Conseil de l'Union europénne, se plaignant des amendements du Parlement européen à la proposition de directive sur les brevets logiciel, affirmant que ces amendements enlèveraient effectivement to ute valeur à la plupart des brevets détenus par leur entreprise, portant ainsi préjudice à la compétitivité de l'industrie européenne et violant l'Accord sur les ADPIC. La FFII souligne que la directive menace bien les intérêts des départements des brevets de ces sociétés mais pas ceux des entreprises elles-mêmes : la lettre est marquée d'affirmations dogmatiques fallacieuses qui en dit long sur l'idéologie des départements des brevets et peu sur les intérêts des entreprises, dont de nombreux employés, particulièrement des développeurs de logiciels, soutiennent les positions de la FFII.

Monsieur le ministre du Conseil Compétitivité, Rocco Buttiglione, Messieurs les commissaires, Frederik Bolkestein et Erkki Liikanen, de la Commission européenne,

le 7 novembre 2003,

Cher Ministre, chers Commissaires,

Objet : Proposition de directive sur la brevetabilité des inventions mises en œuvre par ordinateur (Computer-Implemented Inventions : CII)

En tant que dirigeants des cinq principales entreprises européennes des télécommunicatioons et d'électronique grand public, nous vous écrivons pour exprimer notre profonde inquiétude à propos des amendements récemment adoptés par le Parlement européen concernant la proposition de directive de la Commission sur la brevetabilité des inventions mises en œuvre par ordinateur (Computer-Implemented Inventions : CII), communément appelée « directive sur les brevets logiciels ».

Il est assez remarquable que l'abréviation « CII » — pour Computer-Implemented Inventions : inventions mises en œuvre par ordinateur — n'est pas employée dans le titre de la directive originale. L'avocat en brevets d'une entreprise qui écrit ceci — Tim Frain de Nokia ? — semble empressé d'utiliser chaque occasion appropriée ou non de lancer « CII » comme abréviation déstinée à remplacer le terme familier de « brevets logiciels ». Il est clair qu'il s'agit d'une formulation provenant d'un avocat en brevets et non de PDG d'entreprises de télécommunications. On peut trouver plus de détails sur la campagne autour du terme « invention mise en œuvre par ordinateur », qui est partie de l'OEB en mai 2000, dans l'article What is a Computer-Implemented Invention ? — Qu'est-ce qu'une invention mise en œuvre par ordinateur ? —.

Ensemble, nos entreprises investissent 15 milliards d'euros par an dans la R&D. Dans certains domaines, pas moins de 90% de ces investissements concernent des CII, telles que définies dans la proposition de directive.

Les investissements en R&D des entreprises signataires se concentrent dans le développement et le déploiement d'appareils et de solutions de télécommunication. Environ 5 à 10% de cet argent [1] sont dépensés dans l'obtention de brevets. Le développement de nouvelles idéées informatiques, telles qu'elles sont exprimées dans les brevets détenus par ces sociétés, comptent pour bien moins que cela, probablement moins d'1% de leurs dépenses. Les brevets ne sont plutôt qu'un des moyens possibles — formels ou informels — dont disposent ces entreprises pour protéger leurs investissements.

On peut trouver de plus amples détails sur le portefeuille de brevets et les brevets logiciels typiques détenus par ces entreprises sur :

Disposer d'un système de brevets stable et fiable est vital pour protéger les investissements en R&D et pour encourager les innovations futures en Europe.

C'est peut-être le cas pour certaines industries. Mais pour autant que l'on considère l'objet de cette directive, cela contredit toutes les connaissances et expériences publiées jusqu'ici dans des études économiques.

L'objecti original de cette directiev était 1) d'harmoniser le droit en Europe et 2) de mettre un terme à la dérive vers l'approche des États-Unis brevetant de pures méthodes d'affaires et des logiciels non techniques, tout en 3) préservant l'interopérabilité. Nous soutenons tous ces objectifs.

