“Apple has found itself facing a pair of intellectual property challenges that separately claim its FairPlay DRM system and its iPod music player contain technologies to which the Mac maker does not have a right,” Tony Smith reports for The Register. “First up, Lake Forest, Illinois-based Advanced Audio Devices (AAD) alleges its patent, number 6,587,403, for a ‘music jukebox,’ filed in August 2000 but granted in July 2003, covers the kind of thing Apple has brought to market as the iPod… Meanwhile, Hong Kong company Pat-rights claims FairPlay violates its US patent, number 6,665,797, which details a method of ‘protection of software against unauthorised use.'”
Full article here.
Related MacDailyNews articles:
Report: Hong-Kong company wants 12 percent of iTunes and iPod sales, Apple already in negotiations – March 07, 2005
Here we go again folks. Gather the lawyers and the spin doctors for another battle.
Sickening.
This is just stupid.If their claims have any ground to them,everyone should be taken to court,not just apple.
E-freakin-gads…I really think that these lawsuits are completely pointless. At this rate, what do they hope to do? What did they try to do with their patents? Were they competing with the iPod at any time? And what’s with this “method of ‘protection of software against unauthorised use.'” Are the specifications spelled out in the patent, and are they identical to what Apple is using? Did this company even try to market their ‘patented method’? If not, then get off the stage.
read the article. I doubt either of the two plaintiffs can make the charges stick. Plus there’s no way they can outspend Apple in court. Two small fries looking for a settlement, nothing more…
Key phrase in the patent: “”method of ‘protection of software against unauthorised use.'”
Since when was an AAC file a piece of “software?” Its “data.” Software is something you can execute and runs. Data is something read by software. Ergo, data is not software. Assholes
This is without merit. They’re just trying to ride the magic carpet and catch hold of Apple’s earnings.
The other suit is more serious and at first glance appears to hold some water. But as a previous poster pointed out, the whole digital music industry is threatened here, ultimately, not just Apple. They just picked Apple because they’re the biggest and will prove the most profitable to pursue. If Apple fell to this, everyone else would have to pay up too.
Personally, I think they might escape though. The patent is for “audio signals” and an MP3 or AAC file is definitely NOT an audio signal, but digital data. In addition, there’s “prior art” to deal with here, as digital music players -existed long before this patent was granted, so the patent would probably be dismissed if challenged in court anyway.
But not before a very long and messy court case This one is going to run for years.
The problem in all this lies with the Patent Offices. They have to start giving patents where there is real merit, not for ideas which the so-called owners have no idea how to exploit.
Time for Patent apps to be turned away and save us all time and money.
Where there is money, lawyers follow. What else is new? If they had the knowledge and technology, why didn’t they do it first?
Personal opinion:
I believe ALL patents which are filed but not actively pursued must be abolished within one year of filing.
What I mean by this is if you file a patent but do not pursue turning it into a real product then the patent goes away. There is no discussion. If you don’t try to make something then you lose the patent.
The purpose of patents is to protect the inventor’s rights to create something. If you don’t create something you should lose the patent.
Some people and organizations file patents with the sole purpose of hoping someone else will come along with a practical implementation so the so called “inventors” can sue the practical implementors. There are even holding companies out there which do nothing but buy up the rights to such patents with the sole pupose of funding legal challenges to the practical implementors. Patent lawsuits are turning into a business all its own.
This would stop a lot of these lawsuits where someone or a group files a patent on an idea they have little or no intention of pursuing. These are just patent hoping someone else will actually create something along the same lines/concept and then cash in by suing the real inventors of a practical item.
Patent law needs to be changes to state that you MUST show proof to the USPTO that the patent holder is ACTIVELY trying to bring the patented item to a releasable product or the patent becomes public domain. A time limit of a year or two with another review every couple years until a product is shipped sounds about fair to me.
With a rule like this a lot of these patents would go away and a lot of lawsuits like these would go away too.
Comment:
From: beatsme
Mar 07, 05 – 11:23 am
read the article. I doubt either of the two plaintiffs can make the charges stick. Plus there’s no way they can outspend Apple in court. Two small fries looking for a settlement, nothing more…
Sad that Justice is mostly a matter of how much money you spend… It’s sickening to see how many people just accept this as a way of life.
more$$$ = moreJustice (for the money wielder)
sheesh. So AAD patents a device to make your own CD’s and they want to extend it to iTunes/iPod from what I can figure out.
One of those thing that make you go hmmmmm.
Stored signals? iPod stores mp3 files not signals.
A signal to me refers to a radio broadcast or some kind of signal coming from the air. I doubt if Apple will pay out for this.
Intellectual property is a lie.
http://moglen.law.columbia.edu/
Life is tough at the top, and when you are poised to be a Giant
some people see an opportunity to make some cash. I think Apple needs to do two things–it needs to hire a music guy like SONY just hired, and it needs to hire a guy who can manage the GIANT of a company that it can soon become. Im not saying replace JOBS–Im saying he is only one mind and any one mind needs help
Most likely more frivalous lawsuits. Gotta love attorneys.
make patents a royalty system.
as in get a patent then its free for all to use as long as they pay you the fixed fee. so the more your patent is used the more money you make.
it also prevents patent blocking which is the biggest problem with patents today.