Patent suit targets Apple, Microsoft, others over digital distribution
A newly filed lawsuit takes aim at Apple and its App Store and iTunes Store, alleging that they violate two patents related to digital distribution of content. In addition, Apple has reportedly settled in another patent-related suit filed earlier this year.
Olympic Developments vs. Apple, Microsoft, Amazon
A new lawsuit filed in this week in a U.S. District Court in the Central District of California, Los Angeles Division, challenges a number of high-profile technology companies that distribute content and software over the Internet. Olympic Developments AG LLC believes that the defendants are in violation of two patents entitled "Transactional Processing System" and "Device for Controlling Remote Interactive Receiver."
Named in the suit are Apple and its App Store and iTunes Store, Amazon.com's Kindle Store, Barnes and Noble's Nook Store, pay-per-view services from satellite TV provider DirecTV, Microsoft's Xbox Live Marketplace, Nintendo's Wii Shop Channel, Sony's PlayStation Network Store, and the Steam gaming storefront from developer Valve.
U.S. Patent No. 5,475,585, "Transactional Processing System," is for a system that provides products and services through credit card transactions. Filed in 1994, it describes "real-time authorization of payments for a plurality of products and services."
U.S. Patent No. 6,246,600, "Device for Controlling Remote Interactive Receiver," was first filed in 1997. It describes a "remote" that stores financial information.
Olympic Developments has alleged that Apple is in violation of both patents, as its digital storefronts allow users to receive "desired programming selections," and also grant the ability to "access and/or view and/or purchase products from a remote programming system," the suit reads, via devices like the iPhone and iPad.
Apple reportedly settles suit with Sharing Sound
Many of the same companies in this week's new lawsuit were also named in a complaint filed earlier this year by Sharing Sound, including Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, and Barnes and Noble. According to TechCrunch, Apple has opted to settle in that lawsuit, filed in May.
Sharing Sound is the owner of U.S. Patent No. 6,247,130, entitled "Distribution of Musical Products by a Web Site Vendor Over the Internet."
Author Robin Wauters said that most companies in the lawsuit already moved to settle with Sharing Sound. Apple is reportedly the latest.
Olympic Developments vs. Apple, Microsoft, Amazon
A new lawsuit filed in this week in a U.S. District Court in the Central District of California, Los Angeles Division, challenges a number of high-profile technology companies that distribute content and software over the Internet. Olympic Developments AG LLC believes that the defendants are in violation of two patents entitled "Transactional Processing System" and "Device for Controlling Remote Interactive Receiver."
Named in the suit are Apple and its App Store and iTunes Store, Amazon.com's Kindle Store, Barnes and Noble's Nook Store, pay-per-view services from satellite TV provider DirecTV, Microsoft's Xbox Live Marketplace, Nintendo's Wii Shop Channel, Sony's PlayStation Network Store, and the Steam gaming storefront from developer Valve.
U.S. Patent No. 5,475,585, "Transactional Processing System," is for a system that provides products and services through credit card transactions. Filed in 1994, it describes "real-time authorization of payments for a plurality of products and services."
U.S. Patent No. 6,246,600, "Device for Controlling Remote Interactive Receiver," was first filed in 1997. It describes a "remote" that stores financial information.
Olympic Developments has alleged that Apple is in violation of both patents, as its digital storefronts allow users to receive "desired programming selections," and also grant the ability to "access and/or view and/or purchase products from a remote programming system," the suit reads, via devices like the iPhone and iPad.
Apple reportedly settles suit with Sharing Sound
Many of the same companies in this week's new lawsuit were also named in a complaint filed earlier this year by Sharing Sound, including Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, and Barnes and Noble. According to TechCrunch, Apple has opted to settle in that lawsuit, filed in May.
Sharing Sound is the owner of U.S. Patent No. 6,247,130, entitled "Distribution of Musical Products by a Web Site Vendor Over the Internet."
