AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple, AT&T sued over ties to Shazam music ID service
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple, AT&T sued over ties to Shazam music ID service - Page 2

post #41 of 70
5/14/09 at 2:16pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headrush69 View Post

I think the question about a lot of these patents is more whether these ideas/inventions are truly new and not just obvious extensions or progressions of previous ideas or old ideas applied to new areas. (I know its a fine line to have to draw.)

But according to the article this sounds as simple as "I don't have some info (radio station, song, etc), I'll note it and when i have access to the information I'll look it up."

Is this really different then a post it note to remind myself to do something?

Edit: The information Booga provided sounds more like Shazam, but in many cases arguments still hold. What constitutes a patentable idea/implementation aren't there any limits to obviousness.

If your extension adds something new to a patented device or process that significantly adds to, or changes the final result, you could get a patent for that. It's perfectly valid.

Your description of the patent isn't what it needs to be. It's the description of exactly how it's done that receives the patent.

There can be dozens of valid patents on how to get the same results, if each patent was a description of a different way to do it, and each wasn't obvious (to the average worker in the field) at the time they applied for the patent.

With hindsight, most things seem to be obvious. And that's the problem with forum arguments about things like this. Once the idea is out, many people think it's obvious. That doesn't mean it was.
Reply
Reply
post #42 of 70
5/14/09 at 2:19pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbonner View Post

So what is the process of searching this information? I am a small iPhone developer, and came up with a few ideas. I would hate to bring an app to market only to find that someone had patented the concept.

That's what patent searches are for. This patent is easily available, as booga has seen it, apparently.

It's the responsibility for the person or company working on a new invention to do the search. It's much easier and cheaper these days, as much of it is on the internet.
Reply
Reply
post #43 of 70
5/14/09 at 2:27pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Booga View Post

The patent that was actually granted is pretty much an exact description of Shazam. And although the patent was first submitted in 2000, it was revised several times and not granted until 2005. Shazam debuted in 2002. It's going to be an interesting court case if it goes forward, since essentially they managed to get a patent on the prior art of someone else after the fact.

This is the actual patent claim as it was granted in 2005:
Quote:
1. A process of identifying music comprising:

a) providing a portable communication device to be used by a consumer;

b) a service provider providing a music identification device having a database of prerecorded musical works;

c) the consumer recording a segment of music that is audible to the consumer in a location remote from the music identification device using said portable communication device;

d) the consumer transmitting said recorded musical segment from said portable communication device into a central processing unit of the music identification device;
e) the music identification device analyzing and comparing said musical segment to the database of musical works;
f) the music identification device identifying at least one closest match;
g) the music identification device generating database information regarding said at least one closest match; and
h) the music identification device transmitting the database information regarding said at least one closest match to the consumer.

To me that is just an idea. For it to be patent worthy it needs to explain point e) in great detail.
Reply
Reply
post #44 of 70
5/14/09 at 2:41pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

In its complaint, Tune Hunter doesn't specify its gripes with each individual defendant. Instead, it charges them broadly with contributing to the infringement or inducing the infringement of its patent "by making, using, selling and/or offering to sell, and/or causing others to use [...]

How is Apple different from any software re-seller?
Reply
Reply
post #45 of 70
5/14/09 at 2:42pm
What they (tune hunter) are talking about is http://www.radiobookmark.com/.

Only I guess NPR doesn't have deep enough pockets? Or they are scared to sue NPR?
Reply
Reply
post #46 of 70
5/14/09 at 2:52pm
This lawsuit against Apple, AT&T and other electronics companies is completely without merit. if anyone, they ought to sue SHAZAM, not these other companies that didn't create the APP software. It is like suing Microsoft because you have a copycat/patent infringing program that runs on windows.

sorry.... this wont pass. this is a patent owning company suing for profit. not to say they don't have merit against Shazam, i just dont know. but apple??? ridiculous!
Reply
Reply
post #47 of 70
5/14/09 at 3:16pm
I'd say use this great program while you can...
Reply
Reply
post #48 of 70
5/14/09 at 3:25pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by iphonebuz View Post

I'd say use this great program while you can...

