Is a Patent on Excel to PLC comm possible???????????

Got a quick question, some time back a few members from corporate at the company I work at approached me concerning a possible law suit that group of guys was pushing onto large companies. They claim to have a patent on linking excel to PLC's and that any company practicing this was in violation. Has anyone else heard about this and is this even possible to have to pay a fine because you might have some applications linked to a PLC via an excel spreadsheet. Just for the record, I do not have any of these and use wonderware solely for linking into my PLC's but it was a strange topic for our legal department to bring to me. Would love to know more information about this if possible as our legal department was very vague on the subject and basically just asked point blank as to whether we are using certain types of applications.

Thanks,

Chris

I could understand a copyright for a specific piece of software (as in a DDE / OPC / other communications driver), but not on the enforcable 'Concept' of importing/exporting data to Excel, or any other application.

Carried to the extreme, that kind of idea would prevent me from even looking at a register in a PLC, and physically typing the observed value into a spreadsheet cell.

I'm not saying that some idiot didn't actually get a patent on the concept, just saying that even if they did, it's invalid as too broad in scope.

Patent? I don't think so. That would require development of some unique technology.

Copyright? Maybe. If they have some special method for doing it.
OPC and DDE are tools that are available to ANYONE. So if you're linking to the PLC that way, you should be safe. Otherwise Wonderware, RSLinx, RSView, and everyone else would be breaking the "law" too!

I'd be wary of anything your legal department has to say. The legal departments at big companies tend to play "chicken little" a lot. If you blast fax them today, saying that Microsoft is going to file lawsuits against anyone playing their sound effects in public without licensing, I'll bet all the WAV files on the company computers will be GONE tomorrow!

AK

I think the reference is to the ongoing legal battles between Solaia and PLC makers like AB/Rockwell and Schneider. Try Googling with keywords 'Solaia' and 'Rockwell' and you'll get enough hits to keep you busy.

Oh, good lord, that old crock is still kicking around?

Solaia and the "Steal From Everyone For Our Benifit" legal group that now holds the rights to that patent really need to just be forgotten.

That was basically a huge stretch of the imagination, and was a way to directly, and in real time, and without any intervention from drivers, or operating systems, or other programs have a connection between spreadsheet cells and PLC registers.

It was based on a few 'Direct Link' DLL's, which even by the language of the patent violated it as it used a PC's subsystems to handle the communications.

That crock is a typical 'Lets sue them all, some will settle out of court, the others we'll withdraw the lawsuits from before it gets too expensive'.

Gotta love Lawyers.

Have a look here (particularly post 9): http://www.plctalk.net/qanda/showthread.php?s=&threadid=5439&highlight=EXCEL+DDE

Marc

Patents are great when used correctly....

(Funny, the name Schneider (Square D) popped up as the original owner of this so called patent....)

However when it gets to this ridiculous level it makes me want to take a patent on toilet paper cause frankly it really gives me the ****s...

Of late, I think that the patent system is starting to collapse.
Now days, if something is patented there is no gaurentee that it will hold up in court. Even some perpetual motion machines have recently slipped past and managed to get patented.
I even heard of the child's playground toy "the swing" being patented recently.

Unfortunately, these rubbish patents waste everyone's time.
None of this stuff will stand up in court, so for that reason you will never find these guys going after companies that produce these applications. They go after the end user and hope to use the threat of legal action to extort money off them. Generally, if you say "see you in court" while thumbing your nose and shaking your private parts in their direction you will never hear from them again.
They operate on the premise that most people don't know that they are trying to pull a con game on you.

If you want to know how to bust their patent, look here:

http://www.tinaja.com/

Point your lawyers in this direction and say "sic em", if they are worth what you are paying them you will never have to worry about this stuff again.

Hope this helps,

Doug (who is not a lawyer, so any legal advice is I give you is worth what you pay for it)

Doug_Adam said:

Of late, I think that the patent system is starting to collapse.
Now days, if something is patented there is no gaurentee that it will hold up in court. Even some perpetual motion machines have recently slipped past and managed to get patented.
I even heard of the child's playground toy "the swing" being patented recently.

