Slashdot Mirror
Apple Sued Over iTunes UI
An anonymous reader writes "It apppears that Contois Music Technology is suing Apple Computer over the UI to its iTunes music software. The suit claims patent infringement over a patent owned by Contois."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
This seems to cover not only iTunes but WinAMP, FooBar2000, and just about any other player that can organize music and play only selected artists, albums, or genre's.
This my friends is why we don't like software patents.
Kyle
http://www.unlogikal.net/
Maybe if enough big companies get shafted through patent lawsuits they may consider working to get rid of software patents.
But then again....
---- There are 10 types of people in the world. Those that understand binary and those that don't
bath water.
If the child is a brat, you discipline the child. If the child tries to stab you to death for disciplining it, you put the child in a mental ward for safe observation and help. If when the child (or in this case patent industry) is mature and tries it again, society prescribes the death penalty (in the US). Why shouldn't the patent system be any different?
The big IT corporations don't need patents to maintain their control because they are in a unique position to crush upstarts that few industries have. They industry as a whole has proven that they can't use them responsibly and the very fact that a hobbyist can turn their hobby into a business means that patents are bad. I'm sorry, but the ends justify the means here. Patent holders have time and again proven that milking their work and not innovating is their real goal, at least in IT. It's time that the entire system be flushed out and simplified.
Click here or a puppy gets stomped!
Abstract
A computer system and method for controlling a media playing device. The system provides a user interface for allowing a user access to media pieces stored in a media database. The interface is also for controlling a media playing device, like a player piano or movie playing video device, that is coupled to the computer to play the accessed or selected piece of media. In one embodiment there is a computer interface that allows a user to display only music that relates to a selected category, like jazz or classical music. Another embodiment allows the user to direct the media playing device to automatically play selected music pieces that are related to a selected music category. Another embodiment allows a user to direct the media playing device to automatically play selected music pieces that are related to the selected music composer or artist."
My only question is: Where are the lawsuits against Microsoft's WMP, Realplayer, the Microsoft XBox Media Player, MusicMatch, etc?
iTunes has been out for over 4 years, and just now there's a lawsuit? I understand it takes time to find a lawyer that will accept a case, but *4* years? Hmmm, right at the height of popularity too, kinda amazing how it worked out like that...
I like big butts and I cannot lie.
The patent was granted January 1999. It was actually filed Feb. 13, 1996, so you have to beat that date since that is the priority date and the date from which their 20 year term of protection begins. If you read the claims carefully, it is more than just a simple listing and selection of songs. In order to violate the patent, each and every element of an independent claim has to be present in what is alleged to be infringed upon. It is not as simple as you are making it out to be.
Similar to the upcoming US election results
Contois is seeking a trial by jury.
While a settlement may be in the future, this should not be a solid case. The patent is blindingly obvious. Come on, they patented any database access program for a music collection that can then cause a player device to play it.
If you have a 100 disc CD changer and write a computer program to allow you to choose and begin playing selections from that changer, you violate this patent.
Here's the first claim from the patent:
1. A computer user interface menu selection process for allowing the user to select music to be played on a music device controlled by a computer, comprising the steps of:
a) simultaneously displaying on a display device, at least two individual data fields selected from music categories, composers, artists, and songs;
b) selecting at least one item from at least one of the data fields;
c) in response to step b), redisplaying all data fields not having an item selected therefrom with data related only to the at least one item selected in step b), and simultaneously maintaining all items originally displayed in the data fields with at lest one item selected therefrom;
d) selecting an item in the songs data field in response to step c), and
e) playing the selected song item from step d) on the computer responsive music device.
Now come on. If you are going to use a computer for connecting to a music device, how obvious is a user interface that categorizes the data? 90% of what a computer does when it isn't playing games is categorizing data!
Education is a better safeguard of liberty than a standing army.
Edward Everett (1794 - 1865)
Nearly every software patent I have ever seen is bogus.
Apple is getting its just deserts from supporting the software patent system.
MORTAR COMBAT!
Woah! Those are really neat inventions. Must have required a lot of intellect to bring that intellectual property to paper.
Go patents go!
diegoT
And?
They might have a case for copyright infringement if they can show their ex-employees took the code to Apple. Might even have a case for contract law, if Apple NDA'd to see the software at the trade shows.
But the patent was applied for in 1999. How long has winamp existed? When winamp first came out, how much information did it display on the screen? How long have ID3 tags been around, with Winamp using them to display song name, artist, title... ooops, we've already passed the two fields in the patent! And the buttons, of course the buttons! Buttons are clearly a novel way to control a computer!
The patent as described in the abstract would have been a pretty cool invention. "Control a player piano from your computer!" Too bad the patent lawyers sank their teeth into it and turned it into a steaming pile of crap, knowing that the patent office would accept it anyway. "A computer controlled device" in this language could mean anything from a piano to a pair of speakers.... and imagine that, the music comes out my speakers when I hit play in either iTunes or Winamp!
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
This is no joke; it's real, and it's why more needs to be done to stop software patents. If they're not stopped, there will be more and more lawsuits just like this one. If there are enough of these lawsuits, they will have a dramatically negative impact on the economy, because wealth will be flowing from those who are being productive to those who are really nothing more than leaches.
Software already enjoys the protection of copyright, it does not need patent protection as well.
Despite what EULAs say, most software is sold, not licensed.
Does MOD4Win control an external music playing device (like a player piano or an iPod)?
No, but neither does iTunes. According to their patent, the software must be capable of "b) sending a data stream from the computer to the computer controlled music device in response to step a) for controlling the playing of the selected song;". Or in other words, the external device must respond directly to the stream provided by the computer device.
iTunes does no such thing. It merely downloads the music to the player for storage, control, and later playback by the player. i.e. An iPod cannot be reasonably compared with directly controlling a "player piano".
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
You might be right, I read only the abstract from the top of the linked page which stated:
The system provides a user interface for allowing a user access to media pieces stored in a media database
I don't think you can seriously refer to a directory as a "media database". They might have something if they had sued based on the iPod. To me that wordind in the abstract indicates intent and kills the claim.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I think RMS should just come up with a succinct "this example demonstrates exactly how the patent system is broken" reply, which /.ers can then copy and paste into their posts as a show of solidarity.