Actually, I will continue to use this program for quite some time... Tune Hunters are just patent trolling and can drop fucking dead - no one will care...
Reply
Reply
post #49 of 70
5/14/09 at 3:37pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissionGrey View Post

I call: Helicopter ejection seat, solar powered flash light, glow in the dark sunglasses, invisible diamonds.

dibs on submarine screen door and dehydrated water (bringing back the catch phrase "just add water!")
Reply
Reply
post #50 of 70
5/14/09 at 4:06pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by halfyearsun View Post

dibs on submarine screen door and dehydrated water (bringing back the catch phrase "just add water!")

Actually, dehydrated water exists.

Get a bottle of hydrogen and a bottle of oxygen. Mix the two, then add a spark, and instant water!

Just make sure the container is strong enough for the resultant explosion.
Reply
Reply
post #51 of 70
5/14/09 at 4:13pm
The link to the patent is included in the article:

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-P...&RS=PN/6941275

If you read a little further into the patent (I haven't read it all), it is talking about using radio station info only. Since Shazam doesn't rely on radio station info, it doesn't seem likely that this will make it to trial.
Furthermore, as a couple of posters have pointed out, it really looks like the patent isn't valid at all, since products using the EXACT method described in the patent have existed for some time before the patent was granted.

I'm no lawyer, so I could be very wrong.
Reply
Reply
post #52 of 70
5/14/09 at 4:14pm
i agree with what virgil-tb2 said ... how is "marking the time and the name of the radio station in portable device" and then using that data to look up info in a broadcast archive "strikingly similar" to "capturing a sample of the track, analyzing it, and then comparing it with a remote database based on its acoustic footprint."?

one is a certain piece of info at a certain point in time that you use to query a database.

the other is a non-specific sample of audio collected at any time and anywhere compared with digital footprints. the sample could be almost any section of the song.

someone help me out here.
Reply
Reply
post #53 of 70
5/14/09 at 5:06pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by iStink View Post

Dude that's exactly what I was thinking. We should all start filing for patents on the craziest futuristic ideas we can think of, then someday, even though we don't make any product whatsoever, we can sue anyone who turns our idea into reality!

Rocket shoes, banana cameras, touch screen dildos, spring loaded beer, invisible gum, computers for dogs, french fry gardens, fingernail polish clocks, solar powered lifeguard robots. These are all things I came up with off the top of my head in 5 seconds, imagine how rich we could be some day if we hold the patents long enough!

I wonder if some old man will come forward one day, holding a paper proving he filed for a patent, screaming, "I invented cell phones!"

I'm afraid as the owner of bananacameras.com and woofcomputing.com and extensive patents covering their respective intelectual properties I must ask you to cease and desist and submit for a spanking. You really have been a naughty boy.
Reply
Reply
post #54 of 70
5/14/09 at 5:46pm
No where does it say they are suing Shazam or anyone because of their relationship to Shazam.

The article says "presumably for their connection to Shazam," but I suspect that that's completely wrong.

Check out this product that (somehow) Apple supports:

http://www.hdradio.com/iTunes_Tagging/

TidBITs description:
http://db.tidbits.com/article/9165

And some me-too Zune version:

http://www.mediapost.com/publication...&art_aid=90323


I assume the real lawsuit is about these products.
Reply
Reply
post #55 of 70
5/14/09 at 6:27pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by iStink View Post

Rocket shoes, banana cameras, touch screen dildos, spring loaded beer, invisible gum, computers for dogs, french fry gardens, fingernail polish clocks, solar powered lifeguard robots. These are all things I came up with off the top of my head in 5 seconds, imagine how rich we could be some day if we hold the patents long enough!

I am sorry but all these things have been invented. you can see them all on youtube.

rocket shoes - see JackAss movie
banana cameras- search the phase on Youtube.
touch screen dildos- there's an app for that. wobble or ijiggles
spring loaded beer- a college student invented a fridge that shoots beers a few years ago. look for it on youtube

invisible gum- they are invisible. no one wants to see what's in your mouth.
computers for dogs- see New Yorker cartoon. "on the internet, no one knows you are a dog"
french fry gardens- this is in every American's stomach.
fingernail polish clocks- every woman knows about this. visit my asian friend's salons.
solar powered lifeguard robots- Baywatch.
Reply
Reply
post #56 of 70
5/14/09 at 8:31pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dunks View Post

I'm afraid as the owner of bananacameras.com and woofcomputing.com and extensive patents covering their respective intelectual properties I must ask you to cease and desist and submit for a spanking. You really have been a naughty boy.

