The Mac Observer

Skip navigational links

You're viewing an article in TMO's historic archive vault. Here, we've preserved the comments and how the site looked along with the article. Use this link to view the article on our current site:
Apple Faces iPod, iTunes Patent Suits

Apple Faces iPod, iTunes Patent Suits

by , 7:35 AM EST, March 7th, 2005

Two separate companies have filed patent lawsuits against Apple Computer alledging the company has violated their patents related to the iPod digital music device and the iTunes Music Store (iTMS).

Chicago-based Advanced Audio Devices LLC has sued Apple claiming the iPod violates one of its patents for a "music jukebox."

The company's patent, filed with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office in August of 2000 and granted in July of 2003, describes a music "jukebox" for storing a "music library".

"The music jukebox includes a housing, audio input structure on the housing for receiving audio signals, audio output structure on the housing for outputting audio signals, and a data storage structure in the housing for storing audio signals," the filing said.

The Chicago Tribune reported Friday the company tried to settle with Apple in December over its claim. Apple "ignored its attempt to seek a business resolution," the complaint states.

Advanced Audio Devices LLC was founded in 1997 by Peter J. Keller.

In addition, Hong Kong-based Pat-rights has also filed suit against Apple claiming its digital rights management technology violates its patent that was granted in December of 2003.

Pat-rights patent describes a method of "protecting publicly distributed software from unauthorized use" using a sub-program for encryption, a sub-program "for authorizing (the) use of a software product," and a sub-program for authenticating a users computer.

The patent holding company claims Apple has not patented its Fairplay technology and that for that reason it must be using its patent. "This is certainly a patentable technology," Pat-right president Peter Chung said in a prepared statement released in late February. "If iTunes does not patent it, there must be a very good reason for them not to do so- someone else has patented this."

The company is demanding 12% of gross sales from Apple's iTMS and is giving Apple 21 days to accept what Pat-rights is calling "a reasonable license fee." At that point on or around March 21st, Pat-rights intends on filing suit for copyright infringement against Apple.

If it decides to file suit against Apple, the company plans on seeking damages up to three times its original value. The company has yet to determine a resonable value.

Observer Comments

Show: Subjects Only | Full Comments
Close Name:Guest
Subject: haha

"The company is demanding 12% of gross sales from Apple's iTMS and is giving Apple 21 days to accept what Pat-rights is calling "a reasonable license fee."

HA HA HA --- man, I needed a good laugh today. I got your fee right here buddy!

Close Name:dhp Posts: 182 Joined: 22 May 2003
Subject: nitpick

"intends to file," not "intends on filing"

Close Name:jcbeckman Posts: 55 Joined: 06 May 2004
Subject: Talk about nerve...

Certainly no prior art on a device that takes in, stores, and plays back audio. Sheesh.

Close Name:FlipFriddle Posts: 480 Joined: 18 Dec 2001
Subject: generic

Sounds like with that generic of a patent filing they may as well sue everyone that produced or produces a digital music player

Close Name:Guest
Subject: Patent Infringement

"The music jukebox includes a housing, audio input structure on the housing for receiving audio signals, audio output structure on the housing for outputting audio signals, and a data storage structure in the housing for storing audio signals,"

This reads like it defines a tape recorder, more so than a digital music device.

Close Name:Guest
Subject: whatever

Yeah it sure does. Technically the iPod does not receive audio signals. it receives data that can be reproduced into audio signals

Bottom line is the patent process is a mess and this is simply greed trying to take a bite out of someone elses efforts.
I wonder if they'd bother if the whole thing had never taken off

Quote
Guest wrote:
"The music jukebox includes a housing, audio input structure on the housing for receiving audio signals, audio output structure on the housing for outputting audio signals, and a data storage structure in the housing for storing audio signals,"

This reads like it defines a tape recorder, more so than a digital music device.

Close Name:Guest
Subject: Every MP3 player in the universe...

This patent description: "The music jukebox includes a housing, audio input structure on the housing for receiving audio signals, audio output structure on the housing for outputting audio signals, and a data storage structure in the housing for storing audio signals" covers ALL mp3 players in the entire universe. I wonder if M$ is behind this, hhhmmmm..., ala SCO vs. Linux.

What a way to make money in the western world! You can be rich by just filing a patent for an idea, whether it's yours or others, as long as you patented it first. By patenting it, you take the ownership that other people or company entitled with.

My 2 cents.

Close Name:HI Posts: 15 Joined: 11 May 2004
Subject: in, store, out

haven't computers done this for decades?

didn't Edison do this about 100 years ago?

when did the patent process become a mindless rubber stamp?

