Slashdot Mirror


PTO Rejects Instant Live Patent

Jivecat writes "Instant Live, a service of the concert promotion company Live Nation, makes recordings of live concerts that are rapidly burned onto CDs to be sold to the audience before they leave the venue. It's a nice service for fans, but Live Nation holds the patent for a technology that places markers between songs so they can be written as separate tracks rather than one big track — in effect giving them a monopoly on in-concert recordings. Now, thanks to the efforts of the EFF and a patent attorney, who found prior work of similar technology, the U.S. Patent Office has revoked Live Nation's patent. This is good news for those who consider Live Nation to be the Evil Empire when it comes to concert promotion."

77 comments

  1. because by User+956 · · Score: 3, Funny

    PTO Rejects Instant Live Patent

    That's because the idea of granting it is patently ridiculous.

    --
    The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
    1. Re:because by Adambomb · · Score: 1

      That's because the idea of granting it is patently ridiculous Granted...but

      the U.S. Patent Office has revoked Live Nation's patent Obliviously, Someone should have mentioned that to the PTO before they did originally then.

      language is fun!
      --
      Ice Cream has no bones.
  2. EFF to the rescue by vivaoporto · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Some people like to diss EFF here on Slashdot, specially when they don't win some cases, but forget to thank them for the victories that make our lives easier. To show your support and help them to help us all, shell in some cash. The digital world thanks you :)

    1. Re:EFF to the rescue by QuantumG · · Score: 0

      dude, it's not the EFF we have fun bashing, it's the pro bono lawyers they get to screw cases for them. In this case, they found someone who isn't pro bonehead, so what? Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    2. Re:EFF to the rescue by vivaoporto · · Score: 2, Informative

      "Even a stopped clock is right twice a day"

      Doing nothing. That may be the case of a lot of people, but certainly not the case of EFF, they fight hard for what they believe.

    3. Re:EFF to the rescue by d34thm0nk3y · · Score: 2, Informative

      Some people like to diss EFF here on Slashdot...

      dude, it's not the EFF we have fun bashing, it's the pro bono lawyers they get to screw cases for them. In this case, they found someone who isn't pro bonehead, so what? Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.


      Some people indeed...

      In the legal arena, being right once a day is pretty good.

      For reference, here is some person talking shit about the lawyer that is pressing the NFL case from yesterday.
      Re:Wendy was our pro-bono lawyer for a time...
      Re:Woo?

    4. Re:EFF to the rescue by QuantumG · · Score: 1

      The first of those comments of mine was replying to this post. If you actually bother to read it you'll see the kind of lawyerin' you get from a pro bono lawyer. Open and shut case of copyright violation and she can't even get them to return her phone calls.

      So excuse me if I think that maybe it would be better for the cause if the EFF didn't pit pro bono amateurs against high paid professionals, inevitably lose and set bad precidents for us all.

      If, like this case, they go out and find someone with something to gain from winning the case and get them to finance a real legal team, they might have a better chance of doing good.

      The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    5. Re:EFF to the rescue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How, exactly, do they "set bad precidents [sic] for us all"? If they failed to bring up good arguments and lost the case, those arguments are still available for future cases since they haven't been ruled upon. If they brought up those arguments and still lost, the arguments weren't good enough and would not have won anyone else the case. I realize there is some grey area there, but that grey area is covered in flexibility of interpretation regarding any precedent. And this is all beside the fact that precedence in the local jurisdiction may mean little or nothing at all in another jurisdiction.

      IANAL, yadda yadda yadda, words words words.

    6. Re:EFF to the rescue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I tried ssh'ing, but I needed a password.

    7. Re:EFF to the rescue by ntk · · Score: 1

      Hey QuantumG,

      First, these aren't pro-bono lawyers. Wendy was, and Jason is, part of our legal staff. That's some of what an EFF donation pays for: having lawyers available to protect vulnerable groups that might not otherwise be able to afford one. I imagine you'll now claim that they're no good, or somesuch. I'll just point people to the recent announcement that one of them, Kurt Opsahl, just won the California Attorney of the Year award for his work winning against Apple. Two of our other lawyers won the award in previous years. You can check all of their track records here.

      Second, you seem very against people seeking out free legal advice. I recall you weren't quite that reticent a few years back, when you mailed me while I was editor of NTK for some free legal advice on work you were involved in. I wasn't working for the EFF then, and you and I were both based in Europe, but the first thing I did - like thousands of others - was contact EFF. They were incredibly friendly, explained that they couldn't advise on EU law, but gave me some useful pointers, which I believe I passed on.

      I know you think it's funny to keep trying to troll about our work on slashdot, but when you deal with as many people who are in genuine trouble as we do, and see as many of them as is possible getting the same careful treatment as EFF gave me when I presented your problems to them, I find it less than high-larious when all you can do is spread FUD and claim it's a joke when people call you on it.

