Slashdot Mirror


Portable Stereo Creator Gets His Due

eadint wrote to mention an International Tribune article covering Sony's settlement with the inventor of the portable stereo. From the article: "Pavel invented the device known today as the Walkman. But it took more than 25 years of battling the Sony Corporation and others in courts and patent offices around the world before he finally won the right to say it: Andreas Pavel invented the portable personal stereo player."

36 of 149 comments (clear)

  1. Sad story by c_fel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In fact it's a sad story, it shows how it could be difficult to actually earn money from our inventions. It's not really motivating for me and many of us since we all are kind of inventors... Personally I don't think I'd have threw away millions of dollars in court like he did. Kudos to him !

    --
    I hate all sigs, mine included.
    1. Re:Sad story by Mattygfunk1 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Imagine the number of every day products which have "true" inventors without a cent to their name.

      The warm and fuzzy feeling of having created an idea that benefited millions probably doesn't have the same effect knowing that you were robbed of personal finacial benefits.

      __
      I watch funny adult videos.
    2. Re:Sad story by earthstar · · Score: 2, Insightful

        Personally I don't think I'd have threw away millions of dollars in court like he did


      But how many have that 'millions of dollars' ?

    3. Re:Sad story by Grym · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Exactly, this story completely undermines the entire argument that the patent system somehow benefits small inventors--it doesn't.

      SURE, this guy won in the end... AFTER 25 YEARS. How many countless other inventors have simply given up? Would this guy have been able to also patent new ideas or defend other contested patents during this time period?

      What's the point in intellectual property if you're realistically only allowed to keep what companies don't want?

      -Grym

    4. Re:Sad story by rbochan · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Imagine the number of every day products which have "true" inventors without a cent to their name...

      Sorta sounds like the music industry...

      Oh wait, this is SONY.

      --
      ...Rob
      The American Dream isn't an SUV and a house in the suburbs; it's Don't Tread On Me.
    5. Re:Sad story by PostItNote · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Be careful here. In order to say "patents help the little guy", you have to look at how effective they've been at letting small inventors take on big corporations, as you mention, but you ALSO have to look at how effective they are at allowing big corporations to squash the little guy flat.

      I know that I wouldn't want to be a software developer in any domain MS or IBM or SCO have ever done anything...

    6. Re:Sad story by tomjen · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well the inventer of FM radio fourth with the RCA (his employer) over his patent rights and afther they used every dirty trick in the book, they declared his patents invalied. They he fourth with them in court for six year before he was broke. They offered him a settlement that did not even pay for the court fees.
      Then absolutely defeated he jumped out of a window.

      I think this inventer was more lucky, he got the money at least.

      --
      Freedom or George Bush
    7. Re:Sad story by hackstraw · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Exactly, this story completely undermines the entire argument that the patent system somehow benefits small inventors--it doesn't.

      SURE, this guy won in the end... AFTER 25 YEARS. How many countless other inventors have simply given up? Would this guy have been able to also patent new ideas or defend other contested patents during this time period?


      I'm not sure what he "won". And this just reinforces the patent theory that the person with the most money wins all patent disagreements.

      First, being that 8-tracks were introduced into cars in 1966 and not in home units until a year later, there was already a desire and some innovation in the portable music market at the time. This guy made is first walkman like thing in the late '60s to early '70s. To me, there is not too much of a difference between a self contained modular radio and tape player that works off of a battery in a car and plays on slightly larger speakers vs a more portable personal unit. Headphones already existed, the form factor was pretty much there, the media was there, and batteries were there.

      I know this is anti-slashdot-groupthink, because this is a little guy who was "wronged" by the big guy and the system, but this is about some guy who was probably getting high, listening to music with his friends, and said, "Dude, it would be cool to be able to walk down the road outside and listen to music". The article does not mention that he ever made anything or had a prototype, but rather had an idea that he was unable to sell to a series of companies. He filed a patent, and got a TV job, and then went after a Japanese company that marked _and_ made the best portable models at a reasonable price. Sony started putting these out in '79, I got my first "walkman" that was GE I believe in '81, and it sucked compared to Sony models, but was cheaper.

