Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

PUBPAT Makes Progress Against JPEG Patent

Posted by CowboyNeal on from the fighting-the-good-fight dept.

The Data Compression News Blog writes "The US Patent Office has granted the Public Patent Foundation's request for a reexamination of the patent which Forgent Networks is reportedly using to harass anyone that implements the widely used JPEG format. They have already been challenged by many, but PUBPAT had the first concrete case with 'prior art'. In its Order granting PUBPAT's request, the Patent Office found that PUBPAT raised 'a substantial new question of patentability' regarding every claim of the the '672 Patent."

4 of 95 comments (clear)

  1. Could they be sued? succesfully? by robbak · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Question: If a corporation like this recieves licence fees for an invalid patent, What is preventing the licensees suing them for the money that they have extorted?

    --
    Prediction for end of Universe #42: Fencepost error in Quantum_bogosort.cpp
    1. Re:Could they be sued? succesfully? by darkmeridian · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's in the contract. Parties license patents to avoid litigation. They know the patent may be invalid, but it's easier to settle sometimes rather than die trying. They waive their right to recoup the licensing costs if the patents are later invalidated. Exceptions exist if there was inequitable conduct (basically fraud) before the PTO while obtaining the patents. then all bets are off.

      --
      A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/
  2. Prior Art demonstrated on ASCII by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'd just like everyone to know, I've filed a claim of prior art in the name of a long deceased relative on ASCII, and every poster here may be in violation of my patent. Please remove your posts at once or I will be disposed to take legal action. Your IP has been logged.

  3. Knowledge of patent encumberance. by jbn-o · · Score: 5, Informative

    Neither of the commenters to date take your question seriously, so I'll make a guess: at the time software was developed to encode and decode JPEG, it was not common knowledge that JPEGs were ostensibly patent-encumbered. As far as I know, no unencumbered alternative to JPEG was developed. But it is widely understood among those who deal with these matters that MP3 is patent-encumbered and that we should use and encourage others to use the apparently unencumbered (and higher quality, besides) Ogg Vorbis instead.

    --
    Digital Citizen