      I know funny, and I know troll. Modwise, QuantumG, you're going *down*.

    8. Re:EFF to the rescue by QuantumG · · Score: 1

      I must be some other QuantumG then.. When I contacted you, I had no "problems" for which I needed your help. In fact, I was offering my services as a reverse engineer to help prevent people using copyright and the strange binary-source nature of software to prevent free expression. Something for which I have repeatedly been turned down by legal people who see reverse engineering as too damn scary a topic to broach. Maybe, and I stress maybe, you're refering to the many years ago when I approached the FSF for advice on some copyright issues I was having with the Planeshift project.. which were caused by them having no clear, and legal, policy for user contributions.. something which they have since rectified.. but most likely not.

      Please, if you have a problem with me contact me directly. My problem, with people who make idle threats through copyright law and then cant even be bothered paying for a lawyer, I think, are quite well founded and require no futher explanation to people who believe, as I do, that copyright is fundamentally a bad thing.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
  3. That's good news by countSudoku() · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Unfortunately scumbags like Clear Channel still overcharge for tickets and hoard any good seating for their crappy radio stations to use or give away as prizes. Until asshats like CC clean up their act I, for one, will no longer attend any live event. I'll just wait for the DVD.

    --
    This is the NSA, we're gonna geet U h@x0r5! Also, what is a h@x0r5?
    1. Re:That's good news by j00r0m4nc3r · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Don't forget Ticketmaster The Unholy, who will slither under your door late at night and eat your children and defile your grandmother in her sleep.

    2. Re:That's good news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait a minute, I'm sure in some other story thread you (or someone else who sounds just like you) was saying that "scumbags like the RIAA... I for one will no longer buy a CD. Besides, I'll support bands by going to concerts"

      Nah, screw it you'll probably just download a pirated version of the DVD off Youtube. Hey come to think of it, why don't you just climb over the fence at the concert. There are plenty of seats after all and real bands make money off selling T-shirts.

    3. Re:That's good news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      couldn't tell from the context of your post if you knew that livenation is a former part of clearchannel, but i agree entirely.

    4. Re:That's good news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about the grandmothers that haven't gotten any in a while and are happy for the attention?

    5. Re:That's good news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you realise of course that Live Nation hasn't been part of Clear Channel for over a year, right?

    6. Re:That's good news by Hatta · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately scumbags like Clear Channel still overcharge for tickets and hoard any good seating for their crappy radio stations to use or give away as prizes. Until asshats like CC clean up their act I, for one, will no longer attend any live event.

      You know there are live music events that ClearChannel has no part in? Plenty of them.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    7. Re:That's good news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's the insane ticket prices that keep me out of shows (that and the shitty lack of anything resembling rock and roll); the same reason I won't go to any major league sports venue. It's robbery without a gun. A hundred bucks or three to see a bunch af geezers who are even older than I am (Rolling Stones) in a seat where I can barely see them?

      OTOH I can go to a local bar and sit fifteen feet from the band sipping a beer for a two dollar cover (or often no cover at all), every bit as talented and original as those damned aformentioned geezers.

      Are you kids out of your fucking minds? Look, I took my (then) wife to see Donovan open for Yes, and paid three bucks per ticket. We saw Golden Earring open, followed by Journey, followed by Electric Light Orchestra; again, three bucks. The Who: Two fifty (Mississippi River Festival, outdoors).

      I saw Delaney and Bonney open for Blind Faith (Eric Clapton, Steve Winwood, etc etc) and then both bands got onstage and jammed together. Five bucks (row M, 13 rows from the stage).

      What's more, you could smoke reefer in THOSE concerts. You can't even light up a cigarette today. If a woman came up and said "wanna fuck?" you didn't even have to buy her any crack! God, but I miss the seventies!

    8. Re:That's good news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, dumbass, there's a massive difference between downloading music and stealing anything.

      COPYING IS NOT STEALING!

      And there's a massive difference between climbing the fence, and sitting outside of it with a telephoto and a parabolic mic. The former is trespassing, the latter is OK.

      Remember, dumbass, COPYING GOOD, STEALING BAD.

  4. The end of the story by bconway · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Now, thanks to the efforts of the EFF and a patent attorney, who found prior work of similar technology, the U.S. Patent Office has revoked Live Nation's patent. This is good news for those who consider Live Nation to be the Evil Empire when it comes to concert promotion.

    But less so (good news) when the author of the prior art files for the same patent, no?

    --
    Interested in open source engine management for your Subaru?
    1. Re:The end of the story by Ecuador · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Nope you cannot do that. Otherwise:

      1. Create/Invent something good
      2. Convince people to use it, since it is a free/not patented alternative
      3. Patent it when it has a decent adoption.
      4. Profit!

