Did Acacia just get fucked?

[JR]

http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showthread.p...threadid=185753 (http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=185753)


"Prior Art" as definined in US Federal Law

Title 35, United States Code, Section 102

Sec. 102. - Conditions for patentability; novelty and loss of right to patent

A person shall be entitled to a patent unless -

(a) the invention was known or used by others in this country, or patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country, before the invention thereof by the applicant for patent, or

(b ) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of the application for patent in the United States, or

(c ) he has abandoned the invention, or

(d) the invention was first patented or caused to be patented, or was the subject of an inventor's certificate, by the applicant or his legal representatives or assigns in a foreign country prior to the date of the application for patent in this country on an application for patent or inventor's certificate filed more than twelve months before the filing of the application in the United States, or

(e) The [1] invention was described in -

(1) an application for patent, published under section 122(b ), by another filed in the United States before the invention by the applicant for patent, except that an international application filed under the treaty defined in section 351(a) shall have the effect under this subsection of a national application published under section 122(b ) only if the international application designating the United States was published under Article 21(2)(a) of such treaty in the English language; or

(2) a patent granted on an application for patent by another filed in the United States before the invention by the applicant for patent, except that a patent shall not be deemed filed in the United States for the purposes of this subsection based on the filing of an international application filed under the treaty defined in section 351(a); [2] or

(f) he did not himself invent the subject matter sought to be patented, or

(1) during the course of an interference conducted under section 135 or section 291, another inventor involved therein establishes, to the extent permitted in section 104, that before such person's invention thereof the invention was made by such other inventor and not abandoned, suppressed, or concealed, or

(2) before such person's invention thereof, the invention was made in this country by another inventor who had not abandoned, suppressed, or concealed it. In determining priority of invention under this subsection, there shall be considered not only the respective dates of conception and reduction to practice of the invention, but also the reasonable diligence of one who was first to conceive and last to reduce to practice, from a time prior to conception by the other

[spazlabz]

Oh
My Fucking gawd
I think I just messed myself. Gotta love that Acacia Research OWNED graphic.

spaz

[nlphoto]

Looks VERY interesting...

[JR]

it would be sort of ironic, humorous and somewhat fitting, if it turns out that the only licensing agreements and settlements were from those who settled right away.

[Winetalk.com]

nice find!

[Paul Markham]

What it also does is bring into the forum of what exactly did Acacia do for there Prior Art research.

Isn't that one of the things that they are being sued for, refusing to reveal what they found. Who knows if they did not do their research properly we can sue them into a section 11. :nyanya:

[Rolo]

Quick sell your Acacia stocks before this get out B)

http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=ACTG&d=t

(just wanted to edit in a link to their stock, so we can cheer when it drops) :hic:



Last edited by Rolo at Oct 14 2003, 03:44 AM

[JR]

Originally posted by Paul Markham@Oct 14 2003, 03:08 AM
What it also does is bring into the forum of what exactly did Acacia do for there Prior Art research.

Isn't that one of the things that they are being sued for, refusing to reveal what they found. Who knows if they did not do their research properly we can sue them into a section 11. :nyanya:
my understanding is that they aquired the patent through a company they aquired. they are saying that the original filer did his "research"

i think this is going to implode anyway. its just a question of time. there is no friendly way to enforce this patent... especially a really flimsy one that is making everyone say "what the fuck!?!?!" and no big mainstream company like Microsoft and AOL/Time Warner is likely to just say "ok". Additionally, when those companies take a stand and take it to the press, Acacia would be fucked anyway.

if their case was so strong... they would just tell people to pay... they would not be wasting time trying to get porn companies to pay a tolken amount just to say they have "licensing agreements" in place.

[Bex]

Hopefully this will take them the way of the dodo.

[Mike AI]

Very interesting reading.

There is ONE thing that is not in debate, and that is the patent office is out of control, and apparently has been overrun by trained monkeys.

[Vick]

Originally posted by Mike AI@Oct 14 2003, 08:26 AM
Very interesting reading.

There is ONE thing that is not in debate, and that is the patent office is out of control, and apparently has been overrun by trained monkeys.
Are you sure they are trained? :unsure:

[Toolz]

Yes the new monkies have robotic arms, see the thread from yesterday, they're in the patent office.

[FightThePatent]

I have started to now post prior art finds at http://www.FightThePatent.com/v2/Squirt.html in honor of Squirt's find on the video.

