Slashdot Mirror

I have been threatened by a patent troll, Acacia Research Group, several times. They didn't invent CDROMs or HTML, but they acquired a patent for putting HTML on a CDROM. They threatened to sue me for doing the same. I was doing it before the date of their patent, so I figured I had prior art. So I decided on the following course of action: do nothing. I filed their letter, and ignored them. A few months later they sent me a more threatening letter. I ignored that one too.

Several years later, I received another letter from them about another dubious patent they claimed I was violating. I wasn't, and figured they were just fishing, so I ignored that letter too.

Then, years after that I received another threatening letter about the original "HTML on CDROM" patent. This was after the KSR International v Teleflex Supreme Court ruling that invalidated these kinds of "combination" patents. So again I decided to just ignore them. I never heard from them again.

So if you are threatened by a patent troll, my recommendation for an initial response , is to just ignore them. My experience is that works 100% of them time, but YMMV. They probably have no reason to believe you are actually violating their patents, are are just shotgunning letters out to a long list of target companies, in the hopes that there are some dufuses that will just roll over a offer to settle. If everyone ignores them are much as possible, and impedes their attempts to extort, then their business model falls apart.

Listening to some freetards trot out the "convicted monopolist" line is like me calling Redhat a bunch of "convicted patent infringers". I don't, however, because I am not a douchebag.

Using the term "freetard" pretty much denotes that you are in fact a douchebag. I won't hold that against you though. Regarding the remainder of that sentence however; Microsoft (fairly or unfairly in your opinion does not matter) has been convicted of monopolistic practices in several courts.

1). http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f3800/msjudgex.htm
2). http://software.silicon.com/os/0,39024651,39119500,00.htm
2). http://law.jrank.org/pages/12388/Sherman-Antitrust-Act-Microsoft-Settlement-Twenty-First-Century-s-First-Major-Antitrust-Settlement.html
4). Google for yourself

Now.. can you provide links to any article that shows that Redhat has indeed violated patents; as proven in a court of law or similar venue? I found a single instance of Redhat (co-defending with Novell as it happens) being sued for patent infringement. Coincidentally, the company behind this suit appears to be a patent troll headed up by former Microsoft GM of IP licensing. Regardless, there has yet to be a conviction, if there is even one forthcoming.

http://www.ip-innovation.info/
http://www.acaciatechnologies.com/
They may want to patent the slashdot effect next, so an example of the prior art may be necessary.

Sorry but you can't use video compression on the internet. That idea has been patented and this company will sue you: http://www.acaciatechnologies.com/

One of the claims in their oldest patent, 5132992, is:

"1. A transmission system for providing information to be transmitted to remote locations, the transmission system comprising:
library means for storing items containing information; identification encoding means for retrieving the information in the items from the library means and for assigning a unique identification code to the retrieved information;
conversion means, coupled to the identification encoding means, for placing the retrieved information into a predetermined format as formatted data;
ordering means, coupled to the conversion means, for placing the formatted data into a sequence of addressable data blocks;
compression means, coupled to the ordering means, for compressing the formatted and sequenced data blocks;
compressed data storing means, coupled to the data compression means, for storing as files the compressed, sequenced data blocks received from the data compression means with the unique identification code assigned by the identification encoding means; and
transmitter means, coupled to the compressed data storing means, for sending at least a portion of one of the files to one of the remote locations."

From this description, it sounds like web, ftp and gopher servers fall under the patent. However, I would think that, since the method that is described was first published in 1971 in RFC 114, 21 years BEFORE the this patent was filed, this patent would be disqualified via the prior art argument.

As for the other patents, you can find their IP list here and the USPTO patent search engine here. Have fun.

Their Management Page

Now proceeding to find their contact info and sign up their personal emails to every spam mailing list I can find. Lets see if they like penis-enlargement on demand.

But on the other hand I will still be on windows because I need high end video editing.

Have you checked out Cinelerra? I've been eyeing it for a while but haven't gathered the gumption to try using it yet.

directX should die, it's holding lin games back

Huh? I haven't seen anything intrinsic to DirectX that would hold back third-party implementations of it; it's just yet another object-oriented (sort of) pile of graphics, sound and whatnot APIs. I think it's more likely the sheer size and complexity of the Win32 standard platform that holds up porting; who wants to go through their code rooting out all those pesky API calls and proprietary libraries when just coding for Windows is going to get them 90% of the users?

I've been working on the media player detection and control code for VegasWebcast.com, and let me tell you, dealing with browser and platform differences at the same time as trying to dance around plugin/ActiveX versioning issues, browser and media player implementation bugs, and other sources of pain is an adventure.

Crap! It's the Acacia Technologies lawyers! RUN!!!

Speaking of crazy patents...

Acacia claims numerous patents covering the use of streaming media, such as video files and audio/MP3s, including original content, and is currently targeting the adult industry with thousands of patent infringement legal notices and lawsuits.

Note this issue has nothing to do with copyrights whatsoever...this affects all use of any streaming media by anyone.

Acacia has chosen to target the adult industry first, since they are an easy legal target, but make no mistake, Acacia is targeting everyone who uses, or even merely links, to any streaming media content, including individuals.

Acacia Reaching To Affiliate Sites 10-24-2003
Patent holder unplugs porn network
Hustler, Vivid, Wicked Sign Acacia Patent Licenses

See more details regarding Acacia's crazy and legally abusive "business method" patents: http://www.acaciatechnologies.com/technology_main. htm

Acacia isn't the only company on the prowl...if Acacia is sucessful, there's a whole swarm of other entities that have zillions of other questionable "business method" patents ready to pounce on both industry and individuals alike with their patent infringement claims and manditory licensing for widely used "open" computer formats that they didn't even develop!

I'm sure at some point they will continue to climb the lawsuit ladder reaching for larger judgements until somebody can afford researching prior art smacks them down. You can see their claim here.

This "patent a toll booth on the information highway" mentality needs to be stopped. Innovate, or die.

I'm sure at some point they will continue to climb the lawsuit ladder reaching for larger judgements until somebody can afford researching prior art smacks them down. You can see their claim here.

This "patent a toll booth on the information highway" mentality needs to be stopped. Innovate, or die.