Lol working hard to cover yer ass eh D$? Then again I dont' blame you..but honestly, this is a GOOD thread... people will realize how huge this could be if we don't win.

Damn D... why you gotta go and back out of it now?

That's wasn't part of the plan!

Oh.. wait... sorry.. is this a public forum? (sigh) :helpme



Disclaimer: There was no plan. But if you send out letters to a bunch of companies in the same industry making demands/requests for payments based on their GROSS revenues, regardless of what % of the revenues may or may not have came from the technology that you currently hold for a patent for - expect dissent.

Isn't it likely to be an illegal practice to only target a specific segment with their lawsuits, when thousands of companies are using the same technology?

it's only conspiracy if the IMPA advises in their letter/communication that said company should not agree to acacia's terms.

advising any company of the current situation is not conspiracy. advising them that they could be next is not conspiracy.

and for the record, acacia can suck my left nut.

Seems to me that it wouldn't be entirely aboveboard.. there must be some laws applicable.

If 1,000 adult webmasters were contacted and only 50 non adult companies were contacted, then what?

Then they also targeted non-adult but focused more on adult?

These numbers are strictly for example sake, I have no idea what the numbers are. I'm asking if that practice would mean anything.

Funny thing is.. they aren't trying to squash porn.. they're wanting a piece of the porn action....

May be so but in the mean time they are trying to rip the adult world a new asshole ??

Cindy xx

did you all actually read the entire patent?
I did, it does not apply to all these companies and is not as broad based as everyone wants to believe. You have to read more then the first few sentences. Go to the bottom and read what they are claiming.

The sky isnt falling.

Though I agree the sky isn't falling, it certainly a nasty looking cloud over us.

Cliff notes of the claims (work in progress and very basic) for patent # 6,144,702:[list=1][*]a way of storing compressed, digitized media [*]in a library that has a listing of the offerings[*]which is used to choose a selection[*]for download and viewing by users of the system.[/list=1]

This is pretty much how video is used/presented on the web.

you still missed the important stuff.
keep reading. read the claims at the bottom.

I received my packet from them, The way we use it, and their patent describes their "invention" and how their "invention" works, does not apply to me.

I think it may apply to cable TV pay per view and other type of pay per view if the pay per view is done the way the patent describes it has to be done. but dont cover someone sticking some clicps on a website.

there are alot more then 4 steps to their claim.

Thank-you for you feedback! I see I was missing a major claim- ammended cliff notes now reads:[list=1][*]a way of storing compressed, digitized media [*]in a library that has a listing of the offerings[*]each of which have an encoded Unique Identifier[*]which is used to choose a selection[*]for download and viewing by users of the system.[/list=1]

fiveeyes, did you get the email I sent to you a bit ago?

Answer should be in your box, and the last posting of mine referenced it, in fact (she brought the Unique ID to my attention and it was then that I realized it's a crucial claim).

You know for the longest time I thought your site was called 3i's, not 5i's.
It took a bit to realize who you were.
you had some awsome traffic way way back when. Wish I had some more of that now. Its good to see someone from back then still up and going strong tho.

Four eyes with a camera, that's me. Great to see one of the first cam girls on the net still lookin' good! It was a blast from the past to realize who you are...

In case you all missed it, I will post it again (great article if you take the time to read it):

http://www.hightech-iplaw.com/leswibar2003.pdf


Basically says that is what companies that own patents do. They go after the little guy who can't afford the $1million legal fees, get a few to pay for the right to use the produce they own the right too. When they get enough small companies, they go after larger companies and charge a bit more money, file lawsuits against those that don't buy their license. In the mean time, they are constantly going after the small companies and getting more and more money to poor in. Those companies they take to court who lose to them end up paying the court costs and up to 3x the amount of money they were claiming in damages. When they have enough medium companies, they go after the big dogs and charge them even more money being as they have the money to pay. In the mean time the are constantly sending packets out to small and medium sized companies and constantly going after new large companies too. Every win they get, is more precidence to win more cases.

The sad fact is that something like 76% of all patent claims never see court. Think about it, if you were Microsoft, would you rather pay them a one time fee of $500,000 for the right to use their claim or would you want to spend $1.5 million fighting it in court (assuming you win). If they lose in court, they end up paying the original $1.5 million, plus ALL of the court costs for both sides and then up to three times that amount in damages. That is why 76% of all patent claims are just paid.

Read the article if you want to learn more - very good article!


Flow

Fuck, I hate it - stop whining and wasting my time.

Can somebody write a letter explaining the whole situation then post it here to allow me to send it to companies of my choice?

Thank you

They should go after the White House...

see if they win there..