And as the late owner of helicopterejectorseats.com once said: cease, desist or decapitate. May he (all 39 slices of him) rest in peace.
Reply
Reply
post #57 of 70
5/14/09 at 10:02pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by LTMP View Post

If you read a little further into the patent (I haven't read it all), it is talking about using radio station info only. Since Shazam doesn't rely on radio station info, it doesn't seem likely that this will make it to trial

If you actually read the 1st paragraph, you will see it does not require radio station info either and Shazam works exactly as it describes.
"An alternate embodiment provides the listener with convenient means to record a segment of the music in which he/she is interested. The recorded music segment is played back into an apparatus which can identify the song based on the play back and provide the user with information on the identified song such as title, singer or artist, composer, producer, etc., and provide related purchasing information."
Reply
Reply
post #58 of 70
5/14/09 at 10:40pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by stompy View Post

How is Apple different from any software re-seller?

Exactly. This is the same case as in the iTunes store. Apple is merely the reseller. This is also a free application. The problem is that 1) Apple cannot be held accountable for the patent process for every application it hosts online for software developers. Actually their terminology of the App store states that they are simply making a place to host their applications for the developer. They don't even state that they are a reseller. They take a portion of the sale for hosting their app. They're not even a reseller per their wording. 2) They have to prove a loss of sales from this product. 3)They have to prove that Shazam has profited (and so has Apple etc. but this point is moot). Really. There is absolutely no way they will win this. I hope Apple and the numerous other people being sued bury this company.

BTW, Verizon has used this on their phones for the past few years. The patent process also clearly describes that you must defend your patent within a due amount of time. They failed to do so with respect to Verizon and their phones. Funny that they are in this lawsuit now.

Nope. Any way you slice it. They'll lose.
Reply
Reply
post #59 of 70
5/15/09 at 1:27am
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissionGrey View Post

I call: Helicopter ejection seat

Prior art, one of the attack copters has one already. You jettison the rotor blades first. I have a feeling there's one where you eject from the bottom too, but it's only a vague memory.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MissionGrey View Post

solar powered flash light

I think that already exists too, an LED torch with a solar panel to charge a little internal battery.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MissionGrey View Post

glow in the dark sunglasses

Got me on that one, I did attach one of those tritium-powered glowy keyrings to the lamp remote so I could find it in the dark though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MissionGrey View Post

invisible diamonds.

There's a particular liquid that has the same refractive index as diamond, so when you drop them in they disappear.

Alan.
Reply
Reply
post #60 of 70
5/15/09 at 4:20am
Shazam's been in business since 2002 - well before 2005 when this patent was filed. Back then, it worked by sending you an SMS for which you were charged a few pence (it was UK-only then) containing the track data. Linking to the iTMS closes the circuit.

Hope this only serves to give publicity to an extraordinary service.
Reply
Reply
post #61 of 70
5/15/09 at 5:56am
Actually, you can.


Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

You can't patent an idea.
Reply
Reply
post #62 of 70
5/15/09 at 6:51am
Quote:
Originally Posted by lightstriker View Post

I am sorry but all these things have been invented. you can see them all on youtube.

rocket shoes - see JackAss movie
banana cameras- search the phase on Youtube.
touch screen dildos- there's an app for that. wobble or ijiggles
spring loaded beer- a college student invented a fridge that shoots beers a few years ago. look for it on youtube

invisible gum- they are invisible. no one wants to see what's in your mouth.
computers for dogs- see New Yorker cartoon. "on the internet, no one knows you are a dog"
french fry gardens- this is in every American's stomach.
fingernail polish clocks- every woman knows about this. visit my asian friend's salons.
solar powered lifeguard robots- Baywatch.

I saw that beer launcher vid like 4 years ago and went ape shit. When is he gonna market that? I would spent a good 1000 bucks on something like that, honest to God. My spring loaded beer idea was for the liquid inside though lol.
Reply
Reply
post #63 of 70
5/15/09 at 7:00am
As some other posters have mentioned, Sony sold a device that already did this, and it was well before 2005. I well remember wanting one, because all the radio stations I listen to have a bad habit of playing a song that I enjoy and then not identifying it.

For songs with lyrics, I decided to remember a few lines and punch them into Google. It works but is no good for instrumental songs. Would be nice if radio stations could announce every song or actually start using RDS (in the US, that is).

