...then do something about it, instead of ranting in a forum like this....
I'm not trying to start a political debate here.. but what exactly can anyone do. Call me a "half-empty" kind of person, but I think a lot of people's frustration comes from the reality that the problems are bigger than anyone can fix... no legislation, no more laws (please god no more laws), and no "representative" will ever or could ever do anything to stop this insanity (and by this insanity - I really am referring to the whole picture, not just lawsuits against Apple).
Also, I think a forum meant for people to discuss things openly...
OMFG That patent from Mediostream is amazing . How on earth does something like that get granted? I work as a software engineer for a company that creates video surveillance / recording equipment and so was interested to see what they could possibly have breached and spent a bit of time looking through the patent (proudly linked too from the Medio site as "groundbreaking efforts in computer science")...
Essentially all the document does is describe the operation of a codec. It's a process for decoding an encoded video stream (and this can be pretty much ANY stream as they've listed just about anything you can think of - DVD / VCD / WMV / AVI / RealPlayer / RGB / YUV / Analogue video... everything) and re-encoding to a supplied standard (e.g. TV format, AVI format, MPEG format... again everything under the sun.
There's no specifics, it covers just about everything... oh as long as it doesn't create an intermediate file in the process*. As I see it, this would cover everything from your DVD player (the conversion from DVD format to RGB output, say) to your TiVo, to any video recording solutions on the market.
"This important patent has many applications in today's world and is a testament to the vision and skill of our technical staff"
How do they get off with this crap? How can a patent like that be granted when there's so much prior art you can't walk into an electrical superstore without seeing an implementation of it?
breath deeply ... and relax....
* although the patent is specifically titled to imply recording to a disk medium, the first paragraph of the background states:
"But it would be recognized that the invention has a much broader range of applicability. For example, the invention can be applied to a variety of formats and information including audio information for a variety of applications such as fixed files, streaming video, captured streaming video and/or audio, any combination of these, and the like." so the intention isn't simply to output to files, streams are mentioned. I'm not sure from if this is part of the uses covered by the patent - I would really hope not!
I bought my HD Video Recorder in 2004 and that records to a "Disk Medium" so whoever granted such a patent must be living in a very remote area of the mountains.
Whats next ? A patent for a "method or system of conveying messages and annotations from one point to another in next to no time at all"
what a waste of money... can't these companies make a living with NORMAL business practises?
I think they take the money from marketing. It's clearly a way to get "free" publicity. I've now been to MedioStream's homepage to learn what they're doing. DVD software for Windows, (no software screenshots). I never would have checked them out if it wasn't for this lawsuit.. so I guess it kind of works... it's bad though...
There are billions of examples of prior art and MedioStream will lose their patent and will be put on close scrutiny on following patents. Good thing too because companies that do this don't actually contribute anything to the world and are just out there to slow or stop companies that do contribute things to the world.
By not placing a warning about this apparent limitation in its promotional materials or on the packaging of the iPhone, Apple and AT&T were said to have been guilty of breaching both good faith and the California Commercial Code, which demands that manufacturers in the state honestly reflect how their products will perform in real-world conditions. The two companies responsible for the iPhone and its service meant to defraud customers, the Stieners said.
It's on the package. What a bunch if lawyers. (Sorry for the foul language.)
The court isn't there to decide on the validity of the patent, it's there to decide whether it was infringed.
However as the Mac Mini was released in 2005, and this patent was 2006, so how can the Mac Mini infringe? It's ridiculous, and I'm sure the court will see that.
1. Patents no longer require "proof-of-concept", meaning you can write it up without actually having done it.
2. Horrid review process: As one reader pointed out, they had been doing at home, through the use of readily available hardware and software, exactly what this patent claims. In legalese, this is called "Prior Art."
Odds are Apples attourneys aren't worrid about this lawsuit at all; they'll just bury the plaintiff in reams of prior art. like:
TIVO
Hauppage WinTV
Perception DVR/PVR
Windows Media Mobile
Palm Media Player
ATI TV Wonder...
And the list goes on.
As for the battery life...duh. If you're retarded enough to buy a phone and not notice, after giving it the once over, that the battery is not removable, please take this glass of STFU.