The defense team already had plenty of info on Pandora Project over 2 months ago.. but what was good, was to see the video and give people an insight into prior art.

I have sent alot of prior art leads on to the defense team, and I will be writing them up on the Squirt.html page for all to read.


Fight the Patent!

[spazlabz]

After some additional debate, it has been decided that prior art leads should be posted for all to see.
From your page FTP, I hope you don't mind, but i do have a question about this.
I KNOW it is important for all of us who are not directly involved in the legal battle to get news of whats going on. After the big 3 signed their licenses with Acacia a lot of peoples faith was shaking. I know mine was, along with my knees.
But, and I dont mean anything bad by this, but isn't it sort of short sighted to put this information out in the public? Doesn't it give Acacia the oppurtunity to see what the defense has and build a case against whatever they have? I am under the impression that prosecuters (this is ciminal matters now) HAVE to show everything they have to the defense, but that defense doesn't have to show them what they have as a protection for the defendant. Wouldn't this be an unpopular but prudent course of action for those involved in the suit to follow?
It is heartening to know just how much prior art there is, but also a little scarey thinking Acacia's busy little bees are working feverishly trying to invalidate all this prior art.

One observation, if i was one of the big three, i'd be feeling kinda stupid right now.
I, spaz, am nothing in this biz, but this one little nothing, of his own free will and under the influence of no outside parties has decided to never do anything with/for any of those big 3.

spaz

[Bishop]

Thanks for the post JR.. AEBN was happy to see it.

[gonzo]

Originally posted by Bishop@Oct 14 2003, 02:22 PM
Thanks for the post JR.. AEBN was happy to see it.
Whos ABEN?

[Bishop]

Originally posted by gonzo+Oct 14 2003, 02:47 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (gonzo @ Oct 14 2003, 02:47 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin--Bishop@Oct 14 2003, 02:22 PM
Thanks for the post JR.. AEBN was happy to see it.
Whos ABEN?[/b][/quote]

I have no clue who ABEN is.

[FightThePatent]

Originally posted by spazlabz@Oct 14 2003, 10:29 AM



But, and I dont mean anything bad by this, but isn't it sort of short sighted to put this information out in the public? Doesn't it give Acacia the oppurtunity to see what the defense has and build a case against whatever they have? I am under the impression that prosecuters (this is ciminal matters now) HAVE to show everything they have to the defense, but that defense doesn't have to show them what they have as a protection for the defendant. Wouldn't this be an unpopular but prudent course of action for those involved in the suit to follow?


Whether a case be criminal or civil, in the discovery phase, both sides have to disclose the evidence, otherwise the evidence is not allowed to be presented in court.

Our court system allows each side to present their version of the truth, and sandbagging with some evidence that wasn't disclosed during discovery is not allowed..... i'm not a lawyer, but i watch TV..

Posting the prior art is already out of my hands.... other people have already started anyways, so there is no way to control it.

I made my decision recently to present the prior art given the fact that things like the video clip on the Squirt.html page and other prior art evidence would help people who are faced with the decision of whether to settle or not, have some more information.


So it's not a bad thing at all.. quite the opposite, the more eyes looking for prior art and knowing what to look for, the better.


Fight The Patent!

[FightThePatent]

i updated this page: http://www.FightThePatent.com/v2/Searching.html for some new things that i am looking for, for those that want to help try to find prior art.

A copy of the page is below for the link-click challenged.




If you know people who fit these Prior Art searches, feel free to pass them on to me or dig up your own leads and pass them on. Credit will be given!

All Prior Art finds need to be before 1990 to count.

Current Searches:


Video-on-Demand documentation/proposals. FCC may have a library of such documents.
(Waiting on reply from former commissioner Patricia Diaz Dennis)


Individuals who worked at Bell Labs that were involved with digital audio/video.


Soundcap files (as well as documentation of the file list to show availability before 1990)
(Developers found, waiting on replies)


PDP11 use of digitized audio


Weather (NASA/JPL) or Satellite movies


Electronic copies of IEEE articles/papers on Video on Demand over ATM or Fiber Optics


Quicktime public releases before 1990.
(Looking to contact Steve Jobs and Frank Casanova)


Digital audio or video on Commodore 64, Apple II, Mac (Hyperstack), NeXT, Amiga, etc


PC Speaker (DOS) .exe files that had digitized audio (ie. christmas, classical songs, etc).


