Pre-Markman Hearing news (Acacia)
 

Just completed an article titled: Markman Hearing Primer.

I got a copy of some court docs that should be interesting reading along with a very interesting point of view by Spike at the conclusion of the article (be sure to read the whole thing and not just skip to the bottom).

read there: http://www.fightthepatent.com/v2/PreMarkman.html

discuss here:


Fight the Inquiring Minds Want to know!

why is top bucks not listed in the list of ppl who settled?

get on the ball homie

but what does it all mean Dr Jones?

http://www.ozcraft.com/scifidu/indiana/short_round.jpg

thanks.. forgot that one... updated it on the acacia sponsors list now.

it's not the whole list since some that settled are not sponsors..


Fight the ooops!

For those that hate reading.... ok, skip to the bottom of the article to the words in red.

you should read the whole article tho to put it all into context


Fight the Lazy Eye!

sorry guy I am working & skimming the board.

i dont have time to go download and self educate myself on legal terms that i dont know.

i am not a lawyer, id rather skim and work than download zips of pdfs on legal mumbo jumbo

but thanks for the link, ill read it when I have time, I scanned the first half.

Brandon,

Once again your tireless efforts to keep us up-to-the-second on the Acacia issue brings us news of GREAT weight. Thank you for your great work on this one!!

Fight the good fights...

Oh what a bitchy bitchy mistress Karma can be.

Yes, it can be seen to be a twisted dark comedy about strange justice, if the outcome goes as predicted that those that decided to settle are stuck paying for the license.

Invalidating a patent does require more money and effort, and it does make for a good "business decision" for the defendants to just fight for non-infringement and go home.


Fight the Irony!

The thing to realise is the strategy being applied that will take effect in the long term.

It can be said that those that have signed have a distinct advantage at this point in the market place.

Affiliates are being encouraged to sell Sponsors under a guise of "Protecting our affiliates". This very act is damaging to companies that have chosen to fight.

Non "liscensee" sponsor programs stand to loose affiliates as the affiliates fear being targeted for liscensing if they promote a sponsor that disagree's with the patent claim.

Soon those that have signed are pretty much going to be required to trade traffic with others that have signed only and will be prohibited to send traffic to companies that have not signed.
This may come about when liscencing is re-negotiated.

Basically Acacia is interrupting the very fabric of business in our industry.

The gray area are the affiliates as they are indirectly being encouraged to make a choice and ultimatly the burdon comes right down to the people that drum up traffic for the large programs.

You have a choice to build up those that have betrayed us as comrades in the field or fight to protect foundations of not only this industry on the net but the continuation of an evolving technology that was created by hundreds of countless minds.

You are betraying those that have contributed to the technology and never thought of patenting. You are betraying companies that have evolved the technology to what it is today. Most importantly you are betraying your very business partners one by one...

Look in the mirror...
Think about this...

Yeah that's sweet, hopefully at least some of those dopes actually agreed to a % fee. I'd assume most of them just paid some small sum and got in on the stock speculation.

:thumbsup

good luck getting sven from slovenia to send his traffic to only acacia licensees. wont happen, Ill send my motherfucking traffic were I want:321GFY

Is the summary of your point:

Acacia = bad

People fighting Acacia = good ?


Just trying to help out for those that don't like to read long posts/articles

:Graucho


Fight the Short Attention Span!

This whole thing is bull shit.

Way back in the day I used Java Applet's to implement a JPEG push to emulate video. Then moved on to implementing AVI files.

Hell when you look at a simple animated GIF that can be construed as streaming video as well. AND there is a Patent on the GIF format though it is not enforced.

Acacia is not gonna get a confirmation on the patent I know it won't, there is no way it will happen given the back ground of streaming video technology.
However in the mean while companies that have signed are getting an advantage over those that have not and the more companies that roll over the easier it will be for Acacia to move onto Real Networks and Microsoft.

Bottom line is 2%-4% of a business...
Add 2% - 4% of overhead. Think about the future if you intend to continue work on the Internet and have ambitions to open your own programs.
Acacia is an element that is interrupting the very decision to go into business at this time and while that is happening those that have signed are getting stronger.

Yeah. You are right...
We're fucked.

Java and push-jpeg was around well after the patent filing date, so it wouldn't be considered prior art.

You are on the right track about animated GIF files.. If someone used digitized photos and put them in a loop, it could be prior art if it was downloaded from a BBS prior to 1990 (still looking for that example actually)

Acacia's latest licensing structure is 4% of gross, not 2% (i just read the new updated agreement), along with an adminstration fee that increases each month.

http://www.acaciatechnologies.com/te...t_adultent.htm



Fight the Percentage of Gross!

"The companies that already licensed the patent would have to continue to pay licensing fees. These companies would have a difficult time to break their contract, because they voluntarily agreed to the definitions that Acacia used in the license."

