Is Autodesk Outfoxing the ITC?

The article about Autodesk’s patents in today’s upFront.eZine got my attention. Take a look at the following patents related to sheet sets:
Automatic view creation in a sheet set manager for a graphics program
Sheet set fields of a sheet set manager for a graphics program
Sheet set manager for a graphics program
Sheet set publishing in a sheet set manager for a graphics program
Transmittal and archive tool in a sheet set manager for a graphics program
User interface elements of a sheet set manager for a graphics program

I think I know who these patents are designed for – the IntelliCAD Technology Consortium.

Obviously Autodesk is fed up of the ITC cloning their software and relieving them of their customers. So now they are patenting the new features so that the ITC cannot copy them. And if they do, Autodesk can sue the hell out of them. Judging by the way Autodesk has been shopping around for companies of late, I guess they have kept aside a fat bundle for legal expenses.

Sounds like a good plan, if you ask me. What do you think?

  • Stefan Boeykens

    I must admit that I haven’t read the full patent texts, but at first sight, the features described in these patents seem to be currently available in other applications, e.g. ArchiCAD (with its Publisher, Layouts etc…). The wording might be different, but the functionality seems similar.

  • Stefan Boeykens

    I must admit that I haven’t read the full patent texts, but at first sight, the features described in these patents seem to be currently available in other applications, e.g. ArchiCAD (with its Publisher, Layouts etc…). The wording might be different, but the functionality seems similar.

  • Deelip Menezes

    Stefan,

    Consider the patent titled “Sheet set manager for a graphics program”. I dont know if this is an application or if they have been awarded it already. But if Autodesk does get such a patent, I pretty sure they are not going to license it to the ITC.

  • Deelip Menezes

    Stefan,Consider the patent titled “Sheet set manager for a graphics program”. I dont know if this is an application or if they have been awarded it already. But if Autodesk does get such a patent, I pretty sure they are not going to license it to the ITC.

  • Robin Capper

    So can ITC make a manager for “Project Drawings, Drawing Categories and Drawings” instead of “Sheet Sets, Subsets and Sheets”?

  • Robin Capper

    So can ITC make a manager for “Project Drawings, Drawing Categories and Drawings” instead of “Sheet Sets, Subsets and Sheets”?

  • Deelip Menezes

    Robin, sure then can. Just that the ITC’s “Project Drawings, Drawing Categories and Drawings” shoudl not work like Autodesk’s “Sheet Sets, Subsets and Sheets”.

    From the litle I know about patents, you patent the idea, not the name. Names are trademarked.

  • Deelip Menezes

    Robin, sure then can. Just that the ITC’s “Project Drawings, Drawing Categories and Drawings” shoudl not work like Autodesk’s “Sheet Sets, Subsets and Sheets”.From the litle I know about patents, you patent the idea, not the name. Names are trademarked.

  • ralphg

    IntellICAD used that approach for the RevCloud command.

    Autodesk has a patent on how its RevCloud automatically draws the arcs for the revision cloud.

    So the ITC version draws the arcs differently; the command name is the same.

  • ralphg

    IntellICAD used that approach for the RevCloud command. Autodesk has a patent on how its RevCloud automatically draws the arcs for the revision cloud.So the ITC version draws the arcs differently; the command name is the same.

  • Anonymous

    You most certainly do NOT “patent the idea”.

    Patents are issued solely for a particular implementation of an idea and it’s questionable whether software should reasonably be patentable at all.

  • Anonymous

    You most certainly do NOT “patent the idea”.Patents are issued solely for a particular implementation of an idea and it’s questionable whether software should reasonably be patentable at all.

  • Deelip Menezes

    Anonymous, I believe you are correct. An implementation of an idea can be patented, not the idea itself.

    However, I would like to know why you think software should not be patentable. I don’t see how an algorithm that I spent a lot of time and evergy inventing is any different from any other invention.

  • Deelip Menezes

    Anonymous, I believe you are correct. An implementation of an idea can be patented, not the idea itself.However, I would like to know why you think software should not be patentable. I don’t see how an algorithm that I spent a lot of time and evergy inventing is any different from any other invention.

  • Anonymous

    of course, there is nothing preventing untraceable 3rd parties from publishing functional lisp programs that implement the desired functionality. this would be beyond the control of the ITC, and difficult to litigate if it is a) international, b) anonymous, and c) not for any particular profit or personal gain.

  • Anonymous

    of course, there is nothing preventing untraceable 3rd parties from publishing functional lisp programs that implement the desired functionality. this would be beyond the control of the ITC, and difficult to litigate if it is a) international, b) anonymous, and c) not for any particular profit or personal gain.

  • Bobby Michaels

    I would like to have the patent for “line”.

  • Bobby Michaels

    I would like to have the patent for “line”.