Click to expand...

Actually it was the method of swinging, using a side-to-side motion rather than back and forth.

The patent was filed as a joke/statement on how horrible our USPTO (and what passes for patentable ideas) is.

The patent was later withdrawn when someone hit the patent officer over the head with a clue stick.

http://www.metafilter.com/mefi/29347

Unfortunately, these rubbish patents waste everyone's time.
None of this stuff will stand up in court, so for that reason you

Click to expand...

Tell that to Microsoft. They have been ordered to pay 1/2 Billion (pinky-to-mouth) for their infringment of Eolas's patent.

http://www.infoworld.com/article/03/09/03/HNmicrosoftsloss_1.html

Now Microsoft wants to patent XML & CSS (gee, we didn't see that one coming). Amazon has their one-click, and SBC says you gotta pay if you want to browse using frames (I would think that they would pay you).

will never find these guys going after companies that produce these applications. They go after the end user and hope to use the threat of legal action to extort money off them. Generally, if you say "see you in court" while thumbing your nose and shaking your private parts in their direction you will never hear from them again.
They operate on the premise that most people don't know that they are trying to pull a con game on you.

If you want to know how to bust their patent, look here:

http://www.tinaja.com/

Click to expand...

If you want to know how bad it is, go here:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&lr=lang_en&q=frivolous+patent+&spell=1

And it's really, really, bad.

Point your lawyers in this direction and say "sic em", if they are worth what you are paying them you will never have to worry about this stuff again.

Hope this helps,

Doug (who is not a lawyer, so any legal advice is I give you is worth what you pay for it)

Click to expand...

IANAL either, but if we could just enforce this one, then, problem solved!

http://www.bomis.com/about/pressreleases/990927.html


John

John,

You can usually tell if it's a valid patent by who they sue.
Go for the manufacturer = valid (or in-experienced)
Go for the end user = scam

Other errr (bad language ommitted) not particularly good patents were:

Patent on the Microprocessor 1999, have to find the article but the story was developmental patent issued 1971, a bit before the 4040 hit the market.
28 years of fiddling around to get the paten right, issued 1999, demands issued to intel etc soon afterwards. If I remember correctly, Hitachi offered to licence for $150k, everyone else said stick it where the sun don't shine.

Patent on the motor car, busted by Henry Ford fairly early on.

I am suprised that Microsoft lost out on the court case, although this may have been a legit patent.

On the other hand, I think there is enough prior art and proof around to show that Microsoft did not develop XML. Although I wouldn't put it past them to try to patent it anyway. Unfortunately, MS has the muscle and money to cause a lot of trouble, even if their patent is BS.

Doug

Doug_Adam said:

John,

You can usually tell if it's a valid patent by who they sue.
Go for the manufacturer = valid (or in-experienced)
Go for the end user = scam

Click to expand...

Yeah, take SCO for example

Other errr (bad language ommitted) not particularly good patents were:

Patent on the Microprocessor 1999, have to find the article but the story was developmental patent issued 1971, a bit before the 4040 hit the market.
28 years of fiddling around to get the paten right, issued 1999, demands issued to intel etc soon afterwards. If I remember correctly, Hitachi offered to licence for $150k, everyone else said stick it where the sun don't shine.

Patent on the motor car, busted by Henry Ford fairly early on.

I am suprised that Microsoft lost out on the court case, although this may have been a legit patent.

Click to expand...

I had forgotten about the MPU one, and haven't heard lately about the one that patents displaying pictures on the web.

As for MS losing, it looks like BS on the surface. I think Eolas got away with murder.

Hmmm, looks like MS might win after all.

http://news.com.com/2100-1032_3-5106129.html

Gotta love prior art.

On the other hand, I think there is enough prior art and proof around to show that Microsoft did not develop XML. Although I wouldn't put it past them to try to patent it anyway. Unfortunately, MS has the muscle and money to cause a lot of trouble, even if their patent is BS.

Doug

Click to expand...

Oops, sorry, wasn't clear. Their plan is to patent their extensions and then cram them down our throats. Microsoft's three E's. Embrace, Extend, Extinguish.


John