La Commission européenne a bel et bien déclaré qu'il s'agissait des objectifs de sa proposition de directive mais en y regardant de plus près, la proposition n'en remplissait aucun. Au lieu de ça, elle accomplissait d'autres objectifs non avoués, tels que la brevetabimité illimitée des « méthodes d'affaires mise en œuvre par ordinateur » et la priorité absolue de tels brevets sur toute considération d'interopérabilité. Les départements des brevets des entreprises signataires de cette lettre sont les principaux partisans de ces objectifs réels. On pourra reconnaître l'arbre à ses fruits...

La directive était également destinée à maintenir et codifier le statu quo européen basé sur la meilleure pratique actuelle, qui a permi aux modèles d'affaires des logiciels libres de prospérer côte à côte avec les brevets, tout en protégeant également les intérêts des développeurs de logiciels indépendants et des petites et moyennes entreprises en général. Nous soutenont également ces objectifs fermement.

Par « statu quo européen basé sur la meilleure pratique actuelle », les dirigeants se réfèrent à une pratique de l'Office européen des brevets qui n'est pas significativement différent de celle de l'USPTO — l'Office états-unien des brevets et des marques déposées. Si quelque chose protége les petites entreprises en Europe, c'est plutôt l'incertitude juridique engendrée par le fait que cette « meilleure pratique » est en désaccord avec le droit positif.

Comme le rapporte le Commissariat général du plan en France en 2002 : « Seule la “paix armée” qui prévaut actuellement, précisément du fait de l'incertitude juridique qui entoure la notion de brevet “logiciel”, explique en effet que les brevets existants ne soient pas plus fréquemment utilisés. »

L'objectif avoué de la proposition de directive que défendent la Commission européenne et les PDG signataires est précisément de supprimer cette « incertitude juridique » qui a « protég[é] les intérêts des développeurs de logiciels indépendants et des petites et moyennes entreprises en général ».

Cependant, le vote du 24 septembre 2003 au Parlement a complètement retourné la proposition originale de la Commission, suppriment pour beaucoup la protection efficace par le brevet et, dans le cas des télécommunications et de l'électronique grand public, probablement la majeure partie de notre investissement en R&D. Ceci aurait des conséquences dévastatrices pour nos entreprises. Ce serait la porte ouverte au premier venu qui pourrait exploiter les résultats de nos coûteux programmes de R&D sans rien dépenser, voire même sans aucun apport en R&D de son côté. Ceci est contraire à ce qui a été stipulé au Conseil européen de Lisbonne, à savoir que « l'innovation et les idées doivent être dûment récompensées dans la nouvelle économie fondée sur la connaissance, en particulier au moyen d'une protection par des brevets ».

Cette affirmation insistante est en contradiction avec toute la connaissance publique sur l'économie du développement logiciel dans le secteur des télécoms comme dans tout autre domaine.

Quiconque voulant concurrencer l'une des entreprises signataires devrait engager d'énormes dépenses. Imiter et réimplémenter le logiciel lui-même est un procédé extrêmement coûteux, particulièrement lorsque, comme c'est généralement le cas, le logiciel n'est disponible que sous forme binaire et que le droit d'auteur doit être respecté.

Voir la déclaration de Robert Barr, du département des droits de propriété industrielle (IPR) de CISCO.

La perte d'une protection efficace par le brevet mettrait nos entreprises en position concurrentielle désavantageuse à court terme et réduirait à long terme les incitations à investir davantage dans la R&D en Europe. Au final, il y aura moins d'innovations concernant le logiciel en Europe et en fin de compte, il serait peu probable que l'Europe atteigne l'objectif de Lisbonne de devenir « l'économie de la connaissance la plus compétitive et la plus dynamique du monde ».

Cette affirmation sans fondement est en contradiction avec le sens commun des développeurs de logiciels, y compris de plus de 500 employés de ces cinq entreprises qui ont signé la pétition NoEPatents — non aux brevets logiciels. Suite à des entretiens avec des cadres des entreprises signataires — et à des témoignages tels que celui de Robert Barr de Cisco, voir ci-dessus —, nous savons que les brevets sont largement perçus comme étant un frein à l'innovation, même dans les grandes entreprises de télécommunications et d'électronique.

