Apple, AT&T sued over ties to Shazam music ID service
Apple, AT&T and several others have been named in a new patent infringement lawsuit, presumably for their connection to Shazam, a maker of music identification software distributed under the same name for the iPhone and several other mobile devices.
The 8-page complaint, filed Tuesday by Tune Hunter, Inc. in the patent litigation-friendly Marshall Division of Texas, broadly alleges that nearly a dozen tech companies are contributing to infringement of is US patent No. 6,941,275 for a "Music identification system" granted in September of 2005.
When it originally lodged its patent application with the USPTO nine years ago, the little-known firm described its invention as relating "to a music identification/purchasing system, specifically to a method for marking the time and the name of the radio station in portable device such as a key holder, watch, cellular phone, beeper or the like which will allow the user to learn via internet or regular telephone the name of the song, artist and/or music company by matching the stored data with broadcast archive."
The concept is strikingly similar to technology delivered by Shazam's popular namesake application for the iPhone, BlackBerry and G1 handsets, which helps users identify songs playing in their surroundings by capturing a sample of the track, analyzing it, and then comparing it with a remote database based on its acoustic footprint. If a song is correctly identified, users are presented with links to iTunes and Amazon -- another named defendant -- which they can use to immediately purchase the song.
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 [...] music identification systems and/or devices that are covered by one or more claims" of its patent.
The company, which is seeking that each defendant pay damages, attorneys' fees, and be enjoined from further infringement, claims to have notified "at least one or more" of those defendants about its patent, but says those parties took no action and continued their "willful and deliberate" infringement.
Shazam is available as a free music identification app for the iPhone.
Among the other defendants named in the suit are Samsung, Napster, Motorola, Gracenote, LG Electronics, Pantech Wireless, and Cellco Partnership (doing business as Verizon Wireless).
The 8-page complaint, filed Tuesday by Tune Hunter, Inc. in the patent litigation-friendly Marshall Division of Texas, broadly alleges that nearly a dozen tech companies are contributing to infringement of is US patent No. 6,941,275 for a "Music identification system" granted in September of 2005.
When it originally lodged its patent application with the USPTO nine years ago, the little-known firm described its invention as relating "to a music identification/purchasing system, specifically to a method for marking the time and the name of the radio station in portable device such as a key holder, watch, cellular phone, beeper or the like which will allow the user to learn via internet or regular telephone the name of the song, artist and/or music company by matching the stored data with broadcast archive."
The concept is strikingly similar to technology delivered by Shazam's popular namesake application for the iPhone, BlackBerry and G1 handsets, which helps users identify songs playing in their surroundings by capturing a sample of the track, analyzing it, and then comparing it with a remote database based on its acoustic footprint. If a song is correctly identified, users are presented with links to iTunes and Amazon -- another named defendant -- which they can use to immediately purchase the song.
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 [...] music identification systems and/or devices that are covered by one or more claims" of its patent.
The company, which is seeking that each defendant pay damages, attorneys' fees, and be enjoined from further infringement, claims to have notified "at least one or more" of those defendants about its patent, but says those parties took no action and continued their "willful and deliberate" infringement.
Shazam is available as a free music identification app for the iPhone.
Among the other defendants named in the suit are Samsung, Napster, Motorola, Gracenote, LG Electronics, Pantech Wireless, and Cellco Partnership (doing business as Verizon Wireless).
Comments
Jimzip
The description of their patent idea here:
... a music identification/purchasing system, specifically to a method for marking the time and the name of the radio station in portable device such as a key holder, watch, cellular phone, beeper or the like which will allow the user to learn via internet or regular telephone the name of the song, artist and/or music company by matching the stored data with broadcast archive. ...
Sounds to me like what they patented was the idea of taking note of the time it was played and on what station so that their "service" (which was presumably never started or even designed yet), can look it up and tell you what it was that was playing. There is really nothing here to suggest that this is really that similar to Shazam, which analyses the song itself, and doesn't care what source it came from or what time it was played.
The other 'idea' uses the date/time/radio station to find the track on the internet.
Tune Hunter doesn't even seem to have a web site.
Shazam does not work in the same way, it uses a sample of the music and compares it to a database.
The other 'idea' uses the date/time/radio station to find the track on the internet.
Exactly. Is there something I'm missing here or are these guys just another money-grabbing bunch of jerks? The description resembles Shazam's functionality somewhat, but even if that's so, there's no reason to go a huntin for all other companies that are even remotely tied to the Shazam service....
Someone more legal minded than me (ie, everyone...) care to take a dig at this one?
Jimzip
This one seems seems like an easy win, for all involved. The Tune Hunters should change their name to Fund Hunters
Does Tune Hunter have a product? There should be a ruling that no patent can be filed until a working product exists and no claim will be accepted unless the litigator's product can be demonstrated.
Tune Hunter doesn't even seem to have a web site.
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 think the judge should ask to see the research and product testing from tune hunter. if tune hunter actually has done any research or developed the technology to do so, they might have a case. if they came up with a loose idea without any technology, too bad for them. IMO.
... 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!"
Would be funnier with the wheel...
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 call: Helicopter ejection seat, solar powered flash light, glow in the dark sunglasses, invisible diamonds.
I call: Helicopter ejection seat, solar powered flash light, glow in the dark sunglasses, invisible diamonds.
I've long ago tired of the inevitable "I patented air!!!" rants that follow these articles, but this is funny...
I've long ago tired of the inevitable "I patented air!!!" rants that follow these articles, but this is funny...
I call "Air" - with a capital A
I never understand why people like this go after everyone and the aunt? Surely simply suing Shazam should be enough?
I call "Air" - with a capital A
Hilarity aside, you can't get a patent on a thing or even an idea, you can only get a patent on an implementation.
In this case, it sounds like the basic idea (using teh internets to identify songs), is the same, but the implementation is totally different.
So, yeah ... total fail.
I predict Tune Hunter will lose, if this even makes it to a trial.
WIth that said, I don't think Apple infringes the stated patent.
Coming up with an idea is simple. So is filing a patent. Delivering a product which works is the hard part. I have some advise for Tune Hunter: retract the lawsuit. You will lose.