LinuxMCE Forums
General => Users => Topic started by: sonicwind on May 29, 2010, 08:04:40 pm
-
LMCE aught to have this feature.
Haven't looked to deeply into this, but I think you do something about having prior art or something.
http://www.engadget.com/2010/05/28/apple-applies-for-patent-to-resume-media-playback-on-another-dev
-
We've had this since the beginning.
-Thom
-
So they cannot file for patent, because of "early use"
-
If you want I can spearhead this complaint juridically
-
yeah, that's why I mentioned it. I mean the patent may have some specifics that are different from LMCE, but it sure sounds like the same thing.
-
Direct demonstration of Follow me @ 19:00 in video.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2176025602905109829
Apple are a bunch of fuckers...
-Thom
-
Apple are a bunch of fuckers...
-Thom
+1
Don't mean to be a troll but seriously I hate them. Pricks to work with as well.
-
This is the patent we are talking about?
http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PG01&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=%2220100132005%22.PGNR.&OS=DN/20100132005&RS=DN/20100132005
-
Does anybody know a Patent Lawyer? We use one at work but I don't know him well enough to ask him about this without paying for it.
I do have a little experience checking if a competitor is violating one of our patents and know that it is the claims that are important, sometimes the descriptions say one thing but the claims say another. The claims are what is patented.
-
This is the patent we are talking about?
http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PG01&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=%2220100132005%22.PGNR.&OS=DN/20100132005&RS=DN/20100132005
As ever with US software patents its just so vague and generalised it could be construed to mean anything when interpreted later. Quiet amazing that any patent system allows this kind of submission!
Andrew
-
what can we do about this? this is seriously pissing me off...
as with the US patent system, patent lawyers understand the loopholes in the patent system, quite well. The systematic deregulation of the patent office since 1953 has caused some severe headaches, and the erosion of innovation in the US, because we no longer have to demonstrate tangibility in order for a patent to be valid.
So now we live in a world, where basically any "process" can be patented, and through international strong-arming amongst the remaining G7 nations, patent systems have mostly become compatible, in this regard.
Keep in mind, that China has no such restrictions.
Feel that lump in your throat?
-Thom
-
China has come a long way recently to harmonize with the international standard such that many companies that did not file in China previously have begun too.
LMCE can show prior art which means that, even if the Patent is issued, they can not stop you from having this feature.
-
what can we do about this? this is seriously pissing me off...
as with the US patent system, patent lawyers understand the loopholes in the patent system, quite well. The systematic deregulation of the patent office since 1953 has caused some severe headaches, and the erosion of innovation in the US, because we no longer have to demonstrate tangibility in order for a patent to be valid.
So now we live in a world, where basically any "process" can be patented, and through international strong-arming amongst the remaining G7 nations, patent systems have mostly become compatible, in this regard.
Keep in mind, that China has no such restrictions.
Feel that lump in your throat?
-Thom
Software patents are still not allowed in Europe...at least for now!
Andrew
-
You do not need a patent lawyer, because it is still an application, you just need to show it is used prior to the filing. I am not specialized in US Patents, but they should all work somewhat the same. Just show the patent office the film and they should stop the filing.
-
Does somebody want to do this?
-Thom
-
I have sent an email to the USPTO, with the following text:
http://www.localeconcept.com/prior-art-proof.html
Can someone else look for alternative methods of contact?
-Thom
-
I will make some inquiries on Tuesday after the holiday with our patent lawyer to see if there is a preferred method of contesting it. It is hard to believe it will go through based on the fact I just saw a Timewarner Ad where they talk about 'Follow Me'
-
I have sent an email to the USPTO, with the following text:
http://www.localeconcept.com/prior-art-proof.html
Can someone else look for alternative methods of contact?
-Thom
I spoke with my tenant, who just so happens to work at the USPTO in DC, and she said the likelihood of this being approved is very slim. She said companies try this crap all the time, but the approval board normally won't grant a patent for something like this. Unfortunately she's in the finance department, so she's not privy to the details of any patent requests. I'll see if I can gather anymore information from her.
Ernesto
-
I spoke with my tenant, who just so happens to work at the USPTO in DC, and she said the likelihood of this being approved is very slim. She said companies try this crap all the time, but the approval board normally won't grant a patent for something like this. Unfortunately she's in the finance department, so she's not privy to the details of any patent requests. I'll see if I can gather anymore information from her.
Ernesto
Yes, but no need to comprise her position :). I think this is not a biggy, especially with the mail of TSCHAK.
-
It may be worth alerting FSF (http://www.fsf.org/) or these guys: http://endsoftpatents.org/ Either can probably give you the path to stopping this before you need to pay for lawyers.
-
Derrick has already spoken with the SFLC, who has informed us that until Apple actually goes after us with a patent threat, we should just stay quiet.
-Thom