So in other words those that have signed may want the patent to follow through or those that have not signed will have a distinct financial advantage of not loosing 2% of there business in the long run?

Not sure about what the ramifications are for those that did sign.

Working through that angle now.... the idea had come to me as a possible outcome, and i am sharing it with others in light of the upcoming Markman hearing.

I am sure I will get more input from various people, and i will update the story and the message boards, as i get additional information.



Fight the Lag!

I really don't see how they could try to enforce any 'continue to pay' clause in the contract..

If the patent/s are invalidated, then there is no license to pay for, so what are they paying for?

Kinda like, "Well we lost, but you have to keep paying for the Hell of it."

Further.. It seems to me, in that the contract is patent based, if it is ruled that there are no valid patents, then any contract/s pertinent to such patents would be null and void..

yes, it does make for an interesting discussion with the licensee and acacia.

While the contract that they signed is an annual one, it is one where they agreed to the definitions of use of the patent...and if they continue to do business and not pay the renewal, then the quesiton is whether that would be a breach of contract.


If the defendants are able to get a non-infringement verdict rather than an invalidation verdict, the patent is still viable...

another question, is if the court rules that internet-based use of digital audio/video is not applicable, then would that automatically allow the licencees to not have to pay the renewal (note, they pay their licences in advance).



See section 6.1 of
http://www.acaciatechnologies.com/pr...eAgreement.pdf


Specific page relating to Adult Industry:
http://www.acaciatechnologies.com/te...t_adultent.htm




Fight the Legalese!

This is what I dont understand, someone please explain to me.

Lets go on the theory their patent is valid, how come no one is going into court saying we dont use their technology Microsoft, real media and Apple do. It would be like your the guy with patent for digital camera technology and instead of going after Sony or Nikkon you go after Photographers it would be thrown out. The guy with the patent for the delayed wiper went after car companies not the people who drive the cars. I cant believe smarter men havent gone with this arguement.

FightThisPatent,

Whats your thoughts... ok all Acacia's patents are BS we know this... The way I see it they should not be able to go after people using Java because its not really streaming... its pushing pics one by one (kinda like a flip book) recorded video is where I see a lot of these sponsors getting hit hard by Acacia..

One thing I would like to know is the software we have made... CommChat is using Flash Comm. server and to the best of my knowledge from a good source from Macromedia people buying software from Macromedia cant in no way be effected by there bullshit calms because Acacia would have to go after Macromedia before they would go after the person using the technology and I don't think Acacia has the balls to do that..

I just think it?s weird that I haven?t got a letter from them...

Assuming the DMT patent is valid.... they don't have any technology or product, it's merely an idea of using different pieces of technology in order to produce a desired outcome.

M$, Apple, Real make pieces of the process..... it's the webmaster that combines ALL of the pieces.. content being the last piece.

Don't forget that an Apache web server is also a piece of software that is part of the puzzle for delivering digital content.


All three of these companies also combine content with technology, so they should be targeted as well.


So your analogy won't apply, because there is nothing tangible here.. it's just an idea... and anyone who combines technology with content is essentially following in the steps of the "invention".


Process patents and Business Method Patents are wierd variants of a patent that are hard to fathom sometimes when we think a patent as a tangible object.

But there are many, many patents based on ideas that are not products, and this is the way the patent system works.

What Acacia has done is to illuminate the fact, what mainstream has known for decades, that you can get ideas patented, don't have to make a product, and try to get people to pay for licenses.



Fight the Apples and Oranges!

I don't see that as the case.. i see that Macromedia makes a server piece, much like an Apache web server, or a streaming server, that is a piece in the puzzle for delivery of audio/video.

In going by Acacia's DMT patent claims:

-Content - you have some audio or video to include

-Digitized - you convert it into digital form

-Compress - you include the A/V file in flash

-Storage - it's stored on a server and served up with either HTTP or the flash server

-Transmission - the remote user access a remote server to download the content

-Playback - the user listens/views the content



Macromedia can't be sued for infringement for making a piece of the process.. the whole point of the patent is it's broadness and absurd interpretation.

Now if Macromedia included content on their site, ie a demo, a sample, etc.. that had A/V.. then they would be infringing.. because the last piece of the process is the addition of content.. which they would have now had on their website.



Fight the Broadness!

I have always had that opinion and I think Acacia is going after the porn biz first so the judge and jury are blind to common sense . :)

You bring up a very good point... Yes they provide the piece for you to go and make your software, but they do provide components witch people can use, demo, and change. In fact there are some people I have seen out there that don?t develop anything from the ground up like we did. They just use what Macromedia provides.

Cheers
:glugglug :glugglug :glugglug :glugglug

An interesting point on Top Bucks signing...


Why would Acacia want to make settlement deals with the defendants if they think they have a strong case, especially so close to the Markman Hearing?

