Patent Hawk Files Supreme Court Brief On Behalf Of All Oregon; Oregon Officials Say 'Who?'

from the good-work! dept

You may recall that a guy named Gary Odom, who refers to himself often in the third person as "Patent Hawk," has been known to stop by here every so often to insult us without ever, you know, backing up a point. His day job is helping companies do patent/prior art searches. Last year, he made a bit of news by suing Microsoft for a patent he held on "editable toolbars" (exciting stuff). Microsoft later accused him of violating a contract, in that Odom (whoops) had worked for Microsoft, and had an agreement about not filing for certain types of patents, or asserting them against Microsoft.

Now, with the Supreme Court agreeing to hear the Bilski case, which could have a big impact on the patentability of software and business models, a bunch of folks have been dutifully filing their amici briefs attempting to convince the Supreme Court one way or the other. These latest briefs more or less reflect what was in the original briefs filed prior to the CAFC ruling. Still, there was one interesting one: Odom and a buddy filed their own brief (which Odom, again in the third person praised his own brief as being "cogently potent in its brevity and conservatism" -- nothing like patting oneself on the back).

The brief itself is fine (though I believe a bit misleading in what it leaves out... but that's what these briefs tend to do). However, what stood out, was the odd claim on the brief that it was filed on behalf of the State of Oregon (where Odom resides). That's quite a claim... and it appears the State of Oregon, in the form of its Attorney General, doesn't agree with Odom that this represents the state:

Tony Green, a spokesman for the Oregon Attorney General, said no one in his office had heard of Odom's purported statewide representation before [Joe Mullin at The Prior Art] called. "It is our preference that people accurately convey who they're writing an amicus brief on behalf of," says Green. "We neither authorized this or had any knowledge of it."

Of course, Green also points out that the Supreme Court figured out that Odom's claim to represent the State of Oregon was backed up with about as much weight as his typical insults, and properly filed the brief as just being from Odom and his friend, rather than the state of Oregon.

22 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Did Patent Hawk Violate Contracts In Suing Microsoft?

from the integrity? dept

During the summer, we wrote about how Gary Odom, perhaps better known as The Patent Hawk for his patent consulting business, had sued Microsoft over a patent on user-configurable toolbars. Odom has been known to comment here, using a style all-too common among some of our critics: insult liberally while refusing to offer any actual points. Joe Mullin has turned up a lot more details on this particular case, including the fact that not only was Microsoft a former client of Odom, but as part of his contract he promised not to file for certain patents himself or file patent infringement lawsuits against the company. On top of that, while working for Microsoft, he had access to confidential Microsoft info, including the company's patent strategy.

Odom, not surprisingly, disputes Microsoft's version of the events -- and points out that whatever contracts he signed are no longer relevant, since he has not worked with Microsoft in years. However, there are some questions concerning when he filed this particular patent, and whether or not he disclosed that activity to Microsoft or the law firm that he worked for during some of this period. Interestingly, Odom also is perfectly happy to admit that he thinks Microsoft came up with their toolbar version totally independently (which, again, some of us believe should be proof of obviousness).

Even if we grant Odom's version of the story, you have to wonder if the long-term results of this case will come back to haunt him. Given the facts laid out here, I would think that an awful lot of companies that might use Odom's services as a patent researcher will now be rethinking him as a potential consultant.

14 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Microsoft Sued Over User Editable Toolbar Patent

from the don't-bother-creating-software,-you'll-just-get-sued dept

If you follow the patent world, you know of Gary Odom, who is known as The Patent Hawk. To say he's a big supporter of the patent system would be something of an understatement. He's been known to comment here on occasion, employing the style seen all-too-often among patent system apologists commenting on Techdirt posts: insult repeatedly and broadly, offer no actual points, refuse to actually counter anything we say, provide absolutely no evidence and (for good measure) insult again. However, as reader Jon has pointed out to us, Odom recently received a new patent (he's got a bunch) on tool group manipulations and he's now suing Microsoft for the way its toolbars work in Office 2007.

I won't comment on the patent itself and whether or not its obvious -- read the claims and judge for yourself. However, I will question just what sort of patent system we've created when simply putting a toolbar in your software that can be changed and manipulated by the end user can get you sued for patent infringement. With patents and lawsuits like this flying by every day, it almost seems as if software companies are better off not doing any actual innovation, because it's only likely to get them sued. Have an idea on how to make a toolbar function better? Don't bother unless you're willing to pay a tax. At some point you have just sit back and look at the system as a whole and wonder how we got from the vision of Thomas Jefferson to here.

54 Comments | Leave a Comment..