|
"MPEG does not qualify as prior art. While the specs for it pre-date the patent, it takes someone that distributes an MPEG file from a remote server in order to apply to the patent."
Umm...
Thats what MPEG is. You put it on a server people download it. Umm what part of that is not covered in the claims? Or is this just a situation in itself where the attornies do not know what the fuck they are talking about?
FarL might have been better off just walking in with the MPEG Consortiums patent list and skipping over to TODAI's for sushi.
Microsoft would have plenty of reasn t jump in, and its a shame no one took Microsoft up on it's offer. M$ would have jumped in realising that there server software sales are suffering from the patent liscenses.
Ya can bet they would like to increase the number of sales and increase the price of there software without clients terrified of paying liscense fee's to a bunch of Nazi Lawyers. If thats not incentive enough for em I dunno what is.
|