“A Chittenden County businessman has filed a federal lawsuit against Apple Computer Inc. that accuses the computer and iPod manufacturer of stealing his design for digital jukebox software. David Contois, who owns Contois Music & Technology in Essex Junction, is seeking a court order to prevent Apple from distributing its popular iTunes software. Contois also has requested an unspecified amount of monetary damages and payment to cover fees to his legal team,” Adam Silverman reports for The Burlington Free Press (Vermont). “Apple denies the allegations and is seeking reimbursement of its own legal fees. A hearing is scheduled for Wednesday in U.S. District Court in Burlington to discuss the progress of the case and when it could be ready for trial.”
“Intellectual-property expert Larry Meier said Contois faces an uphill fight. ‘It’s kind of a David-and-Goliath situation,’ said Meier, who leads the intellectual-property practice group for Downs Rachlin Martin, a Burlington law firm. Neither he nor his firm is involved with the Contois case,” Silverman reports. “According to the lawsuit, Contois filed for a patent on his software in 1996, and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office granted the application in early 1999. Apple unveiled iTunes for Mac in early 2001 and made it available for Windows users in 2003. The lawsuit says iTunes violates the patent in 21 ways, including how users sort, view and play song files; the design of the user interface; and the ability of the software to transfer music to external devices such as iPods.”
“Apple’s eight-page response denies any wrongdoing. ‘Apple does not infringe, has not infringed, has not contributed to the infringement of and has not induced the infringement of’ the patent, reads a passage of the response,” Silverman reports. “The lawsuit should be thrown out, according to Apple, because Contois was negligent in not bringing his claim forward sooner, and as a result Apple could be at an unfair disadvantage to defend itself because witnesses or evidence might have become unavailable or been lost. Apple also said the lawsuit lacks merit because Contois’ patent in invalid. The computer maker’s attorneys filed a counterclaim demanding Contois pay Apple’s legal fees and costs.”
Full article here.
Advertisements:
• MacBook Pro. The first Mac notebook built upon Intel Core Duo with iLife ’06, Front Row and built-in iSight. Starting at $1999. Free shipping.
• iMac. Twice as amazing — Intel Core Duo, iLife ’06, Front Row media experience, Apple Remote, built-in iSight. Starting at $1299. Free shipping.
• iMac and MacBook Pro owners: Apple USB Modem. Easily connect to the Internet using dial-up service. Only $49.
• iPod Radio Remote. Listen to FM radio on your iPod and control everything with a convenient wired remote. Just $49.
• iPod. 15,000 songs. 25,000 photos. 150 hours of video. The new iPod. 30GB and 60GB models start at just $299. Free shipping.
• Connect iPod to your television set with the iPod AV Cable. Just $19.
Contois is starting to damage my calm.
another fine example of the state of legal system in the US…..
I just want to say (since i am first) that before you guys get out of control just take a step back and breathe before you tear this guy a new one. He is just standing up for what he believes is his own product. Apple isn’t always right and maybe they are this time but try to keep an open mind instead of immediately crapping on everyone who opposes them.
Another fscking lawsuit?
I guess it comes with the territory: You start to have some serious success, and idiot leeches want a piece of the pie.
This doesn’t look like it will hold any water either – why didn’t the guy sue apple years ago?
First One: he, much like you, are wrong.
Didn’t Apple buy Soundjam and base iTunes on it?
Third One writes: “He is just standing up for what he believes is his own product.”
If he thought he had a valid patent, why wait until now?
Sorry, but it smells like just another opportunity seeker.
In other news: Patent law is way out-of-control in the USA.
tclash – Yes, Apple bought SoundJam, tweaked it a bit and renamed it iTunes. I think it has since been re-written, though.
How many years has iTunes been around now? And this guy is just noticing a similarity with whatever pos he says he invented? Riiight…
Step 1. Peruse “Juicy Target” list for potential extortion victims
Step 2. Find patsy plaintiff – does not matter if actually victimized, only appearances count
Step 3. Develop wild accusation… don’t need logic here, the more outrageous the better
Step 4. Sue, sue, sue ’til your daddy takes the T-bird away…
^ Jayne- Good reference. How about this one?
Contois . . . “You’re fighting a war you’ve already lost.”