Les amendements du Parlement suggèrent que l'Europe est prête à tourner le dos à ses obligations internationnales selon l'Accord sur les ADPIC.

Encore une fois, il s'agit d'un mensonge déjà bien bien documenté : voir L'Accord sur les ADPIC et les brevets logiciels.

Plus encore, ils changeraient le climat juridique en Europe de manière si soudaine, dramatique et inattendue, qu'ils représentent d'ores et déjà un message au reste du monde comme quoi l'un des piliers juridiques nécéssaires pour atteindre une Société de l'information européenne viable est instable, imprévisible et non fiable.

Alors que le système de brevets est peut-être un pilier pour la viabilité de certaines industries, aucune étude économique sérieuse n'a jamais montré qu'il était bénéfique — et encore moins indispensable — pour la société de l'information. La société de l'information a plutôt besoin de réaffirmer de manière stable, prévisible et fiable que chacun est libre de créer et de publier ses propres travaux sous le droit d'auteur et d'interopérer avec d'autres sytèmes. Les amendements du Parlement fournissent précisément cette réaffirmation.

Nous pensons par conséquent que le Conseil et la Commission ont besoin de prendre affirmativement les mesures appropriées pour redresser la situation actuelle en envoyant un contre-signal fort que le droit en Europe ne sera pas changé soudainement et dramatiquement et confirmant que l'Europe n'ignorera ni ne bafouera ses obligations internationales.

En d'autres termes, les patrons de 5 grosses entreprises appellent des responsables administratifs officiels à prendre des décisions législative à l'encontre de la Convention sur le brevet européen et du seul organe législatif démocratiquement élu de l'Union européenne.

La directive, telle qu'amendée par le Parlement, entraînera un sérieux, et peut être fatal, contretemps aux aspirations que nous partageons et qui ont été déclarées au Sommet de Lisbonne pour que l'Europe devienne l'économie de la connaissance la plus compétitive au monde.

Le cadre juridique actuel pour les CII en Europe rend très bien service à toutes les parties prenantes. Nous ne voulons pas voir de rétrécissement soudain ou dramatique de l'étendue de ce qui est brevetable. Si l'on ne peut trouver de solution codifiant le statu quo, il vaudrait mieux ne pas avoir de directive du tout plutôt qu'une directive qui causerait un préjudice incommensurable à l'industrie européenne.

Cordialement,

Serge Tchuruk (Alcatel), Carl-Henric Svanberg (Ericsson), Jorma Ollila (Nokia), Gerard J. Kleisterlee (Philips), Heinrich v. Pierer (Siemens)

Ces remarques en conclusion montrent que le soutien des signataires aux objectifs allégués d'« harmonisation » et de « clarification » revêtissent en fait une importance mineure.

Les PDG des cinq entreprises ont permis eux-même à leur département des brevets de les tromper. Ces départements des brevets ont produit chaque année des milliers de brevets étendus et triviaux sur des méthodes d'organisation ou de calcul et ils veulent une directive qui rendent applicables ces brevets. S'ils n'obtiennent pas une telle directive, ils préfèrent avoir une situation obscure — où leurs brevets peuvent au moins continuer à être amassés pour la comptabilité de leur entreprise et l'évasion fiscale.

Certains des PDG signataires aimeraient se poser en leaders avec un esprit scientifique et le sens des responsabilités sociales. Pour citer cette lettre. Cette lettre, pour reprendre ses propres termes, pourrait « entraîner un sérieux, et peut être fatal, contretemps [à ces] aspirations ».

Voir en ligne : Article original en anglais

[1] voir les chiffres d'Arlene McCarthy ont été apparemment fournis par les entreprises signataires elles-mêmes.

CEA-PME

Gérald Sédrati-Dinet (gibus) — 2005-01-12T11:09:17Z

Les trois confédérations européennes CEA-PME (Confédération européenne des associations de petites et moyennes entreprises), CEDI (Confédération européenne des indépendants) et ESBA (European Small Business Alliance - Assocation européenne des petites et moyennes entreprises) représentent environ 2 millions de petites et moyennes entreprises (PME) situées dans toute l'Europe.

