Publisher.promo.own

There is something flawed in an IP system that lets corporate leeches, who had nothing whatsoever to do with development, purchase unenforced patents and try to retroactively extort revenue from them. You all know I'm not a patent attorney and anything I say on the matter is worth what you pay for it. But this sort of thing looks like the old CompuServe GIF fiasco (I think it was GIF, correct me if I'm wrong) and could be a real PIA for graphic arts firms and anyone who runs a web site.

Formerly known as VTEL, Forgent Networks acquired Compression Labs in 1997, acquiring this patent into the bargain. The patent claim was filed in 1986 but Compression Labs never pursued royalties.
Forgent last week declared that it has "the sole and exclusive right to use and license all the claims" under the patent and is seeking a deal wherever JPEGs are transmitted, with the exception of satellite broadcasting.
JPEGs are not free: Patent holder pursues IP grab. And Sony's already coughed up

[The Register]
I mean, exactly what consitutes a broadcast? If I publish a JPG file on my blog have I "broadcast" it? This sort of thing seems wrong.
I'll be interested to see if it gets any mention from Martin Schwimmer. I'm certainly ok with inventors getting their due, and I'm even ok with companies buying up patents that have prior enforcement. But the idea of patent scroungers digging through rubbish bins looking for some way to make a buck without adding any value if repulsive.

See also: Just ran into the GIF patent extortion ! | Re: Just ran into the GIF patent extortion ! | Re: Just ran into the GIF patent extortion ! | Re: Just ran into the GIF patent extortion ! | Re: Just ran into the GIF patent extortion ! | EUROLINUX Alliance | EUROLINUX Alliancen | EUROLINUX Alliance | Legal Extortion - The Ornery American Forum | Blunt Force Trauma