Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Apple Sues Burst.com in iTunes Patent Dispute

Posted by Zonk on from the you-with-the-patents-stick-em-up dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Burst.com, a patent holder of many patents covering streaming video and time-shifting of video, has been sued by Apple after license negotiations broke down. Apple is asking the court to invalidate Burst.com's patents. Burst.com is the same company that successfully sued Microsoft over patent infringements. Many comparisons will likely be made of NTP and Burst.com, but Burst.com actually has useful technology, has owned the patents for over a decade, and most importantly, actually had highly regarded products that made use of the patents."

6 of 146 comments (clear)

  1. Burst.com by nother_nix_hacker · · Score: 5, Funny

    So do we like Burst.com or not....I a little lost on this one.

    1. Re:Burst.com by springbox · · Score: 5, Funny

      Usually when presented with an neutral report, it is best to form your own opinion.

  2. The patent system is ridiculous by PCM2 · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm so tired of hearing about all these companies whose sole purpose is to hang onto patents and so-called intellectual property. In many ways you can compare these companies to the start-ups of the dot-com bubble. And just like that bubble, sooner or later this bubble ... ...oh, skip it. To hell with it, I can't go through with it. Someone else will pick it up I'm sure.

    --
    Breakfast served all day!
    1. Re:The patent system is ridiculous by Cheapy · · Score: 5, Funny

      "And just like that bubble, sooner or later this bubble ..." will burst.com?

      --
      Would you kindly mod me +1 insightful?
  3. Serious question by jimicus · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Let's say Apple successfully gets one of Burst's patents revoked, and it was one which Microsoft was successfully sued for breach of.

    Does this mean Microsoft can now go and sue Burst to get their money back?

  4. Re:A Brief History of QuickTime... by hw2084 · · Score: 5, Informative
    Given that Burst was founded in 1990, that its flagship product is at 2.0 (I think Apple's opensourced Darwin Streaming Server is probably a more mature product), I doubt they have a leg to stand on.

    Do a little bit of research first.

    The Burst patents don't cover all video streaming in general. Burst came up with and patented the streaming+caching technology that allows smooth playback of video over the internet. Before Burst, everyone would just have you download the whole file before playing, or do straight streaming which led to hiccups during playback.

    Before Burst was on the scene, video streaming was horrible because they couldn't figure out how to smooth out the slowdowns in traffic. After Burst demonstrated their technology (most famously for the U2 Popmart concert) *and* talked to Microsoft and Real about licensing their code, the next versions of their video players magically contained the same buffering technology. Apple was soon to follow, probably figuring "hey everyone else is doing it."