      Sony was the name in portable media playback and recording. They have always been big in the video and audio market, especially with enthusiasts and professionals. Look here for a late 70s cassette recorder http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Sony-TC-153SD-pro-portable-c assette-recorder_W0QQitemZ7568330640QQcategoryZ211 45QQcmdZViewItem Look here for the Sony timeline of electronics http://www.sony.ca/sonyca/about_chronology.shtml For those that don't know, Sony portable cassette recorders and then DATs were the defacto standard for concert recordings for years because of their quality in terms of being rugged and fidelity. I can't tell you how many Grateful Dead recordings I have that were recorded on a Sony cassette recorder or a Sony DAT.

      Personally, I don't think this guy deserves a dime for sitting at home thinking of a portable music player, any more than I should get paid for sitting here thinking of traveling of the speed of light or living on the Moon or Mars.

      Patents basically mean nothing. If you don't make anything from your patent, you just suck and are inhibiting innovation and the proliferation of the idea into reality. If you do make something and have a patent on it, again you suck because you expect royalties from companies that are being competitive in terms of price for a known item that should be a commodity instead of a monopolized product See this url, http://www.symbol.com/products/barcode_scanners/ba rcode_handheld_ls_4000.html for a good example. Symbol has a patent for bar code readers _with a trigger_. Simply because they patented the obvious, you, me, and every business has to pay an inflated price to read UPC labels on products that are not easily brought up to the counter or for inventory purposes.

      To me, intellectual property is no more property than talking shit when drunk or stoned. This guy had the "intellectual property" but could not "sell" it to anybody, nor did he manufacture, market, and sell the product on his own.

  2. Fair? by Wilkshake · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So the guy gets a cash settlement in the 10s of millions. How much has Sony made from the portable music market?

    --

    -
    "I may have invented it, but Bill made it famous." - David Bradley, inventor of Ctrl-Alt-Del
  3. Out with the old, in with the new by Kawahee · · Score: 4, Funny

    I, Todd Aspeotis invented the iPod! iShall send forth my iLawyers to iSue you for my iPatent. iWish iHad some iFriends so they could see my name iN the iMedia, but iDon't.

    --
    I'll subscribe to Slashdot when I see a month without a dupe, a typo, or an article the "editors" didn't read.
  4. Re:Slight correction by creepynut · · Score: 4, Informative

    In a way, Nintendo helped. Sony and Nintendo were working a joint effort to make a CD-based version of the Super NES. Nintendo screwed them over, and Sony went off and made the Playstation.

  5. Sounds like a too "obvious" patent by gorim · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Seriously, a patent for a "portable" stereo ?
    I sure am hell glad there was no patent on portable game consoles. Maybe there is, waiting to sue Sony and Nintendo.

    Its too bad this guy one the fight. This patent just as much shows whats wrong with the patent system as the controversies of today.

    1. Re:Sounds like a too "obvious" patent by Detritus · · Score: 2, Insightful
      If it was that obvious, it should be easy for you to find an example of prior art.

      Before the Walkman, the only people that I ever saw wearing headphones in public were the sound guys on film crews with their Nagra recorders.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
  6. Re:Slight correction by frinsore · · Score: 3, Informative

    Considering that the Walkman is a name brand personal stereo player and considered by the general public to be the first personal stereo player, I'd say that it is an apt summary of the situation.

    And considering that Sony was manufacturing and doing R&D for Nintendo's consoles prior to the N64 and that the play station development was initiated by Nintendo, I wouldn't say that Nintendo invented the Play Station but Nintendo definetly had a hand in it's conception.
    wiki

  7. Re:Slight correction by malkavian · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What an odd thing to say. The Walkman is a personal portable stereo player. Sony invented nothing there, they merely created a personal stereo, and branded it as a "Walkman".
    The playstation wasn't invented under the same argument, as it was a subset of a 'game console'.. Not sure who came up with that idea (atari was the first I remember).

