We can give a huge thanks to Adam Carolla who gave these a*sholes a verbal lashing from time to time on his podcasts.
Actually, I think Carolla, by settling with Personal Audio could have given legitimacy to the patent in the long run, if the EFF hadn't been able to step in with their counter argument. The EFF are the real heroes in this ordeal. While Carolla helped get the word out, he gave up in the end and that could have been highly damaging.
>> I haven't reviewed the PTAP decision and I'm not familiar with the facts of this case,
Yes, this neatly explains why all your statements on the case are completely incorrect.
>>but it looks to me like a classic case where a small guy invented something
Personal Audio invented nothing. The claims made in their patent were already obvious in 1996 as several high profile systems had been launched on the internet which made use of exactly the same technologies the patent claims to invent. This is why the patent office has invalidated the patent. If you had taken 5 minutes to read the ruling you would understand this.
>>The patent was filed in 1996, 5 years before the iPod and the "cottage industry" that developed.
Irrelevant. The specific claims made in the patent were obvious in 1996 on the basis of publicly disclosed technologies/systems at the time.
If the NPR Planet Money story on it was a fair representation, it was less a matter of big business crushing the little guy and more the example of a greedy parasite abusing the legal system for money.
The guy came up with the vague, general idea of what would become a podcast with no way to actually make it happen. And he wasn't even the first one to do so.
Had the patent stood, he could have potentially sued not only Apple (which he did) but anyone who makes a podcast series (which he had been trying to do).
Comments
"Kneecaps" I like that word.
So does Tonya Harding.
We can give a huge thanks to Adam Carolla who gave these a*sholes a verbal lashing from time to time on his podcasts.
Actually, I think Carolla, by settling with Personal Audio could have given legitimacy to the patent in the long run, if the EFF hadn't been able to step in with their counter argument. The EFF are the real heroes in this ordeal. While Carolla helped get the word out, he gave up in the end and that could have been highly damaging.
@ash471:
>> I haven't reviewed the PTAP decision and I'm not familiar with the facts of this case,
Yes, this neatly explains why all your statements on the case are completely incorrect.
>>but it looks to me like a classic case where a small guy invented something
Personal Audio invented nothing. The claims made in their patent were already obvious in 1996 as several high profile systems had been launched on the internet which made use of exactly the same technologies the patent claims to invent. This is why the patent office has invalidated the patent. If you had taken 5 minutes to read the ruling you would understand this.
>>The patent was filed in 1996, 5 years before the iPod and the "cottage industry" that developed.
Irrelevant. The specific claims made in the patent were obvious in 1996 on the basis of publicly disclosed technologies/systems at the time.