Close Name:Tiger Posts: 1018 Joined: 17 Jun 2003
Subject: chasing the cash cow

If you can't join 'em, sue 'em!

Close Name:zewazir Posts: 415 Joined: 03 Dec 2002
Subject:

The patent describes an analog jukebox, not a digital one. The concept is to receive, store, and then playback audio signals. Audio signals are analog, not digital. Therefore the entire precept of their device is incorrect.

The iPod receives and stores digital data files, which are then played back as audio using a translation program. This is nothing like what is described by the patent.

Close Name:Guest
Subject: Patent violations

I smell opportunistic, bottom dwelling fee mongering lawyers

Close Name:Guest
Subject: Patent from 12/03, ipods/itunes released when?

I do believe ipods were here 1st.

Close Name:Guest
Subject: Hahaha

Those lawsuits are a joke.

And we aren't talking your average "well it's cheaper to settle for X than have lawsuits" company, we're talking The Wrath of Steve here.

Close Name:Guest
Subject: first mp3 'jukebox'

According to CNet, the first mass-market MP3 player was sold beginning in late spring 1998, well before this unknown company's patent *application* in 2000. http://news.com.com/Bragging+rights+to+the+worlds+first+MP3+player/2010-1041_3-5548180.html
If it went to market in spring '98, then it would have been announced before that point, so most likely this "Advanced Audio Devices LLC" (formed in 1997) didn't even exist when the first MP3 player was being actively developed.

Close Name:Guest
Subject: Jukeboxes and DRM's

Peter Keller should know that the concept of a juukebox has been around since the advent of 78rpm records. I wonder what Wurlitzer might have to say to hime?

As for Pat-rights, they claim their "patent" on a DRM is bein infringed, but they pplan to file a "copyright infringment" suit. Am I the only one missing this?

Close Name:Guest
Subject: lol

lol lol lol lol lol

Close Name:Guest
Subject:

The patent was applied for in 2000, ipod was released sometime around then, but i dont think until late 2000 if not 2001. basically all mp3 players up to that point used removable media, like smartmedia or compact flash. the patent describes data storage INSIDE THE HOUSING, like a hard drive, which the ipod uses.

it would be interesting to see if apple applied for a patent on the ipod or not, and if it was denied and why.

and this kind of thing has been going on for years. its not necessarily who comes up with the idea, its who officially claims the idea first. kind of how companies register domain names (which is free by the way) and then sell them to whoever wants them.

Close Name:Guest
Subject: hard drive players predate ipod

Same CNet article (linked in previous comment) refers to the first hard drive-based player, also in 1998. It was produced by Compaq.

Close Name:Guest
Subject:

quote: "when did the patent process become a mindless rubber stamp?"

Who is running the patent office? This isn't the first general patent I've heard of...

Close Name:fartheststar Posts: 222 Joined: 04 Jan 2004
Subject:

Quote
FlipFriddle wrote:
Sounds like with that generic of a patent filing they may as well sue everyone that produced or produces a digital music player


My thoughts exactly.

Close Name:Guest
Subject: Re: Evil

This is pure evil B.S. A company that does nothing and goes nowhere with their patents just waits for someone to succeed. Then they sue. Why not sue them when they first invent the product? Cause your F.O.S!

Close Name:jadams Posts: 33 Joined: 03 Nov 2003
Subject:

Quote
fartheststar wrote:
Quote
FlipFriddle wrote:
Sounds like with that generic of a patent filing they may as well sue everyone that produced or produces a digital music player


My thoughts exactly.
Data doesn't have to be digital - that patent can cover just about any musical device on the market, not just digital music players, even your old vinyl lps...

Close Name:Mace Posts: 9604 Joined: 07 Aug 2003
Subject:

Has the patent system gone haywire?

Btw, is there a law against suing without good basis?

Close Name:Guest
Subject: Is M$, Real, etc. affected by this

So...am I the only one wondering this?

If Pat-Rights is suing because of DRM, shouldn't everyone who includes DRM in their products be affected as well?

Isn't Janus the same thing...a DRM scheme?

View Name:RealityCheck -   Troll Posts: 392 Joined: 06 May 2004
Subject: Between These Suits And Apple Corps, iTunes Will Close
Close Name:Guest
Subject: ok, drink time

Ok, who bet Reality Check would post after so many others? Come on now, pay up your bets. I personally had him in the first 5 post, but my man was a little slow today and must have been surfing, ah hem, "other sites" while using his 10 hours of free NetZero time.

