As negatively as this effects my opinion of Blackboard, I am even more disturbed by the actions of the Patent Office.  Aside from the dubious specific claims these ‘thought leaders’ at Blackboard make, how can something as broad as “Internet-based education support system” even be considered for a patent.  I really think the entire patent system needs to be rethought.  There an interesting discussion with Beth Noceck of such possibilities here on IT Conversations

I fear that this specific case is only the latest in a growing trend of traditional commercial forces using patents and aggressive legal threats to reduce competition they face from open source products and the internet fueled global movement toward collaboration.  Since the societal benefits of innovation and openness seem so apparent, I’d like to think that global collaboration will eventually triumph, but it certainly won’t happen without a coherent, sustained, multi-faceted response to these detrimental actions of  some businesses and some governments. 
 
  For me, this case seems like an excellent place to start building that response.  My greatest source of hope in this particular case is the  Post Grant Review of Patent Claims that provides one year (after patent issue) for 3rd parties to raise some kind of objection.  Would love to more about this possibility from those who are more  knowledgeable about the technical and legal issues involved.  Aside from that, I think our community response should make it very clear to Blackboard and the patent office how people in our community, who represent a variety of edtech related roles, feel about this decision and its potential effect on the world of online learning.