e-Literate

Present is Prologue

Tag: Blackboard-Inc.

  • Is Prometheus a Big Problem for Blackboard?

    I’ve been thinking lately about the fact that almost none of the prior art listed in the Wikipedia entry was in Blackboard’s patent filing. It’s remarkable, really, since they are legally obligated to list any potential prior art of which they are aware at the time of filing. Failing to do so would constitute fraud. This is just one of several ways in which the application appears to be very sloppy.

    I was thinking about this again when I received an email from a colleague pointing out that Prometheus is not yet listed in our prior art documentation effort. And it looks like Prometheus could present a really big legal problem for Blackboard. (more…)

  • Conversation with My Own Imaginary Spinmeister

    Me: Blackboard has an imaginary spinmeister! Oh NO!

    Spinmeister: Oh, that guy. I wouldn’t worry too much about him. He was Joe Lieberman’s imaginary spinmeister. He’s not exactly the sharpest imaginary pencil in the imaginary box, if you know what I mean.

    Me: But…their imaginary spinmeister said that this will all just blow over if they wait it out.

    Spinmeister: And that strategy worked soooo well for Lieberman. Listen, this thing is just getting started. It’s only two weeks old. And already there are grumblings among the Blackboard building blocks community that they shouldn’t be contributing code and ideas to a company that is just going to turn around and patent them. Word is getting out. You have to give your efforts time to have their effect.

    Me: So we shouldn’t care that Blackboard’s CEO isn’t answering questions about the specific nature of the patent?

    Spinmeister: Oh, you should care. You should continue to turn that against him. Keep educating people about what the patent actually says. Keep circulating the plain English translations. The more people know, the more concerned that they will be about the non-answers they get from Blackboard, and the more Chasen looks like a sleazy politician.

    Me: Well…OK…but…he has a mantra and everything!

    Spinmeister: Chill. You have a mantra too. Repeat after me: “Chilling innovation…chilling innovation…chilling innovation”…”anti-competitive…anti-competitive…anti-competitive”. The people that Blackboard is trying to spin mostly have PhD’s. They’re not stupid. And they understand how innovation happens through a collegial environment of collaborative research. If you can connect the dots for them so that they don’t have to do a lot of their own digging to understand the basic issues, they will do the right thing.

    Me: What about his point that “no institutions or organizations with any clout has taken a stand” on the issue yet? Shouldn’t we be concerned about that?

    Spinmeister: That may be the only accurate statement that my imaginary colleague made. Yes, institutions will need to step up. But he’s wrong to think that it won’t happen. The New York Times didn’t rush in to endorse Ned Lamont the first day. The fact of the matter is that institutions move in a different time stream than bloggers. The fact that no big players have jumped in two weeks into the conflict doesn’t mean that they are going to sit on the sidelines. Trust me, help is on the way. You just need to hang in there and keep getting your message out.

    Me: Well, I admit this is all very comforting. But are you sure you’re right?

    Spinmeister: Have I ever steered you wrong?

    Me: Um…actually, we’ve never spoken before. Plus, you’re a figment of my imagination.

    Spinmeister: You have a point there. But really, you’re OK. The community is on the right track and will prevail. Just take a deep breath, have a beer, and keep steady.

    Me: You’re right. We’ll hang in there. Thanks.

    Spinmeister: Hey, that’s why you pay me the big imaginary bucks.

  • NoEduPatents.org Wiki

    Since we’ve already reached the limits of the prior art documentation we can feasibly do within the bounds of Wikipedia’s mission, there is now room to add at the NoEduPatents.org wiki. Please note the drill-down to the Blackboard-specific area.

    Go to town, folks.

  • How the LMOS Could Circumvent the Blackboard Patent and Why It Wouldn't Matter

    I’ve heard a handful of suggestions from different sources recently about ways in which the Blackboard patent could be circumvented. There are almost always ways to avoid infringing if one tries hard enough. For example, the LMOS probably wouldn’t violate Blackboard’s patent because it wouldn’t have to come configured in the way that Blackboard’s patent suggests out-of-the-box. Users would add applications to it in whatever combination and configuration they choose. Likewise, the much-vaunted PLE probably wouldn’t infringe either.

    But it wouldn’t matter. This would not prevent Blackboard’s successful prosecution of their patent infringement suit from chilling innovation. Here’s why: (more…)

  • A Good Visual Analysis of the Blackboard Patent Claims

    Al Essa has taken my translation of the patent claims to the next level. It’s a very clear, useful, and succinct explanation of just what the patent says Blackboard is claiming to have invented. I don’t think it can be boiled down any simpler than this.

  • Blackboard CEO Responds on the Patent Issue

    The gents at EdTechTalk ran a terrific Skypecast discussion last night (archived here) on the Blackboard patent and DOPA. I’ll leave it to others to comment on the discussion itself. What I find interesting is the letter that Blackboard CEO Michael Chasen wrote to our hosts in response to their invitation to join the talk. The full letter is on web page for the Skypecast archive, but here’s an excerpt that I find interesting: (more…)

  • One Line of Argument Against the Blackboard Patent

    Several folks on the Sloan-C listserv have raised a strong second line of argument in the Blackboard prior art fight. In addition to identifying specific LMS precursors that had most or all of the functionality outlined in the claims, we should be building the case that LMS’s were directly and consciously copied from and evolved out of more generic groupware. In other words, once you you have a generic groupware system with groups, roles, permissions, and collaborative tools, it was obvious to the educational community that groups could be classes and that tool that education-specific tools such as a test engine, a grade book, and a homework drop box should be added. (more…)