Latest pre-Markman Court docs (Acacia)

The defendant's first day in court is Feb 6th with the Markman Hearing.. The Markman Hearing will establish the claims by Acacia and the definitions of words used in the patent.

The latest article as well as the Markman Hearing Primer article include links to the latest court docs. Lots of legal talk, but interesting to see lawyers in actions and also goes to show where you money goes when involved in litigation...lots of writing of materials that are thoroughly researched and documented, requiring lots of billable hours.



Fight the Drain!

I tried to open the file, did not work. Might be better to copy it into your post.

Good Luck Charly!

Time to buy some Charly Content to support his fight!

I just want to thank all of the companies that are fighting the good fight...

You guys are kicking ass. Thanks for stepping up for the rest of us.

IWI (MaxCash)
AEBN
Ademia
Audio Comm.
Game Link
Innovative Ideas (ARS)
Lightspeed
New Destiny
Video Secrets

I'm very glad to hear that National A-1 told ACACIA to shover their lawsuit up their ass.

Although I understand why TopBucks made a decision to pull out and register, I'm disappointed that they lost their spine.

that show a lot of difference between paul and matrix content. you should all buy content from him now.

Those that signed confirm that they recognize the Patent claim. When Acacia looses signers will still have to pay liscense fee's I believe.

Perhaps Acacia knows they won't win but gaining signers will inevitably make them money even when they loose the claim.

Hows that for long term smart business decisions...

The link on my website goes to homegrownvideo to grab the latest court docs. Having problems opening my page, or the link to the HGV server to get the .zip file?

Anyone else having problems? i just tested it and it works for me


Fight the Technical Difficulties!

yup.. it has been expressed to me by different folks, that WHEN the defendants get a non-infringing verdict, that all other websites will be free from the patent...


BUT, those that signed the agreement, like you said, agreed to the terms of the contract, and it is a contract, and they would have to breech the contract and then get sued by Acacia.. go to court and cite the defendants verdict....


What remains to be seen is about all the subsequent patents that Acacia has filed and whether the non-infringing verdict would help to knock out the legs of the later patents.....



Fight the Chains!

You left out SilverCash.. they are in the fight as well.

They are not part of the defense group, and doing their own thing, but they are in the fight as well.


Fight the AcaciaCash!

Did you read this case, sent out as part of Aharonian's newsletter?

Symbol Technologies, Inc. v. Lemelson Med., Educ. & Res. Found. Ltd. (Jan. 23) (D. Nev.: Judge Pro)

There are some interesting points as far as not asserting your rights for a long time and then coming back and claiming you want money. The time frame was much longer, but it still doesn't seem right that Acacia could do what they are doing after sitting on their "patent" for a number of years without trying to enforce it.

I still can't believe this is even a serious issue. It's not like Acacia invented something and then other people used their invention. They patented something obvious and when everyone else also used that obvious idea, they waited until it became popular, then tried to sue people.

When did Acacia ever contribute anything or help create anything?

I understand your points.. but the way that Patent Law works now, is that you don't have to create anything... you can get patents on ideas that have never been created.

You can get process patents that can be as silly as making peanut butter and jelly sandwich.

You can get business method patents like how to sell peanut butter sandwiches from a stand on the side of the road.

You can sit on your patent for a long time as Unisys did with the GIF patent....

Lemelson is a whole subject matter on its own.. but may provide future precedent (good or bad) for patents with all the various patents his foundation is licensing.

Alot of people have been saying that Acacia didn't even invent the patent, or that the patent doesn't have any software or hardware.. while i agree with those setentiments, they are not relevant to this patent abuse case.

What is relevant is Acacia's interpretation of their patent to be broader than what the patent states, and to interpret wildly in its applications to internet-based audio/video.

The defendants recent court docs focus on the language of the patents and try to show the judge how the claims made today are not relevant to the defendants.

All the while, the clock ticks on the attorney bills... further evidence of how much money companies lose (and attorneys gain) every year for frivilous lawsuits.

Hopefully the new Director for USPTO (young guy) will make some changes.


