Slashdot Mirror


TVI to Sue Over MS Autoplay Feature

scubacuda links to this Infoworld article, which reads in part "TVI charges Microsoft's autoplay feature infringes on four of its U.S. patents. TV Interactive Data Corp. (TVI) of Los Gatos, California, claims that Microsoft infringes on four of its U.S. patents, three entitled 'host device equipped with means for starting a process in response to detecting insertion of a storage media' and one entitled 'method for starting up a process automatically on insertion of a storage media into a host device.", writing "I hope no one has a patent on the shift key, because that's what I hit when I insert a CD. (That is, when I haven't already edited the registry)" Wouldn't automount / autofs fall under the same shadow?

50 of 408 comments (clear)

  1. Why stop with M$? by Matey-O · · Score: 5, Informative

    The Mac has a 'detect on auto insert' for as long as it's had a floppy drive! (IIRC, the Amiga did too.)

    --
    "Draco dormiens nunquam titillandus."
    1. Re:Why stop with M$? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Yup, the amiga would automatically load the 'disk-validator' executable from a floppy when it was inserted. Some pesky viruses took advantage of this mechanism too.

    2. Re:Why stop with M$? by cbreaker · · Score: 4, Informative

      That's what I was thinking.

      I really hope lawsuits like this don't get upheld... but sometimes they are and sometimes they aren't.

      Auto-insert notification is such a simple thing, it's been in computers forever (and in microsoft land since '95) and just now the lawsuit?

      The worst part is that these patents keep being passed, over and over.. we need some technical people in the patent offices, not temps making $7 an hour.

      Whatever. It's just another case of "let people use it until it becomes vital and you can make a bundle of money, then sue."

      --
      - It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
    3. Re:Why stop with M$? by dnoyeb · · Score: 5, Funny

      How the 8-track? It starts playing when the tapes are inserted.

      Didn't SCSI have the cd-inserted data signal long ago? What was SCSI doing with it? or does MAC use SCSI?

    4. Re:Why stop with M$? by robslimo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There's enough prior art here to toss in out, IMO.

      While it's a common practice for these patent vultures to prey on the small, cash poor "infringers", counting on a quick settlement, I don't understand why they'd tackle microsoft. MSFT has the legal guns to back this thing all the way to invalidation of the patent, if they want. I guess they might just figure it's cheaper to fork over a pay-off, but I wouldn't and I doubt Mssr. Gates will, either.

    5. Re:Why stop with M$? by R.Caley · · Score: 5, Informative
      They are claiming a specific way of aranging auto-run, so it may be that (one of) Windows methods infringes, but Apple's doesn't.

      5,597,307
      6,418,532

      Of course, it fails the obviousness test, but since the USPO has aparently interpereted this test to be `obvious to somoene who doesn't know what a computer is and has no problem solving ability at all'...

      --
      _O_
      .|<
      The named which can be named is not the true named
    6. Re:Why stop with M$? by ivanmarsh · · Score: 5, Funny

      Doesn't a toaster have the same functionality?

    7. Re:Why stop with M$? by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Funny

      Suing microsoft is like entering the lottery. The odds are strongly against you, but if you win, the payout is usually pretty big.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    8. Re:Why stop with M$? by junklight · · Score: 4, Funny

      Its a shame you can't patent business processes - because you could patent getting an obvious patent. Sitting on it for a while until the practice had become widespread and then sueing everyone.

    9. Re:Why stop with M$? by DickBreath · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The Mac didn't always have an "AutoPlay" type of feature.

      But there was a tricky cleaver way to get code to execute upon mere insertion of a floppy disk! (Yes, I mean even back in the old days, like 1984.)

      Write a new WDEF. (A window defProc.) Put it into the resource of the Desktop file on the floppy disk. Make it have the same wdef ID as the standard system wdef, that is zero. Write your WDEF so that the window borders, title bar, frame, etc. that it draws looks pixel-perfect clone of the standard wdef.

