“While it struggles to compete with Apple in the marketplace, Creative is exploring a new avenue for dethroning the digital music king: patent litigation. Creative announced Tuesday it had been granted a patent covering the user interface for portable media players, including the iPod,” Nate Mook reports for BetaNews. “Specifically, the patent involves the method for selecting at least one track on a portable player as a user sequentially browses through a hierarchy of three or more screens on the display. For example, the patent would cover a user navigating from an artist, to a list of albums, to a list of songs on an album.”
“The so-called ‘Zen Patent’ was filed on January 5, 2001 and awarded August 9, 2005. The interface referenced in the patent was used in Creative’s NOMAD Jukebox, which debuted in September 2000. Creative points out that the iPod did not ship for another 13 months,” Mook reports. “Although Creative did not say whether it planned to ask Apple to license the Zen Patent and pay a fee for each iPod sold, company CEO Sim Wong Hoo hinted that Creative would protect its work. ‘Before this invention, there was no intuitive and efficient way to deal with the large number of tracks that could be stored on a high-capacity player,’ noted Hoo. Hoo also took the time to point out that Apple’s patent application for the iPod interface was not filed until October 28, 2002.”
Full article here.
The following is a press release from Creative Technology Ltd.:
Singapore – August 30, 2005 – Creative Technology Ltd. (NASDAQ: CREAF), a worldwide leader in digital entertainment products, today announced that it has been awarded U.S. Patent 6,928,433, which Creative is referring to as the “Zen Patent.”
The Zen Patent was awarded to Creative for its invention of the user interface for portable media players, including many of the Creative Zen and NOMAD Jukebox MP3 players, and found in some competing players, such as the Apple iPod and iPod mini.
The Zen Patent covers the user interface that enables users of portable media players to efficiently and intuitively navigate among and select tracks on the players. Creative applied for the Zen Patent on January 5, 2001 and it was awarded on August 9, 2005.
Creative’s invention for the user interface for portable media players enables selection of at least one track in a portable media player as a user sequentially navigates through a hierarchy using three or more successive screens on the display of the player. One example would be the sequence of screens that could display artists, then albums, and then tracks. When the user selects an artist, the player displays a list of albums for that artist. Selection of one of the listed albums then displays a list of tracks on the album.
“The user interface covered by the Zen Patent was invented by Creative research and development engineers in our Advanced Technology Center in Scotts Valley, California,” said Sim Wong Hoo, chairman and CEO of Creative.
“The first portable media player based upon the user interface covered in our Zen Patent was our NOMAD Jukebox MP3 player. We shipped the NOMAD Jukebox to U.S. retail customers in September of 2000, and by November of 2000, it was already ranked as the top revenue-generating product in the U.S. in the digital audio player category, according to PC Data.
“By January of 2001, we announced that we had already sold 100,000 NOMAD Jukeboxes. The Apple iPod was only announced in October 2001, 13 months after we had been shipping the NOMAD Jukebox based upon the user interface covered by our Zen Patent.” “I am very excited that we were awarded the Zen Patent, which helps to protect our invention and recognizes our innovation in portable media players,” said Sim.
“After a major investment of time and effort by a group of our research and development engineers, we developed a way for a user to efficiently and intuitively navigate and select tracks from a significant number of tracks stored on a player. Before this invention, there was no intuitive and efficient way to deal with the large number of tracks that could be stored on a highcapacity player.”
“There has been press coverage recently regarding the rejection of Apple’s patent application, published as Pub. No. U.S. 2004/0055446 for a user interface in a multimedia player. This Apple patent application was filed on October 28, 2002. A related provisional application was filed by Apple on July 30, 2002, eighteen months after our filing date for the Zen Patent and over twenty months after our NOMAD Jukebox based upon our user interface was on the market,” added Sim.
“We continue to innovate in digital media players with the introduction of the Zen Vision, which adds high-quality video playback to its MP3 music and digital photo viewing features.
The Zen Vision, as well as the upcoming Zen Micro Photo with a color OLED screen and many more new products, will be based upon the user interface covered by the Zen Patent,” noted Sim.
United States Patent #6,928,433 here.