La CEA-PME (Confédération européenne des associations de petites et moyennes entreprises) est une confédération apolitique de 22 associations membres de 19 pays européens représentant plus de 500000 entreprises. Elle représente les intérêts des PME dans tous les secteurs des institutions européennes dans le but de leur donner un degré d'influence en rapport avec leur importance au sein de l'économie européenne.

En septembre 2003 (avant le vote en 1^re lecture au Parlement européen), au sein d'une Alliance avec la CEDI (Confédération européenne des indépendants) et l'ESBA (European Small Business Alliance - Assocation européenne des petites et moyennes entreprises), ils avaient fortement pris position contre les brevets logiciels.

Mario Ohoven, Président de la Confédération européenne des associations de petites et moyennes entreprises (CEA-PME), avait rejeté la proposition de directive sur la brevetabilité des inventions mises en œuvre par ordinateur, car cette proposition va profondément à l'encontre des intérêts des SSII européennes. Il avait avertit que si le Parlement européen adoptait cette proposition sans aucun amendement, l'économie européenne serait menacée de perdre des milliers d'emploi, de subir un déclin spectaculaire de ses innovations et cela pourrait aller jusqu'à l'arrêt total des innovations pour les PME.

Si la Directive est mise en application comme prévu, les PME qui n'ont pas de juristes d'entreprise seront confrontées à d'énormes coûts supplémentaires, car elles devront, à l'avenir, mener à bien de vastes recherches en matière de brevets pour chaque projet logiciel. Cela ne concerne pas seulement les développeurs de logiciels, mais aussi les revendeurs d'ordinateurs et les branches IT des sociétés d'applications. Elles seront également confrontées à des coûts de licences pour utilisation de brevets externes, des coûts supplémentaires de développement et des coûts pour leurs propres brevets, si elles veulent essayer de se prémunir contre les attaques des autres entreprises.

Selon la Commission Anti-trust, des études empiriques (par exemple de l'Institut Frauenhofer) sur le comportement des PME de la branche Logiciel ont montré que les brevets sont le moyen le moins efficace de protection des investissements. Pour se protéger d'attaques éventuelles, les tenants de la brevetabilité des logiciels suggèrent de déposer le plus grand nombre possible de brevets de façon à constituer un portefeuille de brevets. Néanmoins, les PME s'en sont toujours très bien sorties sans brevets. Elles sont parfaitement protégées par les droits d'auteur.

À la différence de technologies plus complexes, le développement de logiciels est ouvert aux petites sociétés et même aux personnes physiques. Les brevets logiciels nuisent à l'innovation en augmentant les coûts, en générant des incertitudes sur l'assemblage des nombreux composants nécessaires à des programmes complexes sur ordinateur et en limitant la rapidité et l'efficience des innovations. Ces risques et responsabilités sont particulièrement pesants pour les PME, qui jouent un rôle central dans l'innovation logiciel en Europe ainsi qu'en Amérique du Nord. En outre, on a constaté que dans le secteur TCI l'augmentation de la protection par brevets conduisait à un accroissement de l'utilisation stratégique des brevets, mais pas à un développement sensible de l'innovation.

Les droits d'auteur et la réglementation en matière de concurrence permettent aux PME de se développer, malgré la multiple d'avantages en ressources dont disposent les grosses sociétés. Le secteur logiciel, à l'heure actuelle flexible et à fort potentiel de développement, pourrait devenir un secteur naufragé, car on ne pourrait plus y accéder qu'après de longues négociations avec les grosses entreprises et tout un parcours du combattant juridique. En supposant que quelques PME puissent prospérer dans ce nouvel environnement, nombre d'entre elles n'y arriveraient pas. La validation de standards vagues en matière de brevetabilité assombrirait les perspectives du secteur des logiciels libres et open source en Europe, tandis qu'elle préserverait la domination des leaders actuels.

CEA-PME promeut l'harmonisation des pratiques de brevetabilité européenne. Néanmoins, il faut trouver une méthode qui ne restreigne ni les PME, ni le secteur logiciel libre / logiciel open source. La meilleure solution serait de s'abstenir d'étendre le système des brevets au champ de la logique et de déclarer clairement dans la Directive que le traitement des données ne relève pas du domaine technique et n'est donc pas brevetable.