      Now insert the floppy disk. The Finder puts the floppy disks Desktop file on the resource chain ahead of the System file. When it tries to access wdef 0 to display a new window on the screen, it finds and executes your wdef code. Yours displays window borders and controls like normal, but can optionally have a payload that executes as well.

      Of course, when you ejected your floppy disks, you needed to leave the window open so that when the next user inserts the floppy, it opens the same window in the same position on the screen. The act of drawing the window is what triggers your wdef, simply by virtue of it being on the resource chain.

      It has been a long, looooong time. But I believe that this mechanism was the basis of the very first Macintosh virus, the WDEF virus.

      Anyway, a nice way to "AutoPlay" code of your choice. Before Apple closed the loophole.

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    10. Re:Why stop with M$? by saden1 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Only M$ will make it self look like a prime target for every stupid company that has a patent. When someone sues you, you take it seriously and if it is a bogus patent you have to make stand right there and then otherwise you will open yourself up to a lot more litigation.

      Besides, Linux and the Open Source Community has Free Software Foundation. Plus, I'm sure Redhat, Novel, and IBM has vested interest in seeing Linux grow and won't site idle while shitty companies (ala SCO) tries to extort money from the open source community and its user base.

      --

      -----
      One is born into aristocracy, but mediocrity can only be achieved through hard work.
    11. Re:Why stop with M$? by frdmfghtr · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Hmmmm, if we pay these guys off, that might validate the patent in everyone's eyes, and then Linux won't be able to have automount...

      Then neither would Palm PDAs, VCRs that start playing as soon as a tape is inserted, and DVD players that autoplay the DVD when inserted.

      They tackle MS because MS would just fork out the dough to settle rather than litigate to the bitter end. Just because TVI attempts to tackle MS doesn't necessarily mean TVI will go after Palm, Sony, Toshiba, etc...they probably just assume that MS will settle the quickest--maximum return (settlement) on investment (litigation costs).

      It's extortion, IMHO. If they were serious about defending their patent against all sorts of prior art, then they would have issued multiple lawsuits MANY YEARS AGO when autoplay was first introduced.

      From the article:
      Microsoft is the defendant in more than 30 patent cases, but only three are listed in Friday's filing. The others are the high-profile case brought by Eolas Technologies Inc. and the University of California over Internet Explorer and a case brought by InterTrust Technologies Corp. over DRM (Digital Rights Management) and other technologies.

      Ever really wonder how much of this litigation is based on good-faith belief of true infringement, and how much is picking on the "rich kid of the block?" "Hey, MS has really deep pockets, maybe of we bug them enough they'll give us money to go away."

      Sometimes I think this is a non-trivial percentage of the suits brought on MS. Not to say that MS hasn't infringed (they may very well have do so, voluntarily or otherwise) but they are a corn-fed, juicy target for carnivorous teams of attorneys looking for a quick settlement.

      --
      Government's idea of a balanced budget: take money from the right pocket to balance...oh who am I kidding?
  2. Back in my DOS days by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I had 4DOS batch files do things when the floppy drive was accessed.

    1. Re:Back in my DOS days by Rick+the+Red · · Score: 5, Funny

      Then you violated these patents. Report to the nearest Intellectual Property Enforcement Agency and have your memory erased, you thief!

      --
      If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
  3. Prior Art by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Bootable floppies.
    Take that!

  4. Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    wouldn't the Mac be considered prior art since it has been auto responding for quite a while

    1. Re:Apple by Don'tTreadOnMe · · Score: 5, Insightful


      I have had for a very, very long time a VCR that automatically turned on and played the tape when you pushed one into its slot.

      Sounds like the "host" is activating a process to me.

  5. Hopefully this won't hold up in court by mgrassi99 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Patents are supposed to be "novel" and unique. I don't see anything special about auto playing or mounting media when it is inserted.

