Saint Firefox, Defender of the Weak

News that Firefox 3.x will be adding support for Ogg Theora and Vorbis is welcome, since the latter find themselves in a typical Catch-22 situation: nobody uses them because nobody supports them. But I was struck by the following comment:

there is a risk to bundling even an open source codec like Theora because of the possibility of submarine patents -patents nobody knows about until a product that unknowingly infringes it, succeeds, becoming a target for the patent owner who will seek monetary compensation and a good licensing agreement. This is why the HTML 5 spec doesn’t recommend any encoder so vendors don’t have to choose between taking this kind of risk or not complying with the standard.

During today’s announcement at the Products and Technology Roadmap Mozilla Summit session, Mitchell Baker commented that Mozilla would be a bad target as it is a project with a product a lot of people cares about.

Mike Shaver, interim Mozilla’s VP of Engineering, also commented “Somebody had to do it. It’s good it was us”.

Indeed. And it's further proof of the ever-more central position of Firefox in the free software ecosystem.

Submarines Ahoy

I've not been following the details of the US Patent Reform Act, but this sounds worrying:

The Electronic Frontier Foundation supports the Patent Reform Act of 2007, but the group does worry that the law in its present state could reform the EFF's Patent Busting Project right out of existence.

The EFF has sent a letter to Senators Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Arlen Specter (R-PA) outlining its problems with the Patent Reform Act (the bill has already passed the House). Under the bill's current language, patents will be subject to a post-grant review process, but the current reexamination system would be scrapped.

The post-grant review system would allow nonprofits like the EFF to challenge bum patents for only 12 months after they are issued. In the EFF's view, this isn't nearly enough time to become aware of dodgy patents and the impact they will have on the tech community at large. The group would prefer to retain the current reexamination system and simply add post-grant review to the process.

In particular, this would seem to encourage "submarine patents" - those which aren't used for a while, and then sprung on an unsuspecting world. By which time, of course, it would be too late to challenge.

As the EFF points out:

The public has a right to defend itself against patents that should never have been granted, and organizations like EFF exist to assist in this process. Reexamination proceedings are essential for us to continue this work.