Quote:
Originally posted by Kwasi
Why would I be in violation beause I'm iusng a Microsoft product or whatever that would be the real patent infringer.
|
You would be infringing upon their patents because M$ didn't have a license for it.
Somewhere buried in M$ EULA for Windows Media (and all other streaming servers) probably mentions about no liability for any patents that might cover all or parts of their technology.
Why would Acacia want to target companies that could tie them up in court for years and burn through their cash?
Why not pick on smaller companies that use technology like from M$ and just sue them for infringement?
If 100,000 websites had audio or video, licensed their patent for the mimumum fee of $1,500/year, they would make $150M.. this is exactly the kind of stuff that patent-ignorant attorneys and shareholders think of.
Another thing to keep in mind, what Acacia INTERPRETS or WANTS their patent to mean, is DIFFERENT than what the USPTO granted.
This very point is what 11 defendants are contesting by going to court and defend against the patent infringement claims.
You don't need to be using a streaming server to be violating their patent claims... any HTTP (web) server, FTP server used to transmit audio or video, counts!
Fight the Patent!