  6. Applies to more than MS by NinjaPablo · · Score: 5, Interesting

    How about your car CD player, home console, digital camera, DVD player, etc etc etc? What's next, someone claiming a patent on reading magnetic or optical storage?

    --
    SmashTech - No smashing of tech involved
    1. Re:Applies to more than MS by happyfrogcow · · Score: 4, Funny

      VHS players, Laserdisc players, Betamax players, MiniDisc players...

      no joke, but my shlong too. It has DNA data that gets accessed upon insertion.

    2. Re:Applies to more than MS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
      It has DNA data that gets accessed upon insertion.

      I'm sorry for you and your significant other. I'm luckily have some control over when my DNA data gets accessed.

  7. the patents are.... by bpland · · Score: 5, Informative

    The patent numbers are 5,597,307; 5,795,156; 6,249,863 and 6,418,532.

    1. Re:the patents are.... by LostCluster · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'll remember to play those digits in the lotto tonight, because aren't patents good for nothing more than a random number generator lately?

    2. Re:the patents are.... by Penguinshit · · Score: 4, Funny


      You have 795 numbers in your Lotto?

      Egads, THOSE are some stiff odds...

  8. Priot art (Amiga) by FattMattP · · Score: 4, Informative

    My Amiga would detect when a floppy was inserted and start automaticaly and this was back in 1988.

    --
    Prevent email address forgery. Publish SPF records for y
  9. new tag by rootofevil · · Score: 4, Insightful

    slashdot needs an asinine tag, like fark.

    this is ridiculous.

    --
    turn up the jukebox and tell me a lie
  10. I want to hear from a Patent Examiner by DarkFencer · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I really would love to see a Slashdot interview with someone in the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office that can explain the process and how things like this happen. They probably cannot comment on a specific case like this, but typically we get two of these ridiculous patent claims a week mentioned on slashdot.

    Are they overworked and understaffed and forced to just rubberstamp things?

    Are they untrained in technology to recognize things like this?

    Are they in need of being hit over the head with a clue by four?

    Something is seriously wrong at the USPTO (now more then ever seemingly).

    1. Re:I want to hear from a Patent Examiner by pb · · Score: 4, Funny

      Just wait until I receive my patent on "a method for fomenting cluelessness and incompetence through paperwork"... I'll sue those USPTO people into the ground, right after I bury SCO!

      --
      pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
    2. Re:I want to hear from a Patent Examiner by miyoo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      IANAL, IANAPE, but a patent lawyer told me that patent examiners are paid on a per-application-processed basis, and so they don't generally like to do more work than absolutely necessary. A patent that is initially rejected can be appealed, or modified and resubmitted by the applicant, both scenarios which create more work for the examiner but not more pay. Approved patents are never appealed, except that it *might* end up in court some day, but the examiner is not a part of that. You can see why the system encourages rubber-stamping of patent applications.

    3. Re:I want to hear from a Patent Examiner by imr · · Score: 4, Funny

      Hi, i'm from the uspto:
      1/ yes
      2/ yes
      3/ yes
      4/ yes (oups! It wasnt a question!)
      cheers.

    4. Re:I want to hear from a Patent Examiner by sleepingsquirrel · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Now the burden of proof is on TVi, to prove that they invented it and the patent is valid.
      Close. But the courts assume that the patent is valid, since, of course, it was granted by the PTO. All TVi has to do is show that the MS autoplay feature is described in the patent claims. Microsoft probably doesn't dispute this, since they are apparently trying to bust the patent. So now the burden of proof has shifted MS to show that the patent is bogus.
  11. It's a non-starter... by gillbates · · Score: 5, Interesting

    IIRC, Autoplay has been shipped in MS operating systems since 1996. TVI has been sitting on this for eight years. Which means, of course, that if the statute of limitations hasn't expired, they will be severely limited in the remedies they are allowed to seek. It's not like this escaped their attention for 8 years.

