The Act Of Downloading Videos Online Is Patented
StormLiong
Join Date: 2002-12-27 Member: 11569Members
in Off-Topic
<div class="IPBDescription">no matter what format it is</div> <a href='http://www.siliconvalleywatcher.com/mt/archives/2005/05/patent_watch_th_1.php' target='_blank'>http://www.siliconvalleywatcher.com/mt/arc..._watch_th_1.php</a>
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->What if your patent covers your entire industry? And what if you never build your technology but simply sell the patent to a licensing company? That's the case with a company called Acacia (just Google "acacia patent"), which has been enforcing its Digital Media Transmission (DMT) patent since 2002. The patent basically covers any kind of video transmission: download, progressive download, over any type of network, as long as there is file storage involved. Legally, Acacia has a patent on pretty much any type of digital download.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This just made me laughing,
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->What if your patent covers your entire industry? And what if you never build your technology but simply sell the patent to a licensing company? That's the case with a company called Acacia (just Google "acacia patent"), which has been enforcing its Digital Media Transmission (DMT) patent since 2002. The patent basically covers any kind of video transmission: download, progressive download, over any type of network, as long as there is file storage involved. Legally, Acacia has a patent on pretty much any type of digital download.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This just made me laughing,
Comments
Found this digging into Wikipedia... they don't seem to be too big in the spotlight
yet.
Found this digging into Wikipedia... they don't seem to be too big in the spotlight
yet. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Whoa....i think this story is similar to that company that is suing Linux for patent infringing. That company (SnP was it?) was jsut formed JUST to make money from the settlement should they be successful with their case with Linux.
Acacia seems to be the same. They don't make any product at all. They just hold a patent. That doesnt sound right at all.
Oh and from that article, its funny to see how out of touch the patent office is (though not sure if its the exact way they thought)
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> The US Patent Office thought (downloading videos online) was an original idea and granted them the patent.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> The US Patent Office thought (downloading videos online) was an original idea and granted them the patent.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
The first patent was filed in 1991. Not out of touch, out of date. Anyway, with dialup just becoming main-stream, I can see why it was new and revolutionary. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Idiots will be idiots.
edit: why the hell did i say movie instead of money? /boggle
There are many other similar cases of technology being patented by someone who thinks of an idea, but doesn't develop it. If their attorneys are bigger than the developer's attorneys, they get money for free.
At least one drug addiction I think.
Its just the "concept" of transfering media over the internet that the company has patent on.
Again this is how screwed up the Patent Office is.
oh snap
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->WIRED: So, you stumbled across this patent and realized you'd do better cashing in on JPEG than selling videoconferencing gear?
PETERSON: Yes, that is correct. But we like to call it "finding a Rembrandt in the attic." We already had a small revenue stream from MPEG licensing, but it's much, much smaller than the JPEG revenues we have realized over the last three years.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
haha!!1