  8. Not sure I understand by David+Off · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I'm not sure I understand the invention here (unless we are defining "invention" in the terms used by the USPO). When I was at school back in the early 1970s there were girls who would walk around with headphones and casette recorders to listen to music using the Philips Compact Audio casette system. which was introduced in 1963. I don't know if you remember these casette players, they would work on batteries and had a strap so they could be carries over the shoulder like a handbag. The walkman just seems like the usual Japanese refinement and minituarization of the system... I don't see an inventive process here except for certain component technologies such as the compact audio cassette. There were also portable music systems based on the 45RPM record available from the early 1970s.

    Just because this was novel in Hicktown Italy in 1977 doesn't mean it was novel in some of the slightly more go ahead parts of the world. He has basically beaten Sony into submission by harrassment despite losing all of his court cases. Ok maybe we shouldn't shed a tear for Sony who would do much the same themselves.

    1. Re:Not sure I understand by tatonca · · Score: 2, Interesting

      FTFA - "took his invention to one audio company after another - Grundig, *Phillips*, Yamaha and ITT among them..."

      You'd have to analyze the text a little more to get the timeline, but doesn't it seem odd to you, that a guy presenting a portable music player swings by the Philips office - they laugh at him and tell him it's crazy - and then said company comes out with similar in the same time frame? Ever wonder why hollywood seems to be constantly putting out similarly themed movies at the same time all the time?

      Same reason - a guy is wandering around pitching a script idea - the studio laughs at him and tells him he's crazy - they hire their own writers to capitilize on the idea without having to pay out royalties...

      Of course, this is all mere speculation - but then how come Philips didn't sue Sony? Maybe cause they'd stolen the idea themselves?

  9. What did he invent? by TorKlingberg · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Did the Walkman actually use any of his technical solutions? Or did he just "invent" the idea of portable music? The difficult part of protable music is not to think it would be nice, but to overcome the difficulties like making it small, light and robust enough.

  10. That's how it is.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The fate of engineers in a world where buzzwords earn the money and working people have to go to court for 25 years to get their share.

  11. The hypocrisy of Slashdot by msormune · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So why is this not an obvious invention? Because it is a single guy against a big company, suddenly it's ok to patent something pretty obvious and try to start cashing in on it? This of course means that the manufacturers will increase the prices in order to cover the extra licensing costs. If someone working for Microsoft had patented this 25 years ago and now won the patent, most people on Slashdot would be huffing and puffing with their faces red. But when it's a single guy against the "new evil empire" Sony, let's all cheer for him. Never mind that it's the consumer that gets screwed in the end.

    1. Re:The hypocrisy of Slashdot by mumblestheclown · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Sigh.

      Here's a simple example: compare the number of new pharmaceuticals developed in countries with strong IP regulations compared to those that don't.

      Now, expand your 'test' into virtually any avenue of economic endeavour that you can think of: aviation, automotive, medical devices, consumer electronics, manufacturing process, chemical production, etc etc and you will see that in essentially every case, the systems with stronger IPR have historically done better in providing a better quality and quantity of items for their citizens. EVERY TIME.

      Just because you have no actual knowledge of the subject and therefore subject me to the silliest of challenges does not make you right.

    2. Re:The hypocrisy of Slashdot by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 4, Interesting

      There have been *many* cases of patents retarding innovation.

      My favourite is the steam engine - development was stalled for 20 years because of an outstanding patent on high pressure steam valves.

      And that was when patents didn't have stupid lifetimes.... If it were like today I suspect we'd still be waiting for someone to invent it.

    3. Re:The hypocrisy of Slashdot by Jasin+Natael · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I will have to qualify your statement, and say that strong should refer only to the strictness of enforcement, not the lengthening of period. This is a mistake that the US legislature has made time and again.

      When a company can get licensing fees from a patent or copyright past the end of my lifetime, or when the creator's grandchildren can collect royalties throughout their lifetimes, we have done the opposite of what IP law should do. We have *exempted* the entity in question from ever needing to contribute to society again, when the point should be to *tempt* them with the benefits of further innovation after their temporary monopoly has expired.