Maybe to try and thin the herd so those left won't have enough strength (money) to keep fighting?

Or maybe because they see the outcome of the Markman hearing being unfavorable and trying to get as much licensing as they can?

Where have i heard that before.. oh yes.. V-chip patent that sony helped to invalidate.


Fight the Points!

You will all please forgive me if, once this patent is invalidated, I gloat my ass off like a motherfucker on ritalin to any and all who deserve a good gloating.

Thank you in advance.

I will be gloating when we crush Acacia hard enough to show others that this is not a place to extort, at the moment we have not come anywhere near that. All we have shown ourselves to be is disorganised and easily scared. Acacia even if they lose will walk away with a nice profit.

A few companies would have paid out a lot of money to save the arses of many, will they be so willing next time?

And some pricks would have made the whole thing a bigger mess by their actions.

:thumbsup

A few idiots have tried to undo what Brandon has done, for what reason we may find out iin the future. In my opinion Brandon has done one hell of a job on this issue.

WELL DONE.

You are all arguing about the validity of the patent and I'm afraid you miss the point. Whether the patent is valid or not is totally irrelevant. Let me explain.

Acacia hold a patent that can be linked rightly or wrongly to companies.

They can tell those companies "PAY THE LICENSE OR WE WILL TAKE YOU TO COURT"

A patent court case can cost $300K so most will license rather than face that expense. With the added benefit of forcing some of your competitors out of business.

Those that choose to fight not only have to pay, they have to spend time organizing the fight.

No license fee is refundable, it might even be those who signed will continue paying.

Acacia have made a nice profit on a patent that in my opinion is not valid.

And the way it's going that is the story, whether the DMT patent holds water is totally irrelevant. The point is WILL ACACIA MAKE A PROFIT FROM THIS?

So what can we do?

Come together, show any company that signed your back. Stop buying content from them, sending them traffic, using their banner as your signature, stop taking their advertising, stop selling them content.

Contribute to a fund to pay any and all court costs of the defendants, even if it's only $10 a month. Send traffic to those who do fight, buy their content. Show you support.

And this is the problem, how many have done what I suggested and how many have just thought "Let someone else do it for me, I can't afford it"

Words on a chat board are helpful, but do nothing to stop it.

Acacia WON the V-Chip case.

Any business deal which I come out better off, is not a loss.

Tell me if they have lost money so far, tell me if we have sent a warning to the other companies with patent waiting to see the outcome of this case.

It's not about whether the patent is valid, it's about whether you can make a living out of it.

charly, and if people are doing well with sponsors that have signed with acacia

they have the most part of their profit from such sponsors as epic cash and topbucks

so they need to lose their profit taking their traffic to other sponsors (who knows may be it will not convert with new sponsors)

as we can see most webmasters are worried more whether sponsors shave or not
than in things with acacia

just my :2 cents:

situation is coming hotter now because acacia now covers europe countries too:warning

I'll be right next to you. Probably even baring lude body parts and displaying certain fingers in the process.

This is what I'm not sure about.
The defense group has decided to go for a non-infringement judgement rather than a total invalidation judgement.

Okay. So let's say they get the non-infringement judgement.

Does that cover all internet transmissions (ie: us webmasters who have been out here cheering them on and/or sending money when we can), or does it ONLY cover the defense group and their sites?

If it only covers the defense group and their sites... well, that would certainly be a slap in the face to all of their hardcore supporters. So I hope that's not the case.

Assuming the judge finds the defendants not infringing to the patent claims because the patent doesn't apply to the internet, then there is still the issue of the other patents that acacia has filed that further defines their patent claims to now include internet.

The question will be that if the defendants are successful in getting non-infringment, would that mean Acacia would come back later with one of their later patents that do address the "internet" part.

It might be a "business decision" to not try and go for invalidation of the patent, due to higher costs and prolonged court time.

Another thing to look at is your point about "hardcore supporters".

I see alot of people cheering the defendants on, but i don't see the matching level of $$ contributions with that cheering.

I don't have access to the numbers given to the IMPA or to the defense group, but I can guess that it's very low.

I know some of donated to the IMPA, but when you add up the dollars, they don't add up to supporting too many hours of attorney time.

As you have seen charly's and Paul Markham's postings about trying to gain financial support for the Defense Group, the offerings from the larger webmasters and from the adult community in general has been lacking.

The big players have basically settled and you would think with their sweetheart deals they could fight behind the scenes with private contributions.. but that's not the case.

On the flipside, IMPA and the Defense Group have not exactly come out to say to the community to contribute money... only people saying to contribute are people like me and paul...and those that had made their own contributions to the fight.


Given my viewpoint, I don't see the adult community seriously backing the defendants...and while having cheers and 'go get'em' posts are great for moral, it doesn't pay the bills.


Fight the Not putting your money where your mouth is!