DUOSOUND files


GIF89a files (not animation or cartoony, but using digitized images in a loop to make a video-like presentation)


Video Guided missiles and digital


Associated Press system for transferring videos (Harris/Radiation ?)


BBS SYSOPS with CDROM archives prior to 1990


Computer magazines that talk about audio or video, convergence of computers and entertainment, etc


Sparkle "movie" files


IBM Storyboard Plus player that would have had "video like" files to be used by this player


LinkWay from IBM. Similar to HyperCard (card oriented, has buttons, pictures and fields, not nearly as powerful as HyperCard).


HyperPad from (I think) Brightbill-Roberts. It's another HyperCard-like authoring system.


AVC from IBM. Features (anti-aliased fonts, digitized video and audio (requires special hardware), complete control over event synchronization).


Spinnaker Software is supposedly working on a "real" HyperCard clone that can read and write actual HyperCard stacks.




Fight the Patent!

[KevinG]

FightThePatent - I appreciate the responsibility you've taken on with this, so if you don't mind, I have an idea for you.

Acacia is quick to send out PR stating, "Acacia makes deals with Hustler, Vivid and Wicked Pictures", which makes everybody crap their pants.

How about sending PR out about all the prior art that seems to invalidate their patent.

[MikeFold]

an interesting post from the yahoo finance board....
re: acacia
----------------------------------------------------
Notes Posted On -- Tuesday May 21,2002


RIDING THE DIGITAL REVOLUTION - Part 1

Last Tuesday I attended the annual meeting of `favorite` Acacia Research Corporation (ACRI) $8.43. Much of the post meeting presentation by management was devoted to providing for the first time to Acacia`s shareholders their patent enforcement strategy. Recall that (ACRI) has a suite* of `pioneer` patents on the process of digital streaming that cover the transmission pathways that link; digitization, encryption & encoding, compression, storage, transmission, receiving and play-back. The patents that date back to January 1991 are importantly `open continuation` i.e. you can add to them, and that prevents design arounds.* 5 US patents, 16 international patents, 137 claims.

Some needed history. In 1990, walk on water, Sarnoff Research Center, then a subsidiary of RCA, (now GE), executed a thorough literature and prior art search of existing patents for Greenwich Information Technologies the originators of the patents. Sarnoff found no `prior art`.

This is also a grabber - In 1994 Bell Atlantic, (now Verizon Wireless) did a pilot program of video on demand, `VOD`, over phone lines. Bell Labs researched the patents for them and found that Greenwich was the beneficial owner of the key patents. Bell Atlantic then made a royalty agreement for an option on the VOD patents, whereupon subsequent and substantial payments were paid to Greenwich.

More good stuff. Back a ways, in 1996, (ACRI) buys 30% of Greenwich, then the remaining portion last year. That`s after hotfooting it to 4 major law firms to have them try to bust the patents. There unanimous opinion after months of extensive research was - bullet proof - that indeed the patents encompassed the process involved in the method of digital streaming, audio and VOD. They also found nothing prior in the literature and the patents were `cited` over 200 times.

Now consider the spectacular success of the Gemstar (GMST) patent licensing program. The stock flew from $2.00 to $100 on the back of their single patent on set-top boxes. Importantly 4 of the executive Gemstar attorneys who orchestrated that undertaking are now at (ACRI) readying to enforce their patents. Scuttlebutt is that the now `Acacia 4` thinks that these patents are way stronger than the one they successfully enforced and licensed for Gemstar. Recently 2 more Gemstar executives who ran Europe and Asia, plus a key engineer have joined the hunt. At one point Gemstar wore a market cap of $9 Billion.

Word is that the (ACRI) team is already knocking on doors in the beginnings of licensing / royalty agreements. Important here is the fact that (ACRI) seems to view this endeavor as the setting up of strategic partnerships rather than an aggressive adversarial pursuit of giant lump sum payments. I.e. A penny or so on this application, a penny or so on the next one; and on and on, thru the complex of the associated technological pathways involved. These small nominal fees would not affect their `partners` business models yet they add up to a cumulative royalty stream in the mega millions.

Their goal is to become a very lean money making machine with exceptional 95% + gross margins and low expenses. Once the program is underway you presumably need a walk up, an accountant to count the take and a few attorneys to make sure there`s no one cheating. Head count at Acacia Technologies, that`s the `patent portfolio` side of the company, is only 17, so you get the `drift` and the potential bonanza.