Can’t compete? Litigate. Sim’s mention of press coverage of Apple’s “patent rejection” in his press release reads like a threat to us. Creative Technology’s market cap is currently US$667.73 million. Apple Computer’s market cap is currently $38.64 billion. Apple has approximately $9.3 billion in liquid assets on hand and is a debt-free company. Could Apple simply buy Creative?
Related articles:
Microsoft has not, repeat not, patented Apple’s iPod – August 17, 2005
Beleaguered Creative Technology’s ‘war’ on Apple iPod not faring well – August 15, 2005
Microsoft to allow Apple to license iPod patent? – August 15, 2005
The real story on Microsoft’s ‘Apple iPod’ playlist patent – August 12, 2005
Patent lawyer: Microsoft and Apple iPod patent saga is much ado about nothing – August 12, 2005
Microsoft beats Apple in iPod patent race? – August 11, 2005
Microsoft researcher involved in rejected Apple iPod patent – August 10, 2005
Apple’s patent application for Pod’s menu-based software interface rejected – August 09, 2005
Apple’s iPod shine dims beleaguered Creative Technology’s outlook – August 08, 2005
Microsoft not buying stake in Creative Technology – August 02, 2005
Creative CEO Sim Wong Hoo adds fronts to war against Apple iPod – August 01, 2005
Analyst: Microsoft could buy Creative Technlogy in bid to compete with Apple iPod – July 14, 2005
Beleaguered Creative CEO Sim Wong Hoo ‘optimistic’ the company will survive ‘MP3 war’ – July 01, 2005
Beleaguered Creative may have to write off unsold stock as losses loom – June 28, 2005
Creative Tech’s reduced outlook drags on Apple, PortalPlayer, SigmaTel – June 27, 2005
Creative Tech cuts sales outlook, drags Apple down in early trading – June 27, 2005
Apple passed 20 million iPods sold milestone in early June – June 24, 2005
Apple’s understanding of what really counts makes iPod+iTunes impossible to beat – June 22, 2005
Creative Technology shares slide to lowest mark in almost two years – May 18, 2005
Apple squeezes and Creative’s profit plunges 72-percent – April 23, 2005
Apple iPod pressure forces Creative to drop prices on music players – March 01, 2005
Creative’s self-declared ‘MP3 player war’ against Apple isn’t going very well – January 20, 2005
Creative CEO: Apple iPod shuffle ‘a big let-down, worse than the cheapest Chinese player’ – January 12, 2005
Creative declares ‘war’ on Apple iPod, shoots for 40% market share of MP3 players – December 21, 2004
Creative Technology declares ‘MP3 War’ against market-dominating Apple iPod – November 17, 2004
Mossberg: Dell, Rio, Creative ‘iPod mini killers’ lag badly behind Apple iPod mini – October 27, 2004
Creative pushes to become ‘Pepsi’ to Apple’s ‘Coke’ in digital music player market – August 07, 2004
Worst. Company. Ever.
Oh, did they suddenly discover they had a patent? What a load of s**t.
I invented the idea of pressing buttons to make things work, back in 1932.
As an AAPL investor I say NO NO NO!!! to buying CREAF – what a waste of a company
mdn:pattern
Grasping at straws?? Absolutely! How long till Creative just curls up & dies like Rio did?
“I invented the idea of pressing buttons to make things work, back in 1932.”
Yeah well, I patented the finger, so anyone who uses their finger to control their iPod owes me a royalty. However feel free to use other appendages.
MW ‘cars’. Pixars next films is called Cars.
Creative will probably attempt an injunction to halt iPod sales.
if you can’t compete, don’t bother making a better product. litigate!
MDN: “taking,” as in Creative taking the low road….
Not sure how they are able to get a patent on what amounts to heirarchial menu browsing. This has been around for a long time. Making it specific to a particualr category (music selection) seems a bit far fetched.
MW ‘little’ as in Creative will only be around for a little while longer.
hammer
In that case, I would like to license a finger under the terms of your patent to send Creative a message.
Not sure how they are able to get a patent on what amounts to heirarchial menu browsing. This has been around for a long time
—
*looks at Mac menu bar..
Oh yeah.. oops
Apple buy Creative, smart move? No, but it would allow Apple to not worry about their crap with the patent. Maybe Apple could buy the patent for a couple billion and shut Creative up, and allow them to use the patent royalty-free. Apple becomes the patent holder.
tisk, tisk, tisk…
hammer, we have been here before I think. We all know you invented the finger, but I invented the hand, without which the finger would be useless.