Man, the party can start now that RC is in the house!!!

Close Name:Guest
Subject: Apple Stock is a Terrible Investment

Better dump your shares, iLemmings. Everyone knows that RC's Apple stock predictions are always right on the money. Or not...

Close Name:Guest
Subject: Yea and try and get to Microsofts music store

On a Mac and you will see who is propriatary. You can't get there from here. iTunes is open to Windows users and Mac users. There isn't another online store that provides for both. So who is the closed system. With iTunes you can do exactly the same things on either platform.

Close Name:Guest
Subject:

""The music jukebox includes a housing, audio input structure on the housing for receiving audio
signals, audio output structure on the housing for outputting audio signals, and a data storage
structure in the housing for storing audio signals," the filing said."

Among other things, that describes a computer. Their patent suit is a sham.

"The patent holding company claims Apple has not patented its Fairplay technology and that for that reason it must be using its patent."

Yeah, that's good thinking. Apple hasn't patented Fairplay, so they must be using MY patent! Their only hope is a settlement, because they'd be laughed out of court.

"Not paying for intellectual property"

Apple has no legal obligation to pay those morons.

"and breaking the agreement with Apple Corps that Apple
Computer would not enter the music business is going to force iTunes to shut down. "

Apple Computers has faced Apple Records before, and it's never forced them to do discontinue anythining. They're still called Apple, they're still in business, and their computers can still synthesize music.

"What's going to be really funny is that iPod users won't
have a decent online music store that works with their closed propriety iPod."

All iPods support MP3 and WAV formats. They can't be either closed or propriety when they support the two standards in digital audio. Think your lies through alittle better.

Close Name:Guest
Subject: I've just figured it out

Reality Check is, in fact, Steve Ballmer. No-one else in the computer business has this ability to look facts so squarely in the face and then state the exact opposite. Even the Jobsian RDF is no match for the Blindness of Ballmer.

Oh, and Reality Check is actually an anagram of "Hey! Check lice!" (sort of nit-picking, if you get my meaning)

Close Name:Guest
Subject: Reality check is incorrect

Apple is decent and won't run a indecent onLine music shop. They will close iTunes down instead.

I am a fool but I want to eat the Apple. If you are Mr. Ballmer, would you help me.

http://www.zdnet.com/5208-10533-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=8686&messageID=175067&start=-1

Close Name:Guest
Subject: Hey, you fool...

It sounds a great idea.

But there is something wrong in it...I think it should be amended as "we eat", not "I eat' or "he eat".

Reality check, do you agree ?



BILL.

Close Name:Guest
Subject:

Have you gotten your terminology mixed up? Patents and copyrights are completely different animals. If Pat-Rights holds a patent and is (or will be) filing suit on it, what is the copyright infringment you mention? Is Pat-Rights also making a copyright claim? Or does the reporter think the two terms mean the same thing?

Comment on this Article


You cannot edit your comments.   You cannot delete your comments.

Comments are currently closed. Please email the author instead.


Recent Headlines - Updated November 22nd

Fri, 7:07 PM
Games - Soccer Sim Championship Manager 2010 Released for Mac
6:47 PM
Games - EA Publishes Original Monopoly for iPhone
6:15 PM
News - Original Apple I on Ebay for $50K, w/Letter from Steve Jobs
6:11 PM
Games - New iPhone Games: Secret of the Lost Cavern Ep 1, New DJ Nights, More
5:47 PM
Games - Star Trek D-A-C Game Headed to the Mac Next Month
4:57 PM
Product News - TidBITS Releases “Take Control of Syncing Data in Snow Leopard”
4:26 PM
John Martellaro's Blog - Particle Debris (week ending 11/20) Stationery Pads Go Poof
2:59 PM
Free on iTunes - Musée du Louvre, Art Lite, SketchBook Mobile X and More.
1:50 PM
Deal Brothers - Acer P215H bmid 21.5” Widescreen LCD Monitor:  $139.99
11:24 AM
TMO Appearances - Jeff Gamet Shares More Holiday Gift Ideas on MacJury
10:43 AM
Product News - Cocktail 4.5 for Leopard Adds QuickLook Cache Clearing
10:06 AM
News - Hack Enables Mac OS X 10.6.2 on Netbooks

The Mac Observer Reader Specials

  • __________
  • Buy Stuff, Support TMO!
  • Podcast: Mac Geek Gab
  • Podcast: Apple Weekly Report
  • TMO on Twitter!