Author Robin Wauters said that most companies in the lawsuit already moved to settle with Sharing Sound. Apple is reportedly the latest.
Comments
Queue the argument regarding the patent process and why is a patent issued for an idea or a concept vs an implementation of that concept?
Seriously though, if patent law works this way, what will be the incentive for making anything any more? Patent troll is the way to go, no substantial risk, and tons of upside.
I should file a patent, method for distributing 3D movie files over the internet using wires with computerized boxes on the end, and sometimes wireless. Some day it will start happening, and I'll be rich.
Seriously though, if patent law works this way, what will be the incentive for making anything any more? Patent troll is the way to go, no substantial risk, and tons of upside.
Abstract outside of that to include any form of Radiated waveforms between one to many devices which transmit any form of sensory data and you can hook them all.
This should be interesting.
Time will tell.
A newly filed lawsuit takes aim at Apple and its App Store and iTunes Store, alleging that they violate two patents related to digital distribution of content. In addition, Apple has reportedly settled in another patent-related suit filed earlier this year....
I didn't even bother with the third one but neither of those first two are even close to anything Apple or anyone else is doing.
It's the details of the implementation that count and both are very weak on details. Those they do mention don't correspond to anything Apple has patented or is using. The similarities are general, and conceptual only and you can't win a patent suit on that. The "remote" they are talking about is plugged into your home phone jack with a cable for starters. Who even has a home phone or a "modem" anymore?
I should file a patent, method for distributing 3D movie files over the internet using wires with computerized boxes on the end, and sometimes wireless. Some day it will start happening, and I'll be rich.
Seriously though, if patent law works this way, what will be the incentive for making anything any more? Patent troll is the way to go, no substantial risk, and tons of upside.
Abstract outside of that to include any form of Radiated waveforms between one to many devices which transmit any form of sensory data and you can hook them all.
And don't forget to use the phrase "plurality of products and services". That seems to be the catch-all phrase to cover, well, everything.
I just want to know why Apple's iPad and iPhone's patents don't seem to prevent everyone copying them?
Yeah! When Apple has to settle with someone holding a patent called "Distribution of Musical Products by a Web Site Vendor Over the Internet." you got to wonder what's going on. SJ made a point of saying they were patenting the crap out the iPhone yet it seems to me everybody is pretty much replicating it.
And don't forget to use the phrase "plurality of products and services". That seems to be the catch-all phrase to cover, well, everything.
Yeah! When Apple has to settle with someone holding a patent called "Distribution of Musical Products by a Web Site Vendor Over the Internet." you got to wonder what's going on. SJ made a point of saying they were patenting the crap out the iPhone yet it seems to me everybody is pretty much replicating it.
Apple patented the heck out of their ecosystem so they can protect their innovations w/ as little to no impedance from the competition.
People have shown that continued innovation gets their dollars. Continued litigation would turn them off.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860_3-20...ag=topStories1
This should be interesting.
Time will tell.
HTC is already paying a license fee to Microsoft on every Android handset they sell.
Now that someone is making money out of Linux, Microsoft has someone to go after.
Then Oracle's going after the JVM on top of the Linux core.
It looks like Google's model of wholesale theft of IP, open sourcing it and giving it away may hit a few roadblocks.
Yeah! When Apple has to settle with someone holding a patent called "Distribution of Musical Products by a Web Site Vendor Over the Internet." you got to wonder what's going on. SJ made a point of saying they were patenting the crap out the iPhone yet it seems to me everybody is pretty much replicating it.
Exactly. I have to wonder why.
HTC is already paying a license fee to Microsoft on every Android handset they sell.
Now that someone is making money out of Linux, Microsoft has someone to go after.
Then Oracle's going after the JVM on top of the Linux core.
It looks like Google's model of wholesale theft of IP, open sourcing it and giving it away may hit a few roadblocks.
To that end the IP in Linux has been around a lot longer than anything MS has come up with. In any event please explain what IP Google has stolen?