[homegrownmof]

Reads like propaganda to me.

[KevinG]

Originally posted by homegrownmof@Oct 15 2003, 08:53 AM
Reads like propaganda to me.
I agree

[FightThePatent]

Originally posted by KevinG@Oct 15 2003, 06:10 AM
FightThePatent - I appreciate the responsibility you've
Acacia is quick to send out PR stating, "Acacia makes deals with Hustler, Vivid and Wicked Pictures", which makes everybody crap their pants.


It is a great suggestion.. I took some time to get some mainstream media to cover this story, but nothing yet... i didn't try to push that hard and have been more focused to bringing awareness to people who might be able to help in the search for prior art, as well as to get webmasters informed and involved.

I created this page http://www.FightThePatent.com/v2/Squirt.html to start posting prior art, so everyone can see what it looks like.

It's not everything, just the ones that i find that stand out.

I am trying to finish up on a white paper to send to sponsors and content producers, to give them an overall summary of these issues as it pertains to the licensing of acacia's patent issue.

I'm trying to wrap it up soon since some have already emailed me, for those that are interested, email me at brandon -at- fightthepatent.com

Any webmasters that have email lists of webmasters, if you could send an email that i prepare to that list, it would help to spread the word... so many don't read the message boards, that maybe coming in email, they will get informed.

It would be greatly appreciated to help spread the word about Acacia and about Fight The Patent Foundation (http://www.fightthepatent.com/go)


Fight the Patent!

[FightThePatent]

Originally posted by MikeFold@Oct 15 2003, 07:16 AM
an interesting post from the yahoo finance board....
re: acacia
----------------------------------------------------
Notes Posted On -- Tuesday May 21,2002


RIDING THE DIGITAL REVOLUTION - Part 1

` and the potential bonanza.
My comments to this article to an ICQ buddy who i think posted my words on the yahoo forum (haven't checked), but here is what i said:


"That`s after hotfooting it to 4 major law firms to have them try to bust the patents. There unanimous opinion after months of extensive research was - bullet proof
"

ok, so name those 4 patent companies... maybe each one did their analysis and saw there was prior art, so they had to go to another, and another, and another until one would say that the patent was bulletproff..... they only say they brought their patent to 3-4 firms, they never claimed that each one said it was bulletproof, that's just this guys personal opinion or spin



"Head count at Acacia Technologies, that`s the `patent portfolio` side of the company, is only 17,
"

ya, but's all the same patent.. so if the foundation patent gets invalidated, the rest fall like dominoes...




Fight the Patent!

[FightThePatent]

Berman said in one publication:
""It's the user of tech that is liable under patent law," added Berman. "There are several large companies that actually cite our patents in their patent documentation, like Real."


Of course other patent holders cite their patents.. it's REQUIRED by the patent office to disclose any prior art and patents they can find.

It's not a validation that their patent is valid.

The huge problem with Acacia is this: (to use a car analogy).

They patented a personal transport with 4 wheels.

Someone else cited them in their own patent, but called it a car with low ride suspension.

Acacia comes out to sue the auto dealers for patent infringement of selling cars with wheels, which they say is the same as a personal transport. They could sue the manufacturer, but they have deep pockets, so they pick on the smaller dealerships that have tight margins and high overhead (ie. inventory).

In this simple example, Acacia is looking to sue everyone for a broad patent claim... the problem is that so many companies were making "personal transports" prior to their patent, that the patent claims should be invalid.

But why would the USPTO grant this fictiious patent then if there was prior art? The language in this patent was so obscure and science fiction like, talking about the ability to turn invisible, transform into a robot,etc.. that the patent office thought it was novel and new. but acacia decided to just focus on the broader claim of a car with wheels.

But some auto dealerships decided to fight..they didn't want to pay someone a licensing fee for the sales of their pimp-mo-biles. So these dealerships fight back by challenging the big bad patent.



Hope you have enjoyed this analogy to explain how absurd this Acacia patent is.


Fight the Patent!

[Dravyk]

Originally posted by homegrownmof@Oct 15 2003, 11:53 AM
Reads like propaganda to me.
Ditto! Isn't there an SEC law against people trying to push their own stock up by impersonations? That post (thanks Fold) sounds like a graduate of the "How To Shill 101" course. :yowsa:

They've obviously never seen YNOT circa 1997. Now there was some Advanced Shilling!!

