This has been out for a few days.
MMRGlobal Investigates Possible Patent Infringement in Singapore
LOS ANGELES, CA -- (MARKETWIRE) -- 02/19/13 -- MMRGlobal, Inc. (OTCQB: MMRF) today announced that as a result of recent publicity, it has been brought to the Company's attention that vendors providing services to the Ministry of Health in Singapore appear to be infringing on patents (including Singapore patent number 200801954) and other Intellectual Property (collectively, the "MMR-IP") issued to MyMedicalRecords, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of MMRGlobal. The Company has been advised that personally-controlled health records, or Personal Health Records (PHRs), are included in programs for the Ministry of Health, the Health Promotion Board, the Health Sciences Authority and numerous other organizations in Singapore, which the Company believes is clearly part of MMR's inventions that led to its MyMedicalRecords patents. The discovery came as a result of the Company's investigations in Australia, which were reported in recent announcements that the Australian Government, both state and federal, through the National E-Health Transition Authority (NEHTA), appears to be infringing on two MyMedicalRecords patents.
NEHTA has reportedly spent an estimated one billion Australian dollars on a Personal Health Records program which is the subject of the potential infringement and which it appears broadly incorporates numerous portions of the MMR-IP. The Company has spoken with an attorney for NEHTA. MMR suggested entering into an agreement to exchange documents to facilitate an informal resolution to this matter for the benefit of all parties. MMR also suggested that all relevant parties schedule a meeting at the 2013 HIMSS Conference starting March 3rd in New Orleans in a good faith effort to get this resolved.
As part of the Company's continued efforts to protect its patents, MyMedicalRecords, Inc. announced on February 12, 2013 the filing of a complaint in the United States for patent infringement against WebMD Health Corp. and its wholly owned subsidiary, WebMD Health Services Group, Inc. ("WebMD"). The complaint alleges that WebMD is infringing on MMR's Personal Health Records patent, specifically U.S. Patent No. 8,301,466, and as a result, MMR is seeking monetary damages as well as a permanent injunction. The complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California, case number CV 13-00979, on February 11th, and is available on the court's website http://www.pacer.gov/.
The full release is here.
I feel sorry for Singapore being sucked into all this. It does rather seem to be spreading! Interesting to read of actual suits being underway.
David.
6 comments:
Seems that IP Australia should conduct due dilligence on behalf of the taxpayer wihich funds their activities. There are numerous e-health standards that pre-date this patent. Consider AS ISO 18308 - 2005, HB 304 or even the full published HL7 suite of standards. The Australian standards have been developed by volunteers who devote their time to help the rest of us. Allowing the registration of this stuff and then leaving it to busines (and NeHTA) to determine validity later, is simply wasting tax payer and business effort. E-Health progress has been hard enough without IP Aust giving away all the public owned IP.
I can't believe there is not any 'prior art' that covers this. The concept is hardly rocket science.
David.
David - prior art must be protected. Over the years, nay decades, people have dreamed and talked and researched. That's all good. Then someone comes along drops a blanket over everything with an attempt to patent what they claim are their NOVEL ideas. If they have done their patenting job well it could be difficult to stop them doing a big-round-the-world-robbery.
I might be alone here but I'm confused. PHR's were being used in Australia before the patent was issued right? Even before NEHTA's roll out we had a system in NT (back in the mid 2000's if I recall) that sounds very similar this 2008 MMR patent. So does that mean we'd have to pay royalties to MMR for patent infringement back dated to say 2005 or just when they lodged the patent in 2008?
As I've said before, it's like patenting an idea for a network device that protects an enterprise network by controlling what packets are allowed in and out. No product is made by the patent owner, however they then go out and file suit against every firewall vendor.
These guys are the very definition of a patent troll. I don't believe that IP Aust should ever have awarded these patents.
I see this going one of either two ways, the patents are enforced and NeHTA/DOHA will pay, or the patents are ruled invalid in which case IP Aust will probably be sued by MMR. Either way the taxpayer pays.
I suppose if the opposition wins government and scraps the PCEHR then the whole thing may just go away.
I have reviewed the patents and it's fairly clear that they should never have been granted.
MMR's strategy seems to be to make money by suing any company that they think they can extort money from instead of creating products that are better than others that are out there.
Post a Comment