CEA-PME soutient que les lois en vigueur - comme les droits d'auteur et l'Accord sur les Brevets Européens, Article 52 - sont suffisantes et que la Directive doit se contenter de les entériner. L'interprétation de la législation afférente doit être laissée à la jurisprudence.

Bruxelles, le 16/09/2003 - Walter Grupp

Voir en ligne : Déclaration sur le site web de la CEA-PME

ObjectWeb

Gérald Sédrati-Dinet (gibus) — 2004-09-06T20:41:38Z

ObjectWeb est un consortium international à but non lucratif regroupant des industriels, des laboratoires de recherche, des utilisateurs et des membres individuels.

La mission d'ObjectWeb est de favoriser la création et l'adoption d'intergiciels, ou logiciels d'infrastructure, libres. Sa vision est que l'infrastructure informatique devient essentielle pour tous et doit par conséquent être considérée comme un bien commun d'utilité publique. ObjectWeb s'attache à la création de ces biens immatériels communs en toute indépendance quelle qu'en soit l'utilisation. Dans ce but, ObjectWeb fournit une structure collaborative qui permet à des experts du monde entier de réaliser des implémentations libres de standards ouverts.

ObjectWeb s'est clairement prononcé contre la brevetabilité du logiciel en étant signataire de l'Appel à l'action lancé par la FFII et en publiant un Livre blanc sur le brevets logiciels, qui a d'ailleurs été joint en annexe lors de l'envoi de l'Appel urgent->art31]

Plus d'information sur http://www.objectweb.org.

Contact : François LETELLIER
INRIA Rhône-Alpes - ObjectWeb Consortium Executive Committee
email : francois.letellier at objectweb.org - phone : +33 (0)6 84 64 00 24

Alcatel Denies Patent Infringement Allegations by Fitel USA

Gérald Sédrati-Dinet (gibus) — 2003-11-02T23:00:00Z

DALLAS, Nov. 3, 2003 – Alcatel (Paris : CGEP.PA and NYSE : ALA) today announced that it has filed a response in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, denying the infringement of a patent alleged in a complaint brought by OFS/Fitel.

Alcatel's patented TeraLight optical fiber has been widely available since 1999 and is the first of a new generation of optical fiber designed for the networks of the future. TeraLight has established new levels of performance with numerous bandwidth and distance records for both 10- and 40-Gbit/s applications.

Prior to the filing of this litigation, Alcatel informed OFS/Fitel that the TeraLight products neither used the Fitel patent nor was the Fitel patent valid. OFS/Fitel was well aware of the invalidity of its patent but nonetheless chose to respond by bringing this litigation. Alcatel strongly believes the marketplace should not be misled by the claims in the Fitel lawsuit regarding Alcatel products that have been in the market for several years. Alcatel will vigorously defend TeraLight and its position in the marketplace by showing that the OFS/Fitel claim is baseless and that the Fitel patent is neither infringed, nor valid, nor enforceable.

About Alcatel

Alcatel provides end-to-end communications solutions, enabling carriers, service providers and enterprises to deliver content to any type of user, anywhere in the world. Leveraging its long-term leadership in telecommunications network equipment as well as its expertise in applications and network services, Alcatel enables its customers to focus on optimizing their service offerings and revenue streams. With sales of Euro 16.5 billion in 2002, Alcatel operates in more than 130 countries.

Contact press alcatel.com

Voir en ligne : Communiqué original sur le site d'Alcatel

Alcatel et Qualcomm concluent un accord sur l'utilisation du brevet CDMA

Gérald Sédrati-Dinet (gibus) — 2002-07-15T22:00:00Z

Paris, le 16 juillet 2002 _- Qualcomm Incorporated (Nasdaq : QCOM), pionnier et leader mondial de la technologie numérique mobile CDMA (Code Division Multiple Access) et Alcatel (Paris : CGEP.PA et NYSE : ALA), l'un des principaux équipementiers mondiaux en télécommunication, annoncent la signature d'un accord portant sur l'utilisation du brevet des équipements CDMA. D'après les termes de l'accord, Qualcomm a concédé à Alcatel, contre le paiement de royalties, une licence mondiale lui permettant de développer, fabriquer et vendre des équipements de 3^e génération WCDMA (UMTS) et TD-SCDMA à partir du portefeuille de brevets CDMA de Qualcomm.