Comments
I invite your questions or comments, just beware the consequences.
I agree wholeheartedly. You may recall that a couple of weeks ago I proposed public beheading as a viable punishment for frivolous lawsuits.
...then do something about it, instead of ranting in a forum like this....
I'm not trying to start a political debate here.. but what exactly can anyone do. Call me a "half-empty" kind of person, but I think a lot of people's frustration comes from the reality that the problems are bigger than anyone can fix... no legislation, no more laws (please god no more laws), and no "representative" will ever or could ever do anything to stop this insanity (and by this insanity - I really am referring to the whole picture, not just lawsuits against Apple).
Also, I think a forum meant for people to discuss things openly...
Essentially all the document does is describe the operation of a codec. It's a process for decoding an encoded video stream (and this can be pretty much ANY stream as they've listed just about anything you can think of - DVD / VCD / WMV / AVI / RealPlayer / RGB / YUV / Analogue video... everything) and re-encoding to a supplied standard (e.g. TV format, AVI format, MPEG format... again everything under the sun.
There's no specifics, it covers just about everything... oh as long as it doesn't create an intermediate file in the process*. As I see it, this would cover everything from your DVD player (the conversion from DVD format to RGB output, say) to your TiVo, to any video recording solutions on the market.
"This important patent has many applications in today's world and is a testament to the vision and skill of our technical staff"
How do they get off with this crap? How can a patent like that be granted when there's so much prior art you can't walk into an electrical superstore without seeing an implementation of it?
breath deeply ... and relax....
* although the patent is specifically titled to imply recording to a disk medium, the first paragraph of the background states:
"But it would be recognized that the invention has a much broader range of applicability. For example, the invention can be applied to a variety of formats and information including audio information for a variety of applications such as fixed files, streaming video, captured streaming video and/or audio, any combination of these, and the like." so the intention isn't simply to output to files, streams are mentioned. I'm not sure from if this is part of the uses covered by the patent - I would really hope not!
Whats next ? A patent for a "method or system of conveying messages and annotations from one point to another in next to no time at all"
what a waste of money... can't these companies make a living with NORMAL business practises?
I think they take the money from marketing. It's clearly a way to get "free" publicity. I've now been to MedioStream's homepage to learn what they're doing. DVD software for Windows, (no software screenshots). I never would have checked them out if it wasn't for this lawsuit.. so I guess it kind of works... it's bad though...
There are billions of examples of prior art and MedioStream will lose their patent and will be put on close scrutiny on following patents. Good thing too because companies that do this don't actually contribute anything to the world and are just out there to slow or stop companies that do contribute things to the world.
They can predict the future!
I predict they will lose.
And today is NEW IPOD DAY!
By not placing a warning about this apparent limitation in its promotional materials or on the packaging of the iPhone, Apple and AT&T were said to have been guilty of breaching both good faith and the California Commercial Code, which demands that manufacturers in the state honestly reflect how their products will perform in real-world conditions. The two companies responsible for the iPhone and its service meant to defraud customers, the Stieners said.
It's on the package. What a bunch if lawyers. (Sorry for the foul language.)
It'll never hold in court.
The court isn't there to decide on the validity of the patent, it's there to decide whether it was infringed.
However as the Mac Mini was released in 2005, and this patent was 2006, so how can the Mac Mini infringe? It's ridiculous, and I'm sure the court will see that.
1. Patents no longer require "proof-of-concept", meaning you can write it up without actually having done it.
2. Horrid review process: As one reader pointed out, they had been doing at home, through the use of readily available hardware and software, exactly what this patent claims. In legalese, this is called "Prior Art."
Odds are Apples attourneys aren't worrid about this lawsuit at all; they'll just bury the plaintiff in reams of prior art. like:
TIVO
Hauppage WinTV
Perception DVR/PVR
Windows Media Mobile
Palm Media Player
ATI TV Wonder...
And the list goes on.
As for the battery life...duh. If you're retarded enough to buy a phone and not notice, after giving it the once over, that the battery is not removable, please take this glass of STFU.