Green and bear it

HERE’s a poser. Is electronic media greener than traditional print media? In the latter, trees are killed. Increasingly, we has sustainable tree farms to mitigate the deforestation factor. But in the electronic world, we’re talking about lotsa computers, PDAs and other devices being switched on for extended periods of time. That must consume a considerable amount of energy. Not to mention the plastics and metals (some semi-precious) that go into making the gadgets. How about the microwave pollution that comes with over-the-air communication that invariably accompanies this culture? So, is electronic media really that much greener? The jury is still out on that, methinks.

Photo

My blog

course exercise - not a post

exercise to add links to this TNP story.

DON'T pay. This is what netizens have been telling website owners who received 'pay-up' invoices from a local company for allegedly using its technology.

But now a netizen has taken a step further by setting up a website, Suevuestar.biz, to encourage others to challenge the validity of a patent owned by Singapore-based Vuestar Technologies.

The patent, held by an Australian, Mr Ronald Neville Langford, 68, is for Internet technology which uses images to link to other websites.

Mr Langford is a major shareholder of Vuestar, which recently sent invoices to owners of small online businesses in Singapore, asking them to pay for the use of its patented technology.

Ms Cheong Lee Sing, a PhD student at Nanyang Technological University, said she set up the website last week to reach out to as many affected website owners as possible.

She said she had not received an invoice, but decided to set up the site 'due to pure outrage that a foreign-originated company would prey on Singapore companies'.

'No one has come forward to organise the companies that have been slapped with the invoice, despite the appearance of many blog posts on this topic,' she said.

Ms Cheong said she also wants to help decrease the likelihood that less savvy netizens would simply pay the licence fee to Vuestar.

The company's actions have caused an online uproar on blogs, news websites and online forums.

Many are asking: Is the company a patent troll?

The term 'patent troll' is used to describe a person or company which enforces its patents against one or more alleged infringers in a manner considered unduly opportunistic.

Mr Langford is associated with at least 14 patents filed in Australia.

These include a patent on a 'digital wallet' - a system which allows Internet users to access financial information after entering a password - according to a search on AusPat, a database of Australian patents.

Mr Langford owned a patent in Australia for the same technology he is trying to charge a fee for in Singapore, and founded a company called Aogami International based in Brisbane to enforce the patent there.

However, the patent has ceased because Mr Langford did not renew it.

He told The New Paper that Aogami International is now defunct and that he is no longer a director of the company.

He said: 'My former principal shareholder and partner died suddenly, hence (I started) Vuestar.'

The business model of Mr Langford's Singapore company is similar to that of US-based Intellectual Ventures, helmed by former Microsoft chief technology officer Nathan Myrhvold.

The company buys and invents patents, then licenses them to manufacturers.

Mr Shane Robison, chief strategy and technology officer of Hewlett-Packard, called Intellectual Ventures a 'very large patent troll' in several media interviews.

Likewise, local and overseas netizens have dubbed Mr Langford's company a patent troll, borrowing from what they had read online.

Asked about this, Mr Langford declined to comment.

In a post on Techcrunch.com, a popular technology website, writer John Biggs described Mr Langford's patent as 'kind of like creating a patent to identify a goat on sight'.

Another blogger described Vuestar's actions as 'absolutely ridiculous', adding that he wondered 'how these patent squatters manage to get their applications accepted in the first place'.

HOT TOPIC

To date, a blog search with the keyword 'Vuestar' yielded more than 1,500 blog entries.

A spokesman for the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore said it is possible for the validity of a patent to be challenged 'by way of defence in proceedings for infringement of the patent'.

On the validity of his patent potentially being challenged, Mr Langford replied: 'Legal action is ademocratic choice of all parties involved. The consequences of success or failure is germane to all.'

ticket to ride

PRETTY soon, public transport commuters in Singapore will be told of a new formula on which annual bus and train fare adjustments will be based.

The previous formula, which is pegged largely to inflation rate, has been in use since 2005. The panel which devised it said it would be reviewed after three years.

So, it has been three years. Time flies when you're taking the bus. What will the new formula be?

Before attempting at some educated guesses, it might be interesting to note that if the previous recipe were to be applied, fares will be spiking pretty sharply this year. And quite likely, for the years to come.

That's because inflation, if you haven't noticed, is at its scariest in over 20 years. And with the price of oil fuelling price increases in everything from petrol to rice to plastic forks, chances are that inflation will stay up.

But the folks at the Public Transport Council are probably aware of that. And they are also probably aware that there is really no dire need to raise fares sharply to prevent the duopolistic public transport industry from going under.

The last we checked, the two players - ComfortDelGro Corp and SMRT Corp - are posting record profits, despite high energy and other running costs.

Why? Simply because more people are taking trains and buses. If you have been commuting like I have been, you will know that the two vehicular modes (don't you just love big words?) are pretty packed. Even during offpeak hours.

I was in New York City two weeks ago, and took the subway quite extensively. Although the trains were far smaller than ours, they did not seem as crowded. Neither were the buses. And I took them all hours of the day.

New Yorkers commute quite a lot. But because the city's 100-plus year-old subway system is so extensive and expansive, it is able to cope easily with the huge rider population.

I have commuted in Hong Kong and Tokyo too, but not frequently enough to qualify a comment here. Although I was once caught in a Tokyo subway crush (and the word is used literally here) - and the experience was hellish.

My body, my face and my whole being were pressed against another living, breathing human being. The fact that it was a young woman did not lessen the trauma of having your rib cage depressed each time the train stopped and started.

But I digress. So the two transport giants here are quite profitable (in fact, they have been for yonks - only more so now). And people are feeling the pinch of inflation (or in the case of folks who rely on public transport, the punch of inflation).

Do we want to stick to the old formula of adjusting fares? The answer is quite clear.

But what would (or should) the new formula be? If I may be so bold, it should be based on how well the operators serve the public. A fare formula pegged to service level is applied in countries such as Britain and Australia. Whether directly or indirectly, states and counties there reward operators who manage to attract more riders, who are punctual, who are clean, who are safe, who are reliable, etc.

Dare Singapore adopt this method? It would entail a lot more work for the PTC than the previous mathematical formula, for sure. But it would be a fairer fare formula.

By extension, why have a fare formula at all? Why not let the operators earn their buck by drawing more customers? Logically, they would do this by being more efficient and user-friendly. If people - including car owners - see that public transport is quick and painless, I guarantee they would rush to use it.

Maybe even voluntarily packing into trains and buses like sardines.

the beginning

this is a test blog, a tentative step by an old-school dead-tree newspaper man to join the 21st century, a toe dip into the ocean of bare-all and bare-none...