Fight the Long Posts!

good info. thanks Brandon

posted on Yahoo ACTG board:

porntales wrote:

"It would appear that they are going for the "patent is valid, but only for a specific closed system". That has interesting implications for those companies that have already licensed, and still allows Acacia a potential revenue stream from PPV closed cable systems.

The most interesting is at the end of the third document, where the original claims of the patent inventors are touched on in a document filed with the government. It clearly shows that there are certain things integral in the patent (I don't want to say DMT, as that is a fabricated term attempting to support the broad stretch) that are just not required for internet usage, such as buffer storage for later playback, library of original documents, fixed ID codes for documents, etc. It would appear that the extensions of the patent are based on this original setup, and cannot be removed without creating a vague, meaningless, and non-unique system.

It would be interesting to attempt to build the system as described in the original patent. I see a library of original documents, a bunch of machines to encode them, storage devices to handle the uniquely identified documents, a transmission system that then sends them to a remote storage device, where the document is later played back in real time (after complete reception). I see a system that requires human intervention, to load the original documents into the encoding systems (there is no mention that the system would be able to keep digitized copies of these original documents... it appears they would have to be rescanned / encoded / read / digitized / photographed / other before each use, as the UID is assigned at this point in the system."




I responded with:

"The patent is supposed to be like a blue print that details the parts of the invention.

I would envision that a computerized arm is used to access the library to then begin the digitization, compression, storage, etc...

In my article "Beam me up Scotty! Acacia's Patent Claims invention of teleportation
(http://www.fightthepatent.com/v2/Teleportation.html)

I cited that musical instruments could be in the library and teleported to the end user.

Acacia Pumpers responded to my article and saying that what they meant was the digitization of the musical instrument's sounds *yeah right*

In the Defendants recent court filing, they made reference to the "instrument" wording, and how Acacia interpreted that to mean "live music" rather than a physical instrument *yeah right*.

Alot of interpreting going on...

Another interesting note is the defendants claims of estoppel in what Acacia originally stated as the infringement claims by the defaulted defendants from earlier on, and what they are claiming now...


I agree with your analysis that given the court docs, the defense is based on the wording of the patent, and how the patent describes a closed system that no one uses today, especially any of the defendants.

While there is certainly alot of prior art to refer back on, it seems the challenging of the actual language of the patent is the method of undoing the claims.

Feb 6th is not that far away.. while i cannot attend the opening day, I will certainly be getting frontline reports to share."


Fight the Copy and Paste!

Acacia actually funded the development that's described in the patent. They didn't just swoop down from out of nowhere and buy this patent. Acacia has been funding it from the start, and eventually bought it.

This is one of the thing's that worries me. If the judge decides that this patent does in fact apply to the internet, then it's got to be proven that they were developing something that already existed. Why would Acacia fund development of an already existing technology, and more importantly why would someone develop existing technology?

I don't think they had the internet in mind for this though. And I'd also like to know the difference between the Acacia and USA Video patents. They both seem to claim the same thing.

... buy the shares instead, swimm with the big fish.

USA Video's patent is only on video, and their claim is downloading video "faster than real time".

So in a way, it is a subset of Acacia's DMT patent, since it also claims over audio.

In the abstract sense, yes.. there is a paradox here that both cover video and a company that has a license from Acacia could be easy pickings with USA Video.



Fight the Pair Of Docks!

While the big fish eat the little fish, the big fish get speared for their blubber.

Do you want to be a cosmetic ingrediant? Be sure to time your sell in advance.. when the bottom drops out, no one will be there to buy your shares on your sell order.


Fight the Moby!

After various chats with mainstream companies, it has sparked my latest article:

Goodwill Hunting
http://www.fightthepatent.com/v2/Backyard.html


For those link-challenged or have short attention spans, here is the summary/ending to the piece:

"For any company that steps forward to help in this battle (whether it be Microsoft, Real, Apple, or any other company looking to make a public stand against patent abuse), they will surely receive "goodwill points" for helping to fight against what is so patently wrong.

The one line summary:

If you have audio or video on your website, then the patent abuse problem is in your backyard."



Fight the ADD!