mohangk.org/blog

Its sad that most of the time, Malaysia or Singapore gets on Slashdot, its for something silly, embarrassing or downright disturbing. Sigh.

Slashdot | Singapore Firm Claims Patent Breach By Virtually All Websites

“A Singapore firm, VueStar has threatened to sue websites that use pictures or graphics to link to another page, claiming it owns the patent for a technology used by millions around the world. The company is also planning to take on giants like Microsoft and Google. It is a battle that could, at least in theory, upend the Internet. The firm has been sending out invoices to Singapore companies since last week asking them to pay up.”

S’pore firm claims patent to image search : News : Internet – ZDNet Asia

Dubbing itself “pioneers of visual search technology”, Vuestar Technologies said it owns the patent to the technology that enables “Internet searching via visual images”.

In sum, the company implied that any Web site that uses pictures and graphics to link to another site or Web page will need a license from Vuestar.

“Those who use visual images which hyperlink to other Web pages or Web sites…whether on the first page or subsequent pages of a Web site require a Vuestar ‘license of use’,” the company said on its site.

In other words if you have images on your websites which double up as links these guys will send you an invoice of around S$5000. Currently the company claims that the patent is enforceable in Singapore, Australia, New Zealand and the United States.

This type of patent trolling can only be fixed with some form or real patent reform (Not this.). Too bad most countries are more interested in signing bilateral FTAs with the US that include cross nation patent enforcement and harmonization. What tends to happen during this harmonization is laws are modified to suit a lowest common denominator (With the US most often then not being the lowest denominator). This tends to err on the side of big companies and existing copyright/patent holders and screwing Joe public.

With the debate on patent reform in the US still going on, is this a smart thing for countries to be doing ?

Take for example, the Singaporean experience :

MinLaw – United States-Singapore Free Trade Agreement – Intellectual Property Chapter: Factsheet On Provisions With Major Impact

2 Extension of Current Copyright Term of Protection

Where the term of protection for a work is calculated on the basis on the life of a person, this term of protection shall be life plus 70 years after author’s death. Currently this is life plus 50 years. (Art 16.4.4 (a))

Where the term of protection of a work is not calculated on the basis on the life of a person, this term of protection shall be not less than 70 years from the end of the calendar year of the first authorised publication of the work. Currently it is 50 years. (Art 16.4.4 (b))

So they increased copyright protection by 20 years. Was this in the best interest of the Singaporean public ? Was this something the Singaporeans wanted?

What about the Singaporean DMCA ? Was that a reasonable trade off, considering that there is still much opposition to the DMCA in the US? Will the Singapore version of the DMCA benefit from any reform that might happen due to this opposition?

In the end, its the people who get screwed over.

No Love for VueStar | ThinkingNectar

On a parting note, what on earth was the officer at IPOS thinking when he/she issue the patent?

Sigh.