Here is his business’ contact page:
http://www.emusicgear.com/help_answer.asp?ID=46
I for one will be sending him my ‘considered opinion’ of his company’s actions…
>>. He is just standing up for what he believes is his own product.
You misspelled “patent”.
This, my friends, is why software patents are evil. Just taking an obvious idea and writing it down like “software that transfers music to a portable device”, without building either the software or the device, gives him the right to sue anyone who does? Regardless of the language or platform used?
I guess Shirly, the secretary who rubber stamps tech patents and vacuums the office on Fridays, didn’t grasp the part about how a new patent needs to be “non-obvious”.
Copyrights = FINE, Patents = HELL NO.
If the industry had been this out of control with obvious tech patents in the 80s, things like the save button, the print button, the scrollbar, the title bar, the minimize button, etc, would all be patented, and nobody else would be able to implement them in a completely different language for a completely different platform. Where do you think the industry would be today if that were the case? Do you realize how it’s holding the industry back today?
to Contois: “Sir I think you have a problem with your brain being missing”
There should be a statute of limitation on the time one has to respond to a patent infringement. Unless Mr Contois has been in a coma there is no excuse for this lengthy delay.
Enhance your calm, Jayne. I will take you to Taco Bell.
Being first (or even mistakenly thinking it) is of absolutely no significance to anybody on this site, except, of course, to the infantile and petty-minded.
As the article read…
“lawsuits are expensive to litigate, often costing $2 million or more. That can lead to out-of-court settlements even when no wrongdoing has occurred, Meier said. A $50,000 settlement, he said, often makes more sense than spending many times that amount in legal costs”
The adoption of a “Loser-Pay” system of civil lawsuits would certainly cut down on the number of frivolous lawsuits, given the attorneys representing the plaintiff would have to pony-up the 2-mill to cover the one who prevails in addition to their own costs. Under the current rules (given the quote above) they’ll get their $16K for filing a law-clerk’s research. Nothing to lose.
By the way, how many of us Apple users have received an invitation to jump on the class-action bandwagon, whereas we will get our $0.85 and the law firm collects the millions?
So how many people/companies does this make who have patents for the design and interaction with music, in such novel ways a listing items by artist, song title, album, and other things I’m certain no one ever considered.
june 2005:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/06/21/apple_sued_over_itunes/
Why didn’t this guy sue Apple when version 1.0 of itunes came out in 1992?
The interface has not changed much since then.
This is a joke – yet another parasite suing Apple for some crumbs of money.
Seriously – being in the UK and seeing all these US claims makes me laugh. I have never known a society made up of people that are just out to get money of people for nothing. I know there are some decent Americans out there, but, omg if I lived in the states I would have given up design years ago and become a lawyer – I would have been a millionaire by the time I was 25 with all these claims!!
Jesus – i’m glad I live in the UK!
Why didnt he sue Apple for itunes in 1992? i can think of one very good reason…
Just another example of a vague, ridiculous patent being granted in the first place. Patents used to be granted to protect real inventions that could take years to develop. Now they grant software patents on anything you can pull out of your butt.
I abhor these “johnny-come-lately'” lawsuits. It happens all the time.
1) Think of an obvious idea and apply for a patent.
2) Get awarded the patent and do nothing with it.
3) Sit on the sidelines and watch.
4) Wait until somebody comes up with a product that is possibly similar to your “original” patent.
5) Continue waiting to see if they are successful.
6) If successful…sue. If not, continue waiting until somebody else is.
BTW, why is it only Apple that is being sued? Not that I’ve seen any of the other music stores. But they all must be somewhat similar….Oh wait, I know. (See #5 & 6 above)
It must have been a lawyer that convinced this guy he had a case.
A few years late, probably couldn’t decide what to sue for. What a putz!
“The computer maker’s attorneys filed a counterclaim demanding Contois pay Apple’s legal fees and costs.”
Should be re-written to say,”The computer maker’s attorneys filed a counterclaim demanding Contois’s ATTORNEY’S pay Apple’s legal fees and costs.”
Maybe if courts made these scum bag money grubbing attorney’s responsible for their greed, we’d have less of these idiotic lawsuits that end up costing consumers more money.