Please get your facts straight before you waste another $5 using your finger (my royalty fee for hand invention).
“In that case, I would like to license a finger under the terms of your patent to send Creative a message.”
Im sure we can work that out Dave, as long as it’s the middle one ;^)
Jamie
My patent doesnt require the finger to be attached to a hand. Sorry.
Hey ‘Creative’,
Microsoft already tried this about three weeks ago.
Try DOING something after your namesake.
Oh yeah. I patented the arm and the hand the carries and moves the finger. Anyway, which finger did you patent? MDN = “did” like in did so
But it’s OK for Apple to submit a similar patent (which obstensively be enforced against others)?
Creative did sumbit the patent and have working prior art long before Apple’s iPod. And the patent has very recently been granted. Tough to protect a patent which hasn’t been granted yet (for those wondering why it took so long for Creative to go this route).
That said, Creative obviously has it’s back against the wall with the MP3 player business. Much like Apple 20 years ago, it’s squandered it’s first-to-market advantage to a more able competitor.
Didn’t iTunes come before Creative??
While buying Creative might make this little problem go away (and get rid of the second place market leader – at least I imagine they are) there are likely two sticky issues: 1) would the acquisition be allowed (anti-competitive and all) and 2) if it were allowed, I would imagine MS would jump in and offer more. The odd thing is, even if Apple had to license this patent (and the MS one) and have to charge more, they would probably still sell more than Creative – kind of sad for Creative really.
I thought creative was belegured… what gives MDN?
just look at column view in any finder window…
even microsoft utilises this sort of interface…
in fact – its a no brainer system – i have ‘real’ folders here on my desk that use the same method!
Client > Contact Name > Correspondence…
does this mean that sim wong who(?) is going to be knocking on my door to ‘protect its work’?
The very fact that the press release then goes on to talk about the ipod and basically says ‘hey! we did it first ner-ner- ner ner -ner!’ – what moron sends out a PR and then devotes an entire paragragh to your competitor in a just light?! they dont even say ‘hey! and we did it better than ipod!’
One day, all of the parts of the body got to talking about which of them should be the boss.
The brain piped up first. “I think I am most important, because I do all of the thinking for the man. I tell him right from wrong, I tell him when it’s time to go to sleep and when it’s time to wake up. Thanks to me, the man was able to learn and because of my education, he now holds a good paying job that helps to support all of you. That’s why I should be boss”
The eyes chuckled, “Oh surely you jest! We are by far the most important and should be boss. We let the man see! If it weren’t for us, he would be walking into everything and all of you would be bumped and bruised every day of his life.”
“Wait a minute!”, chimed the stomach. “I am the most important part of his body! I digest the food that he eats and because of me, you are nourished and are able to stay healthy and strong. Of all the parts of a man’s body, I am the most important… and should be boss!”
The legs twitched a bit and spoke up, “Oh sure, all of you do play an important role in the man’s body, but we am by far the most important. We carry all of you where the man wishes to go. We jog for you in the morning, walk you to his job and even dance for you when he takes his ladies out on the town. Because of us you are well taken care of and entertained! We are the most important and should be boss.”
All the body parts sat in silence for a moment, angry with each other, when from down below, came a tiny little voice. It was the asshole, speaking up as to it’s importance.
“I am the asshole, and I think that out of all the parts of a man’s body, that I am the most important.”
The other body parts went into hysterics…this upset the asshole so much that he clammed up tighter than a drum, vowing that he would never open up and speak again.
After a few days, the brain got foggy, the eyes glassed over, the stomach got queazy and the knees got a bit wobbly.
The other parts of the body got together and had a secret meeting, voting unanimously that indeed, the asshole was the most important part of the man’s body and should always be the boss.
That is why the asshole is the boss.
And that is why you should not patent the finger, the hand, or the arm. Just the asshole. And it helps if that’s what you already are. Step forward, Creative execs…
LOL a site devoted to ipod SURROUNDED by creative zen ads.
I LOVE MDN
There are quite a few makers of automobiles. They all have an engine, seats, steering wheels, etc. Does each company have a patent on an “engine.” They are basically the same.