[JR]

The bottom line in all this seems pretty simple.

Prior Art does definately exist.

Increased awareness of this issue and help in searching will increase the finds.

This patent will be invalidated.

People need to talk about this issue and show some interest. The Patent does not have ANY DIRECT IMPACT on my business and what i do as it does not cover live video. However, failing to be interested in these issues and take a stand can DEFINATELY have a major impact on us all.

These cases are the beginning and will set precedence for many cases to come.

People should get involved as much as possible instead of waiting until we finally have to pay a license fee for using a JPEG or GIF.

ACTG Shareholders seem to be pretty ignorant of the other side of the story for the most part

http://messages.yahoo.com/bbs?.mm=FN&actio...80497&mid=22078 (http://messages.yahoo.com/bbs?.mm=FN&action=l&board=7080497&tid=acri&sid=7080497&mid=22078)

You even go to the board and there are headlines connected to the company about Wicked, Hustler, Vivid etc. Its all a really unfair representation of the facts and the issues to shareholders as well and the single biggest reason why the price of the stock is so over valued.

It was very well stated here:
http://finance.messages.yahoo.com/bbs?.mm=...80497&mid=22016 (http://finance.messages.yahoo.com/bbs?.mm=FN&action=m&board=7080497&tid=acri&sid=7080497&mid=22016)

People need to get involved. Talk about it. Help in the search.

There are two sides to this story and so far, the market has only heard one side ... and THAT fact is reflected in the price of Acacias Stock. That should not be happening.

[Rolo]

I have only found a few recent Acacia news stories not made by Acacia own PR people. However after reading them, then I think they are very one sided. Would be great with a more aggressive spin, which would really show what kind of a company Acacia really is. Acacia gets away with alot of things, which makes them sound like they have actual won several court cases and have already proven their patents in court.

Acacia Sets Sights On Cable Industry: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...07/tc_zd/109095 (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/zd/20031007/tc_zd/109095)

Larry Flynt, Others Bow To Acacia Patents:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...07/tc_zd/108958 (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/zd/20031007/tc_zd/108958)

Acacia Attempts to Enforce Streaming Media Patents:
http://www.learningcircuits.org/2003/oct20...bytes.html#oct1 (http://www.learningcircuits.org/2003/oct2003/newsbytes.html#oct1)

Patent holder unplugs porn network: http://www.zdnet.com.au/newstech/security/...20278931,00.htm (http://www.zdnet.com.au/newstech/security/story/0,2000048600,20278931,00.htm)

etc.

Would be really great with headlines like:

IMPA Sets Sights On Acacia Patents
IMPA, Wants Acacia To Bow
etc.

:)

[Rolo]

JR - just finished reading most of the recent posts at the ACTG yahoo board... I´m suprised at the number of stock holders who know nothing about the company :blink:

[JR]

Originally posted by Rolo@Oct 16 2003, 01:51 AM
JR - just finished reading most of the recent posts at the ACTG yahoo board... I´m suprised at the number of stock holders who know nothing about the company :blink:
its amazing.

i never imagined in my life that the people investing in that company had
no idea why the stock was climbing,
had no idea what the company does,
had no idea about the patent issues...
had no idea that it has not been challenged yet...
had no idea that the patent can be invalidated and has simply not made it to court yet,
had no idea that a patent can be invalidated.
had no idea that a countersuit is happening and the patent is being challenged

etc etc etc.
its really bizarre to me.

i always read other message boards and expect something more ... or expect something different and somehow its always the same. same morons, same characters and personas, same stupidity.

[JR]

Originally posted by Rolo@Oct 16 2003, 01:16 AM
I have only found a few recent Acacia news stories not made by Acacia own PR people. However after reading them, then I think they are very one sided. Would be great with a more aggressive spin, which would really show what kind of a company Acacia really is. Acacia gets away with alot of things, which makes them sound like they have actual won several court cases and have already proven their patents in court.

your exactly right!

their value is based on press releases.. not a business model. they control the press and thats why they are perceived to be winning.

i have openly stated before that the first step in my opinion should be to control information and the flow of information and attack through the media.

as far as Joe Public knows... the adult industry is giving in and the prospects look great for Acacia. thats why their stock keeps going up with these press releases

The public should be hearing the other side... its a stupid patent, it has not been challenged yet, it is being challenged, all companies are not just giving in and companies who have nothing but cash to spend, have Acacia in their sites.