      Jasin Natael
      --
      True science means that when you re-evaluate the evidence, you re-evaluate your faith.
    4. Re:The hypocrisy of Slashdot by SillyNickName4me · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There is a long list of such examples, the oldest that I know about dates back to the 1600s and regards some required technology for a wind driven sawing machine (sawmill), its most likely not the oldest documented case however.

      Another example is the patent battle surrounding the invention of the traditional TV system and camera technology. While there were definitely genuine patents involved here, it goes to show that a small inventor has little power over big companies even when winning a patent dispute after a few decades and how this can completely stall the development of some invention and anything directly related to it.

    5. Re:The hypocrisy of Slashdot by Idarubicin · · Score: 2, Insightful
      ...development was stalled for 20 years...

      And that was when patents didn't have stupid lifetimes...

      I'm pretty sure that patents in the United States are still only good for twenty years from the date of filing. The stupid lifetimes you're thinking of are related to copyrights, which last for the age of Mickey Mouse plus twenty years.

      The question of whether or not twenty years is a 'stupid lifetime' is of course open for discussion, as are twists like compulsory licenses.

      --
      ~Idarubicin
  12. Re:In a Nutshell: by mumblestheclown · · Score: 2, Funny
    Actually, that's the complete OPPOSITE of what the story says. Rather, it says that the inventor stood up for his rights and won, eventually, and now will receive more money than you will ever see in your lifetime despite actually producing ZERO units himself and doing a step that some might characterize as marginally novel.

    But dont worry! Keep belieiving your junior-high school grade korporation konspiracy. I'm sure there will be plenty of other stories on slashdot where you'll get modded insightful for it!

  13. Re:In case of slashdotting... by bheading · · Score: 3, Funny

    But as for that before winning the right he finally to say

    My lexical analyser dumped core trying to get through that.

  14. Ideas are almost entirely worthless... by SpotBug · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'll say it again: Ideas are almost entirely worthless.

    Seriously. It's the implementation that counts. This is the problem most people have with the patent system, without even realizing that that's what their problem with it is.

    Hey, here's any idea: personal transporters. You'd never have to waste time going anywhere!

    Want something more realistic? Pretend it's 1990. How about a really, really good Internet search?

    Patents should only be granted if the inventor has an implementation or, at the very least, a plan for an implementation with a time limit on when the implementation must happen.

    --
    cygnuhchur
    1. Re:Ideas are almost entirely worthless... by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 2, Informative

      Untrue. *many* patents are on ideas only.

      It is not necessary to prove that an idea actually works before getting a patent on it.

      Software and business patents are *entirely* idea based.

  15. It was already available by NigelJohnstone · · Score: 4, Informative

    He filed a patent in 1977 for fucks sake. Tape recorders already came in stereo, they already had headphones, they already were getting smaller, my dad had a phillips one with a battery pack and a carrying strap.

    So what was his invention? What??

    Similar in style to the tape recorder on this page:
    http://www.superscopetechnologies.com/company/hist ory/superscopehistory.shtml

    "In 1975, Superscope's product line included: eight portable tape recorders, six portable-cassette radio products, seven Hi Fi receivers, two tuners, three amplifiers, five stereo tape decks, six speaker models, five compact music systems, eight microphones "

  16. The history of Grundig by NigelJohnstone · · Score: 4, Informative

    http://www.grundig.com/index.php?id=250

    1965 The Cassette Recorder C 100 is the first cassette tape recorder made by Grundig. Recording takes place with the DC International System, on cassettes with the dimensions 120 x 77 x 12 mm.

    1967 The CC Compact Cassette is introduced and can be listened to with the Cassette Tape Recorder C 200.

    1974: The portable Radio Recorder C 6000 Automatic is a best-seller. Over 710,000 units are sold.

    He filed for his patent in 1977.

  17. Re:Slight correction by damsa · · Score: 2, Informative

    I believe the first game console was the Magnavox Odyssey, it came out before the first pong machine.