    Of course, IANAL, but I'm pretty sure that even if TVI wins the case, they won't be able to collect damages for past infringement because they clearly did not demonstrate "due diligence" in protecting their patent. They might end up with a compulsory license agreement; or to avoid infringement, Microsoft OS's may end up simply popping up a dialog box ("Would you like to play this CD?") when a disk is inserted.

    Yeah, I'd put TVI at net loss on this one. Their lawyers are going to make more money than they will.

    --
    The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
    1. Re:It's a non-starter... by Oliver+Wendell+Jones · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Their lawyers are going to make more money than they will.

      And this differs from every other lawsuit in the world in what way?...

      --
      A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing -- Emo Phillips
  12. One good thing about patent ridiculousness.... by i_want_you_to_throw_ · · Score: 5, Insightful

    is that it's growing among companies. Companies litigating the little guy out of business over patents is relatively straightforward.

    Hopefully when enough 800, 1200 and 1600 pound gorillas start beating up on each other then there will be some reform. (Hopefully)

  13. What about VCRs? by enosys · · Score: 4, Interesting
    All the VCRs I've seen start playing write protected tapes after they're inserted (with no need to press play).

    (Okay, they just output analog stuff from tape, but they do have microcontrollers, and some can even digitize the signal eg. for better pause and slow motion image quality.)

  14. No by crlf · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Automount and autofs trigger filesystem mounts on directory traversals, not on media insertion.

    Maybe you were thinking about vold or some other similar project.

  15. The really sad thing... by n()_cHIEFz · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...about these recent patent cases is I find myself on the side of Microsoft.. yuck! I need to shower!

    --
    -- Is it a right to remain ignorant? -- Calvin
  16. Patently absurd? by BitRandom · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Evidently the new idea is that even the product your suing shouldn't be considered prior art. The first patent, 5,597,307, was filed in May 1995. The last Beta of Windows 95 was in March 1995 and the Microsoft DRG people were talking about it in 1994 (Auto-play was evangelized to ISVs - "Mr ISV you need to make sure that your application uses Auto-play"). What it looks like here is that the current patent strategy is to wait until someone releases a product then patent the features that aren't covered. Hopefully this is yet another nail in the stuipidity of patent issuing.

  17. So what? by Ridgelift · · Score: 4, Funny

    My 8-Track player would automatically start playing music upon insertion of the audio storage media. I guess that either qualifies as prior art, or 70's electronic manufacturers better start ponying up their licensing fees.

  18. Patent Dates by ripsnorta · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I did a quick search on the patent numbers in the Patent Office database. The earliest patents was filed in November 1995, and others were filed in 1999 and 2001. Strangely, the wording on all of them seemed to be very similar. (5,597,307; 5,795,156; 6,249,863 and 6,418,532)

    November 1995 was around the time Windows 95 was released IIRC. It almost seems opportunistic. Maybe the patent holder quickly came up with a patent after seeing Win95, and filed it hoping that with a long enough gap he would be able to sue for patent infringement.

    Cheers

    --

    Hollywood: The place good stories go to die.

  19. Patent Suits are not what wil change Patent Laws. by l0ungeb0y · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Seems every lawyer I meet these days is into IP law and living in downtown SF, I meet quite a few every week. Most of these lawyers also tells me with a very satisfied smile on their face what a complete and utter scam it all is. None of them want to see it changed. Hell, I can't blame them, it's like one big swollen tit from which to feed.

    And no, it's not cases like this that will cause anything to change. For that will need to be done by tax paying citizens taking up torches and pitchforks and decending upon Washington in an orgy of blood lust. Then maybe we might see Congress decide to "review" the patent application process.

  20. Re:No kidding by bhtooefr · · Score: 5, Informative

    Actually, Windows (and DOS) always assumes that a disk is inserted whenever the drive is mounted. It does check to be sure that it's the SAME disk, and it only does this on an access attempt. The only hardware that can autodetect mounting of a floppy disk is the Mac, and it's done it since 1984.