[FightThePatent]

Originally posted by JR@Oct 16 2003, 02:18 AM
i have openly stated before that the first step in my opinion should be to control information and the flow of information and attack through the media.


I completely agree with you.. especially since any coverage that does make it to the media always has the "smut-peddling" title of attention grabbing articles like "patent on porn"

http://www.forbes.com/2003/04/02/cz_sl_0402porn.html

Use this Google search: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-...tent+on+porn%22 (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=%22patent+on+porn%22)


to see where websites have quoted the Forbes articles...excellent places to try to promote some eye-opening information, such as what I post on my website at http://www.FightThePatent.com

For those that are posting in the financial groups, please point people to my website... some people are posting to GFY...and that's not a good thing for GFY and for anyone.


Fight the Patent!

[FightThePatent]

I found this quote in a patent email-list that i subscribe to:

-------------------
If society allows patents in areas where cumulative innovation is the dominant mode of innovation, then new innovators end up carying the weight of the giants instead. This is because they need to license prior innovations before marketing their own innovation, and that expense grows exponentially with innovation generation for complex products.

(this is so simple you could put it on a T-shirt ;*)

See "Standing on the Shoulders of Giants: Cumulative Research and the
Patent Law", J. Economic Perspectives, Vol 5, winter 1991, p. 27-41
http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~scotch/giants.pdf


---------------------------


This is my reply, reposted here for your reading:




This is so true of Acacia Research's 2nd round of wielding a patent claim... first round with V-Chip, they got knocked down, but that was before they got companies to spend MILLIONS of dollars on "licensing their patent".

Round 2 is where they are making the broad claim to owning the process to downloading of audio or video from a website.

Acacia's attorneys cite that 150+ other patents reference their patent, as if that was some form of validation for the patent... more like the other patent holders citing all possible prior art as required by USPTO.

But Acacia's patent claims are like claiming to have a patent on a ball. Others may have a patent on a red ball. In this example, Acacia won't sue the patent of a red ball, but will sue not only the manufacturer of the red ball for patent infringement, but also the toy store that carries the red ball, for contributory infringement.

Patent Law allows them to do this... this is clearly patent abuse.

In real terms, Acacia is suing websites that have audio or video on their website.. they have yet to target companies like Microsoft, Real, or Apple for infringement.. these targets would fight back and tie them up on court. Based upon their failed V-chip patent, but successful licensing campaign, it seems to be the business model to throw a patent and some infringement letters at comanies who use the "alleged infringed patent" to "convince" them to license their patents.. using things like an "amnesty" cut-off date, where retroactive infringement fees could be accessed.

Most websites don't have the money to pay $10k-$35k to do the initial legal dance, so they have no choice but to license the patent. The kicker here, is that in the event the patent is invalidated by companies who do challenge the patent, they DON"T GET THEIR MONEY back from the license.

This kind of stuff really gets to me, that's why I started FightThePatent.com and my hopes to extend that work to Fight the Patent Foundation.

This is the new, new,new, new economy with the new kind of business plan. Get patents, get people to license the patents and bet that most won't be able to fight it, and will just settle. For those that do fight it, it gets stuck in court for years, but in the mean time, they collect licensing fees and continue to "convince" companies to license the patent.

This is wrong!

[analgalleries]

What Can I do to protect myself and my business from this Legalized Mafia? :o

[Rolo]

analgalleries, there are several options:

1. Pay Acacia and all of the other patent mobsters, which will follow them..
2. Move yourself and business to countries where they can not touch you because they do not have any patents in those countries!
3. Do not offer video at your sites and do not link to any sites with video content!

or

4. Take a stand - join http://www.impai.org/ and hope that enough people will do this, so the IMPA can have their day in court with Acacia :okthumb:

[FightThePatent]

A FLI file was found by fiveeyes that is the first one that I have seen that used digital images, rather than cartoony animation.

This file also has validation of the file date, so it's a great find!

The Prior Art page has been updated with this file/find:
http://www.fighthepatent.com/v2/Squirt.html


Fight the Patent!