Dans le cadre de cet accord, Alcatel a accordé à Qualcomm l'utilisation gratuite au niveau mondial de son portefeuille de brevets pour développer, fabriquer et vendre des circuits incorporables dans les équipements CDMA mobiles et multimodes.

« QUALCOMM is pleased to license Alcatel, a premier worldwide equipment manufacturer to develop, manufacture and sell WCDMA and TD-SCDMA wireless infrastructure products using QUALCOMM's patents, » said Steve Altman, president of QUALCOMM Technology Licensing. « This agreement further validates the strength of QUALCOMM's patent portfolio and applicability to WCDMA, also known as UMTS, and TD-SCDMA. »

« This license strengthens Alcatel's leadership position as an enabler of mobile data and 3G CDMA wireless services, » said Marc Rouanne, president of Alcatel's Mobile Networks activities. « We are now, more than ever, well positioned to provide mobile operators with field-proven 3G solutions with everything in place, from UTRAN, Core network, ATM switches to Open service Platform and Software solutions. »

Alcatel's UMTS radio infrastructure (UTRAN) offering is developed and produced by Evolium SAS, the joint venture between Alcatel and Fujitsu. This joint venture leverages Alcatel's expertise in GSM, GPRS and EDGE as well as in ATM and IP technologies, and combines it with the advanced experience of Fujitsu as supplier of NTT DoCoMo, which has a commercial UMTS network in service since October 2001.

À propos de QUALCOMM

QUALCOMM Incorporated (www.qualcomm.com) is a leader in developing and delivering innovative digital wireless communications products and services based on the Company's CDMA digital technology. The Company's business areas include CDMA chipsets and system software ; technology licensing ; the Binary Runtime Environment for Wireless(TM) (BREW(TM)) applications platform ; QChat(TM) push-to-talk technology ; Eudora® e-mail software ; digital cinema systems ; and satellite-based systems including portions of the Globalstar(TM) system and wireless fleet management systems, OmniTRACS® and OmniExpress®. QUALCOMM owns patents that are essential to all of the CDMA wireless telecommunications standards that have been adopted or proposed for adoption by standards-setting bodies worldwide. QUALCOMM has licensed its essential CDMA patent portfolio to more than 100 telecommunications equipment manufacturers worldwide. Headquartered in San Diego, Calif., QUALCOMM is included in the S&P 500 Index and traded on The Nasdaq Stock Market® under the ticker symbol QCOM.

Except for the historical information contained herein, this news release contains forward-looking statements that are subject to risks and uncertainties, including the Company's ability to successfully design and have manufactured significant quantities of CDMA components on a timely and profitable basis, the extent and speed to which CDMA is deployed, change in economic conditions of the various markets the Company serves, as well as the other risks detailed from time to time in the Company's SEC reports, including the report on Form 10-K for the year ended September 30, 2001, and most recent Form 10-Q.

À propos d'Alcatel

Alcatel conçoit, développe et construit des réseaux de communications innovants et compétitifs permettant aux opérateurs, aux fournisseurs de services et aux entreprises d'offrir tous contenus (voix, données ou multimédia) à tous clients, partout dans le monde. A partir d'un portefeuille complet de solutions qui vont des infrastructures optiques aux réseaux fixes et mobiles et à l'accès large bande, les clients d'Alcatel peuvent se consacrer à l'optimisation de leurs offres de services et de leurs sources de revenus. Avec un chiffre d'affaires de 25 milliards d'euros en 2001 et fort de 99 000 salariés, Alcatel est présent dans plus de 130 pays.

Contact press alcatel.com

Voir en ligne : Communiqué original sur le site d'Alcatel