Slashdot Mirror


Creative Sues Apple

E IS mC(Square) writes "Looks like Apple's legal problems are not yet over. ZDNet reports that Creative has sued Apple over their iPod interface. From the article: 'Creative Technology said Monday that it has filed two legal actions against Apple Computer, charging the popular iPod infringes on its patented technology. ... In both cases, Creative says that the iPod and iPod Nano infringe on a patent the company has for the interface in its Zen media player, a patent granted last August.'"

11 of 423 comments (clear)

  1. Creative is an evil company by PhrostyMcByte · · Score: 5, Informative

    Not very surprising. Will probably be modded flamebait, but..

    Creative is used to having a hold on their market and killing off competition (ie, SoundStorm) by buying out companies or technologies they depend on. The result is them making sub-quality products and incremental upgrades that are *just* good enough for people to bother, and selling them for top dollar. And then shafting the customer with bad support on all but their latest product line.

    So I can see why they don't know how to play fair and compete. They don't know how to handle Apple any other way.

    1. Re:Creative is an evil company by rsmith-mac · · Score: 5, Informative

      In more recent history, they patented (John) Carmack's Reverse rendering technique, and then used it against id to force them to include EAX functionality in the Doom3 engine.

    2. Re:Creative is an evil company by Wolfbone · · Score: 4, Informative
      "Lady, did you even read your own link?....Nothing all to dirty here, just business."

      Did you even read it? Sam Dietrich relates describing the technique publicly at a Creative Labs developer conference, after which Creative went and patented it. Fraud and extortion not dirty? Just business?

  2. Browsing data by stivi · · Score: 5, Informative

    The column view (browser view) has been in NeXTSTEP since 1989. Apple acquired NeXT in the mid-90s. I do not say that Apple holds patent on it nor invented it (Xerox Smalltalk class browser?). I just want to say, that the column has been here for a while and it was somehow related to Apple too.

    Moreover! Filtering data using a column view is also quite old. It has been used in data-warehousing as way of drilling-down. In the music player it is nothing more, nothing less: it is drilling-down through your song database. Just ask Bill Inmon or Ralph Kimball :-) It is the same to drill-down by region, store and date or by genre, artist and album. They are just different terms.

    --
    First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.
    1. Re:Browsing data by zephc · · Score: 5, Informative

      yup, and the column view even goes back to the Apple Lisa http://www.pegasus3d.com/apple_screens/Dec1980.gif

      --
      "I would say that 99 per cent of what my father has written about his own life is false." - L. Ron Hubbard Jr.
  3. Re:Last August? by Tim+C · · Score: 4, Informative

    If they submitted the patent before Apple started using the disputed aspects of it, then how is it a submarine patent? A submarine patent is one that's submitted, granted, and then quietly sat on by the holder until the covered tech has gained widespread adoption - then and only then do they start enforcing it, knowing that

    a) there are lots of targets
    b) it'll be much more painful to remove/do without the patented tech than just pay-up

    See for example the .gif patent.

  4. Re:Mixed emotions abound by enitime · · Score: 5, Informative
    "But I am guessing the patent in question might have been applied for years ago."

    Patent No. 6,928,433 was filed in January 2001. Before the iPod was unveiled in October.

    The site isn't available at the moment (Maximum number of users has been reached.) but it looked like a fairly typical old-method-but-for-new-technology patent. You know the type... "auction bidding... but on the Internet!".

  5. Re:Last August? by N+Monkey · · Score: 4, Informative
    IANAPL but...
    If they submitted the patent before Apple started using the disputed aspects of it, then how is it a submarine patent? A submarine patent is one that's submitted, granted...
    No, I believe you are incorrect. My understanding is that, before the US cleaned up their patent laws, a submarine patent was one that was filed but not granted. The old laws allowed a patent to be tweaked multiple times effectively delaying the grant pretty much indefinitely. An unscrupulous person/company could thus tune a patent to cause the most havoc when he/they effectively chose to get it granted.

    Thankfully, the USPTO is a bit more like the rest of the world so this practice should now have stopped.
  6. Re:Wha...? by greg1104 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Creative first released their Nomad Jukebox products in early 2000:
    http://www.mp3newswire.net/stories/2000/createjuke .html

    The first iPod came out on October 23, 2001.

    The Nomad Zen was a late 2002 product:
    http://www.mp3newswire.net/stories/2002/nomadzen.h tml

    Posters here already have identified the Creative patent as being one they filed on January 5, 2001. That was probably early in the design cycle for the Zen players, but before they actually were released.

    I for one am glad to see Creative finally prosecuting Apple for all the technology they stole. Clearly Apple has been taking ideas from the superior Nomad products for quite some time now, and that's the only way they've been able to build the obviously derivative user interface used on the iPod.

    (Note to self: turn down sarcasm knob a notch)

  7. Re:Wha...? by calciphus · · Score: 5, Informative

    No, the iPod did not come out before the Creative's "high capacity" units. Creative's large storage mp3 players were on the market for almost 18 months before the iPod was publically announced, and with an interface that was almost identical to the "revolutionary" iPod interface. At the time, Zens were available in 5 and 10GB - while the iPod was 10, 15, and later 20.

    The iPod was slimer, used a li-poly battery (instead of lithium-ion, resulting in many upset users) and the "click-wheel" technology, rather than traditional buttons. Other than that, they were about the same.

    And the patent for the "hierarchical" (and lets face it, really really obvious) way of organizing music on a mobile player is what they're settling on. The filing date is much earlier, though it was pushed back and re-examined many times. That whole "Artist->Album->Song" method? Creative "invented" it, and God help you if you try and use it yourself in a mobile player and subsequently gain market share over them. Nevermind that it's the fundamental way that files have been stored and sorted on computers since...well...since we left punch cards behind, slapping "mobile" on the patent makes it new! So does slapping "online" apparently...

    They sued now because prior to this, they'd been in negotiations with Apple for an out-of-court settlement for patent infringement. Apple finally flat out refuesd (on the grounds that the patent was "bullshit"), and left Creative little other options for taking their slice of someone else's pie. They'll probably hope that after a bit of bad press and a seemingly losing battle, Apple will decide to settle just to get on with it. Hopefully Apple won't cave, because as much as I hate those stupid white headphones, I hate patent mongering more.

  8. Re:sweet by Guysmiley777 · · Score: 4, Informative

    The people don't want DRM, they don't want iTunes upgrades removing features.
    Guess what? The Creative Zen series is now infested with DRM and has lost features as well. I know because I got f%$^ed buying a Zen Sleek. And on the box it says "Win98/ME/2K/XP compatible". Great, I'm running Win2k. Get home and try to install the required interface software (no UMD device here, oh no). The installer comes up with "Incorrect Operating System". I say WTF? Double check the box "Win98/ME/2K/XP compatible". WTF again. Go to the Creative site, download the software from there, same s$%&. Email Creative asking WTF. Get a response 2 days later saying "To properly support PlayForSure the Zen product you purchased is only supported by Media Player 10, which requires Windows XP".

    So I go back to the store I bought it and returned it, bought a NON-PlayForS$%t iRiver player instead. The funniest part was that the Zen Sleeks on the shelf when I went back had a sticker over the requirements on the back covering up the O/S section, it now says "Windows XP" only. Asses.

    --
    Coding with assembly is like playing with Legos. Coding an application in assembly is like building a car with Legos.