    Here are the dates on the patents:
    5,597,307: January 28, 1997 (filed May 11, 1995)
    5,795,156: August 18, 1998 (filed November 1, 1995)
    6,249,863: June 19, 2001 (filed May 3, 1999)
    6,418,532: July 9, 2002 (filed March 22, 2001)

    Also, here's the date on the Microsoft Autorun patent:
    6,366,966: April 2, 2002 (filed December 13, 1994)

    So, while three of the TVI patents are OLDER than the Autorun patent, the Autorun patent was filed six months earlier than the first TVI patent.

  21. Automount / Autofs by Omega · · Score: 4, Funny
    Wouldn't automount / autofs fall under the same shadow?
    Hey that's right! Someone should tell TVI they're entitled to royalties on 5% of free!
    1. Re:Automount / Autofs by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 4, Funny
      Hey that's right! Someone should tell TVI they're entitled to royalties on 5% of free!

      Or maybe they should sue SCO, who, after all, owns Unix and Linux...

      --
      "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
  22. Re:No kidding by Archfeld · · Score: 4, Informative

    still think unix automounting FS's predates all of this. When a NFS system is initialized my system detects the mounted media and mounts it for me without any user interference or action. But I do remember the MAC chunking away on the floppy upon insertion as well. IBM Mainframe machines required the controller to let the machine know new media or devices had been attached as far back as 3081's, based on my admittedly flawed memory...

    --
    errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
  23. Minor correction (and rant) by Xebikr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The worst part is that these patents keep being passed, over and over.. we need some technical people in the patent offices, not temps making $7 an hour.

    No, we need to ban software patents. Software patents have done absolutely nothing for innovation. Everyone getting sued is not someone who saw the idea and said "Hey! Great idea! I think I'll integrate that with my product." They've all been developers who come up with the idea independently, and then years (and years) later the company who was successful in marketing the product gets sued. All it has done is increase the amount of patent barratry.

    And software is already protected by an insane amount of IP laws anyway. Not only is it protected for 90 years by copyright (if owned by a corp.) but trade secret law, and still for some unfathomable reason, you can patent it as well.

    Oh well. Sucks to be us, I guess.

  24. Prior Art by sbaker · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'm fairly sure the IBM mainframe I used back in 1975 would auto-load and execute a deck of punched cards if you just dumped them into the input hopper.

    Oh - wait...they're suing Microsoft. Ah. In that case:

    Those evil Microsoft guys - always stealing other people's technology. Bastards!

    --
    www.sjbaker.org
  25. Re:Thinking like Microsoft by caspper69 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Actually, Microsoft didn't *violate* a patent, they *stole* Stac's code. That was why DOS 6.2 went on to become DOS 6.22 so quickly. You could even scan the executables for DriveSpace (I believe that's what it was called) and see Stac's name all over it. And actually, Stac got quite a hefty settlement out of it ($50M+). What really killed Stac was that drive space became so cheap, no one really needed to use realtime compression anymore (at least not at the filesystem level).

  26. Really, really prior art by leonbrooks · · Score: 4, Informative

    In... let me see... 1982? I dealt with a PDP-11/23 running RSX-11-M-PLUS which autostarted backups and things when you inserted media (e.g. 1600BPI magtape into a Cypher F880(?) tape drive). We also had monstrous great two megabyte removable hard disks the size of a sombrero, and the system would auto-start things when the correct one of those was inserted. It had been doing these things for many years before I arrived on the scene.

    A local Fight'o'net BBS operator I know, back in the same era, had a process auto-start when you inserted a tape cartridge (snail-mailed from the 'states) full of downloadables in your '286.

    So they're just being SCOlets, pump-n-dump barratrous assholes. It seems to be trendy these days.

    --
    Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
  27. Re:Thinking like Microsoft by Why2K · · Score: 4, Funny

    Microsoft blatantly and fragrantly violated the patent when they build filesystem compression into thier products

    So what exactly does a violated patent smell like?