  18. Breast cancer diagnosis. AIDS drugs. by aepervius · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And in general the medical world. Why the hell you think the third world is calling bloody murder on AIDS or drug patent ? Because most of those drug, *not EVEN found or developped by private laboratory* are sold at prohibitive price despite that the production of chemical itself isn't as expensive. This is why soime country (India /Brazil) many time over blatantly broke and violated patents. As for Breast cancer i can remmember sometimes ago a scientist whining because some labor patented a diagnostic process and made it too expensive or illegal to make some research on rbeast cancer (if I recall corrrectly). So granted those example are NOT consumer electronic, but they concern a far more bigger part of the world and a far more important thing : Health.

    And do not get me started on US/EU company patenting a remedy used locally (india, Africa) since a long time, and then forbid local people to continue using it because of the patent. 10 years some of those patent held on fought by the country of the originating stuff (I think that was the case of Neme...Somebody call me wrong here). I won't even start speaking of mosento patenting grain and forbidding farmer reusing seed.

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
  19. Re:Slight correction by WEFUNK · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Regardless of what Sony may have agreed to in their latest settlement, I agree that it's highly erroneous to claim that Pavel invented the "Walkman" and that at best he might have a claim as "a" father of personal music devices, and not "the father" as is claimed in several sources. Although Sony has grown into a huge faceless multi-national (and was already big at the time), it certainly wasn't faceless at the time and any additional due given to Pavel should not be at the expense of some of the most ingenious innovators of our time.

    From the article and other sources, Pavel apparently invented what he called the "Stereobelt" in 1972, which may have been the first personal portable stereo player concept to anticipate a number of the features that latter helped to make the Walkman so successful. Other "portable" players may have been commercially available around the same time, but were usually mono, and not strictly "personal" as they were heavier due to elements such as microphones and external speakers (although I haven't found anything to indicate the actual design of the Stereobelt or whether it was even more than a prototype).

    He spent years shopping it around his idea to no avail, before finally patenting it in 1977. I'm not sure about the patent laws of the time, so I don't know how he was able to get away with inventing and offering to sell something for 5 years before receiving his first patent (and then proceeding to file other international patents). My guess: from the brief abstract listed elsewhere in the comments, and from the subsequent actions of Sony (modest settlements), I wouldn't be surprised if his actual patent was quite narrow (looks like there is something about retractable cords) and may have been on shakey ground due to his own (and possibly other) prior art and delay in filing.

    At the time, Sony was already selling "portable cassette players" but these were heavy and monoaural. One of the co-founders of Sony, Masaru Ibuka, was a frequent user of one of these products (the "Pressman") and asked Kozo Ohsone to come up with a more portable stereo version. Co-founder and then Sony Chairman Akio Morita correctly saw the potential of the new product to create a new category of "personal" music devices and coined the name "Walkman". Because of his vision and success with the Walkman line, Akio Morita has been (in my opinion) quite rightly credited as the father of the personal stereo, even though the actual Walkman concept was invented by Ibuka and Ohsone.

    As the article points out, Sony did in fact settle with Pavel over a German patent in the early eighties, but Pavel was frustrated over his claim of inventorship and continued to sue Sony through the 90's dispite continually losing in court. Only after Ibuka and Akio's deaths did Sony Corporation provide a second settlement that apparently provides him with some additional credit tied to the "Walkman" and what is a relatively token amount (probably didn't help much beyond his court costs) to stop him from his public criticism and litigation.

    I think it's sad that the significant contributions of Ibuka and especially Morita might be so easily discounted since their death. And while I'm supportive of inventors such as Pavel getting their due, from the face of it I don't think he was particularly hard done by all these millions of dollars later for an idea he had thirty years ago -- this story is a far cry from an entrepreneur that worked hard to implement their idea, start and grow a business, and then had it stolen out from under them. He probably had a valid, if narrow, infringement case when he first settled twenty years ago. But that he could even *consider* suing today's MP3 manufacturers (long after any loosely connected patents have expired) just show how clearly ridiculous his notions are of his intellectual property rights.

    --
    My next sig will be ready soon, but friends can beat the rush!
  20. Lars, take a look at Sonys 1969 Tape recorder by NigelJohnstone · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "But all inventions have always been obvious - once somebody finally came up with them."

    You might like to look at what he invented before you say that:

    http://www.nigeljohnstone.com/archives/2005/12/coo l_inventions.html