Anybody know if the "Shazam" application works with first generation iPod touch hardware--since it needs a microphone, is there a way to plug one in?
Reply
Reply
post #64 of 70
5/15/09 at 7:33am
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

That's what patent searches are for. This patent is easily available, as booga has seen it, apparently.

It's the responsibility for the person or company working on a new invention to do the search. It's much easier and cheaper these days, as much of it is on the internet.

IANAL, etc...

There is a danger in searching for a patent though... namely the fact that if you do a patent search, find something that is similar and then implement anyway because you think the patent does not apply then can be liable for triple damages.

If you think you have a great, unique, valuable, truly new idea for a product or service then get your ass to a parent attorney ASAP and patent it as soon as possible and well before you begin implementing or marketing your idea. In the current legal environment coming up with the idea is worthless unless you file the right paperwork (and pay the fees of course).
Reply
Reply
post #65 of 70
5/15/09 at 8:21am
If only I had a patent on sex, I could literally sue and screw everyone over :-)
Reply
Reply
post #66 of 70
5/15/09 at 8:22am
Quote:
Originally Posted by BuzDots View Post

Holy shit, I love it!!

maybe even solar powered touch screen dildos... think about it!


no, wait.............. solar powered, touch screen with music identifier built in... just call it Shazoom!

how about it gyrates to the music playing in the room , you know like those blinking lights you can buy that flash different colors and at different rates.
Reply
Reply
post #67 of 70
5/15/09 at 9:27am
Quote:
Originally Posted by therealcmj View Post

IANAL, etc...

There is a danger in searching for a patent though... namely the fact that if you do a patent search, find something that is similar and then implement anyway because you think the patent does not apply then can be liable for triple damages.

If you think you have a great, unique, valuable, truly new idea for a product or service then get your ass to a parent attorney ASAP and patent it as soon as possible and well before you begin implementing or marketing your idea. In the current legal environment coming up with the idea is worthless unless you file the right paperwork (and pay the fees of course).

Step one for an idea is to write it up and get it notarized. This establishes precedence. Then you can worry about patent searches, which are needed to file anyway and talking to the lawyer. Patents are not cheap to file so it would help to have a business plan before filing as well. I have never filed a patent mostly because of a lack of potential business but I have 8 invention disclosures just in case someone else markets the idea. In the story above it states that the company filed in 2000 and was awarded the patent in 2005. According to commentators Shazam came on the market in 2002. The question will be (if they are found to be similar inventions) is precedence. So you need to know when the invention by both companies was first put into writing in a formal manner. (laboratory book pages that are dated and signed count, but notarized documents are better). One of the key Radio patents was almost lost because the notary thought the idea was unimportant and used his casual signature to sign the document. It took a lot of effort to find enough examples to show the notary actually had two signatures and that the invention disclosure was valid.
Reply
Reply
post #68 of 70
5/15/09 at 9:32am
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post

Actually, you can.

Don't start with "actually" as though you know. You don't. Ideas are not allowed to be patented.
Reply
Reply
post #69 of 70
5/15/09 at 9:37am
Quote:
Originally Posted by therealcmj View Post

IANAL, etc...

There is a danger in searching for a patent though... namely the fact that if you do a patent search, find something that is similar and then implement anyway because you think the patent does not apply then can be liable for triple damages.

If you think you have a great, unique, valuable, truly new idea for a product or service then get your ass to a parent attorney ASAP and patent it as soon as possible and well before you begin implementing or marketing your idea. In the current legal environment coming up with the idea is worthless unless you file the right paperwork (and pay the fees of course).

You have to do a patent search. If you don't, everything you invest in your device or process can go down the drain. It's very bad advice to tell people not to do a patent search. We did patent searches on every idea we had, to see if someone had already come up with a way to accomplish them. Otherwise, a few times, we would have wasted a good deal of time and money on something we couldn't have done.

A patent attorney will first suggest a patent search. Some patent attorneys are experts in the area you need, and may have one or more degrees in it. They may know right off the bat if your "thing" has already been done. Otherwise, they will tell you that a patent search is in order.
Reply
Reply
post #70 of 70
5/15/09 at 1:14pm
"filed Tuesday by Tune Hunter, Inc. in the patent litigation friendly Marshall Division of Texas..."

Once again, the shitbox known as Marshall Division leaps to the rescue of parasitic companies who sue their way to fortune.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple, AT&T sued over ties to Shazam music ID service