[FightThePatent]

Originally posted by Rolo@Oct 16 2003, 02:14 PM

4. Take a stand - join http://www.impai.org/ and hope that enough people will do this, so the IMPA can have their day in court with Acacia :okthumb:
IMPA is not the ones that are going to court against Acacia's patent claims.

IMPA is an association that also has its founding members as the defendants in litigation. Money donated to the IMPA doesn't go towards paying the defendant's attorneys, it goes to furthering IMPA's efforts in the area of prior art patent searches, challenging the "virtual sex" trademark, etc.

Fight the Patent Foundation and IMPA have an overlap in the area of patents, whereas FTPF is only focused on patents, IMPA is looking after all different kinds of issues for webmasters. But where we overlap, is where we are working together with great synergy.

I would recommend reading up at http://www.FightThePatent.com to learn more about Acacia and the OTHER patent holders who claim ownership over audio/video.

I also recomment joining IMPA to be a MEMBER (http://www.impai.org/join.html) since membership has some privileges to it, as well as making a $100 pledge to Fight The Patent Foundation if you support it's charter, described at http://www.FightThePatent.com/go


Fight the Patent!

[FightThePatent]

this is what the 2nd letter from acacia looks like..sux big time



http://www.cd-media.net/acacia/acacia01.jpg

http://www.cd-media.net/acacia/acacia02.jpg

http://www.cd-media.net/acacia/acacia03.jpg



Fight the Patent!

[Rolo]

FightThePatent, have you or anyone you know off had their lawyers contact Acacia with a "fuck off or meet me in court" letter?

What was Acacia reaction to such a letter, and how long before they would meet you in court?



Last edited by Rolo at Oct 18 2003, 12:32 AM

[FightThePatent]

Originally posted by Rolo@Oct 18 2003, 12:30 AM
FightThePatent, have you or anyone you know off had their lawyers contact Acacia with a "fuck off or meet me in court" letter?

What was Acacia reaction to such a letter, and how long before they would meet you in court?

Some webmasters did send them a f*ck off letter after they had their attorneys review the "information packet" and they have reported no additional contact from Acacia.

Others received the 2nd notice as I posted above...

In either case, Acacia has the legal right to come down on people starting Dec 1st, after their amnesty date has passed.

I am expecting Acacia to file a bunch of lawsuits in the hopes that webmasters won't be able to afford to fight them, and end up settling.

It really does suck that our justice system can be used to extort money from businesses. Most don't have a way to fight back.

I have a way of fighting back, to help defendants directly with financial and legal assistance, much like the ACLU, but, the pledge drive at around $28,000 pledged with a goal of $250,000.

If Fight the Patent Foundation is not able to become a functioning entity, then webmasters will have no where to turn.

I have not read anywhere that IMPA has in its charter to do the same kinds of things that I am proposing...so other than that, you could turn to your business attorney who will just recommend you to some expensive patent attorneys.


Fight the Patent Foundation Pledge Drive: http://www.FightThePatent.com/go



Fight the Patent!

[XXXPhoto]

I'm not a lawyer (duh) but from what I read in the definition of 'prior art'
could also pertain to works of fiction... ie books, movies, ect...

Could call it the 'Star Wars' defense... Leah recording her message
to Obi Wan on disk and storing it in R2D2 for later playback by
Luke when he's cleaning up droid... Aren't examples of this nature
considered viable prior art? Asmov, Heinlein... I'm sure there are
tons of examples in various literature from 70s or before...

What about old Star Trek's? When a distress message is encoded
and sent to Enterprise or top secret orders come down from Fleet
Command...

Or is all that not valid?

[spazlabz]

Originally posted by XXXPhoto@Oct 19 2003, 08:05 AM


What about old Star Trek's? When a distress message is encoded
and sent to Enterprise or top secret orders come down from Fleet
Command...

Or is all that not valid?
Probably not applicable, but just to be safe, I am patenting the use of sub space for intergalatic messages.
HA! 2% of star fleet and I will finally be living the high life whooohoooo :gbounce:

spaz

[FightThePatent]

Originally posted by XXXPhoto@Oct 19 2003, 08:05 AM
I'm not a lawyer (duh) but from what I read in the definition of 'prior art'
could also pertain to works of fiction... ie books, movies, ect...


I believe that prior art references in regard to publications have to deal with serious works ie. non-fiction.

Some patents are sci-fi, in that they can;t be built yet, but the USPTO still approves them......


Fight The Patent!