Apple sued for patent infringement over iTunes, Aperture, QuickTime and MobileMe

“BetaNet on Monday filed a lawsuit against 18 companies, including Apple, Adobe and Microsoft,” Jim Dalrymple reports for The Loop.

“Filed in the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, the lawsuit claims the companies violate the ‘134 patent, entitled “Secure System for Activating Personal Computer Software at Remote Locations.’ The patent was issued on June 22, 1993, according to the lawsuit,” Dalrymple reports.

MacDailyNews Take: The Rocket Docket strikes again.

Dalrymple continues, “BetaNet specifically mentions Apple’s iTunes, Aperture, QuickTime and MobileMe as infringing on its patent.”

Full article here.

Neil Hughes reports for AppleInsider, “‘(Apple is) using, selling and offering to sell computer software via a process that provides a program file — including a loader segment and a registration shell portion — to a remote computer having a display,’ the complaint reads. ‘The program file contains a first executive control program, representing a limited version of the program file. License transaction information is entered into the registration shell portion, and that information is transmitted from the registration shell to a separate registration program provided in a registration computer.'”

Hughes reports, “It continues: ‘The registration program merges the license transaction information with the second executive control program — representing a complete version of the program file to — to generate a unique overlay file. The unique overlay file is transmitted from the registration program to the registration shell, and contains the second executive control program. The overlay file is installed on the main program file, thereby allowing complete operation of the program file.'”

Hughes reports, “Other software specifically mentioned by BetaNet in the suit is Adobe’s Creative Suite, Acrobat and Photoshop; Carbonite’s online backup tools; Intuit’s Quicken, QuickBooks and TurboTax; Microsoft Office, OneCare, Windows Server and Silverlight; McAffee VirusScan; and the Rosetta Stone foreign language suite.”

Full article here.


  1. The DoJ needs to cut the budget for this court to nothing and put it out of business.

    This company is going up against the big boys. They could get hurt big time and be worth nothing.

  2. Isn’t there a requirement that patents be “aggressively defended” in order to be maintained? This “patent” is <u>SIXTEEN YEARS OLD ! ! !</u> … and all the software mentioned is at least half that. If you have a real property that someone is infringing on, I’m sure it would take you less than half a dozen years to figure that out.
    Of course, if your “property” is overly vague and consists of nothing more than a concept of how something <u>COULD</u> be done, skew you, frigtard!

  3. @DLMeyer:

    That’s exactly the point. The patent is about to expire. The only way for them to get money from it is to sue everyone and anyone that even resembles their IP.

    If this does not get thrown out of court, we will be in a world of hurt.

  4. whats the meaning of having a patent unless you actually use it or sell the rights. Waiting long enough for other companies to invent stuff thats similar and then striking down on them like a bat out of hell with lawyers in tow is childish. Grow up damn it!

  5. chabig, thanks for the correction. I was “close”, though. I’m not a lawyer, though I sometimes babble like one.
    Mymac4ever, precisely.
    Additionally … do they even have working (workable?) code to show this is more than just a “concept”? That it was EVER anything more than a concept”? And, yeah … it would be better if the code in question were more than a decade old – to prove they didn’t just rip off the code from the guys they say were ripping <u>THEM</u> off.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.