      So, in the real world there is no "3" in these profit schemes ;)

      --
      Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Polar Scope Align for iOS
  5. Reminds me of film strips from grade school by Dachannien · · Score: 1

    What's that, Billy? That's right: it's a volcano. *BING*

    1. Re:Reminds me of film strips from grade school by Creedo · · Score: 1

      Little Susy has it. Duck and cover.

      --
      All that is necessary for the triumph of good is that evil men do nothing.
  6. Obvious by pembo13 · · Score: 1

    Isn't there some clause that a patent has to be non-obvious?

    --
    "Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
    1. Re:Obvious by jfengel · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Unfortunately, that's the most debatable of the clauses. Much of the time, if it's both "novel" and "useful" (the other two things you have to have for a patent), and nobody's done it before, the patent filer will claim that as evidence that it isn't obvious. A lot of things are obvious in retrospect, but until somebody has shown it to you you'll walk right past it.

      That said, "non-obvious" isn't sufficient, it has to be not obvious to somebody "skilled in the art". If somebody else seeing the same problem would find the same solution immediately, I'd consider that "obvious", but for a long time the PTO has disagreed. They say that often recognizing the problem is not always obvious itself, and it gets bogged down from there.

      I'd really like to see the PTO work up a good paper on what they mean by "non-obvious", and try to raise the bar a bit from where it currently stands.

    2. Re:Obvious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apparently their mission statement goes something like "Our mission is to help our clients get more patents", not something like "Our mission is to supervise the issuance of patents for the furthering of technology and the arts, for everyone"

    3. Re:Obvious by justzisguy · · Score: 2, Informative
      The Federal Courts and Congress are responsible for defining what is exactly obvious. The current standard was decided by the Supreme Court in Graham v. John Deere, 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966):

      (A) Determining the scope and contents of the prior art;
      (B) Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims in issue;
      (C) Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art; and
      (D) Evaluating evidence of secondary considerations.
      And finally,

      To establish a prima facie case of obviousness, three basic criteria must be met. First, there must be some suggestion or motivation, either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art, to modify the reference or to combine reference teachings. Second, there must be a reasonable expectation of success. Finally, the prior art reference (or references when combined) must teach or suggest all the claim limitations.
      This may change depending on a current case up for review by the Supreme Court. More detail about the motivation requirement is available here.
    4. Re:Obvious by dean.collins · · Score: 1

      Yep, when I read the actual patent there were a number of points in there where I thought thats a cool idea BUT nothing in there was patent worth and non obvious.

      it sounds like CC were stopping people recording live concerts which is just totally wrong.

      i think thats the problem with so many patents that they overstep the bounds of what is actually unique.

      Cheers,
      Dean

    5. Re:Obvious by jfengel · · Score: 1

      It wouldn't surprise me to discover that they were deliberately overstepping their patent, hoping that people would pay up or get out of the way rather than go to court and risk losing. Even if they won, in fact, they'd need to find a judge willing to award them considerable damages to make up for the expense of the trial and the lost opportunities.

      I don't know any of that for a fact; I'm just guessing. But we've all seen similar instances documented here on Slashdot. It's enough to make even those most sympathetic to the idea of intellectual property want to give it up as a bad job.

  7. Re:A tragedy, actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This isn't about stopping them producing CDs, it's stopping them from forbidding others to do the same.

  8. uhhhhh by intthis · · Score: 2, Insightful

    why does anyone need extra software to break things into individual tracks? these concerts are almost certainly being recorded into protools... and it's about a 1 minute process to zip through the total recording and and just seperate the songs into different regions... and then burn away... you'll get seperate tracks, and you won't have to deal with patent issues over something this insane...

    --
    now is the winter of our discotheque
    1. Re:uhhhhh by QuantumG · · Score: 0

      Uh huh. Do you wanna listen to a 50 cent concert? Or Shannon Noll? No, didn't think so.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    2. Re:uhhhhh by AndroidCat · · Score: 1

      Well, I'm glad that my use of Audacity doesn't violate anyone's patent! *whew*

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    3. Re:uhhhhh by intthis · · Score: 1

      no, but i'm sure there are people out there who would (god forbid) and i'm sure they wouldn't mind waiting the extra minute and a half while a protools engineer breaks the whole concet into tracks... other than that, i have no idea what you're talking about...

      --
      now is the winter of our discotheque
    4. Re:uhhhhh by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      why does anyone need extra software to break things into individual tracks

      Surely there is an operator pressing the buttons, watching the levels. Do they want to include soundchecks, other crap between songs (some fans would, I suppose, but most not.) Dividing the soundtrack into tracks seems one of the more trivial parts of the process. After all, it's unlikely the software can identify the name of the song, etc. (Even if there was a playlist, often bands diverge from that, skip songs or do encores.)

  9. Re:A tragedy, actually by OverlordQ · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How hard is it to run a line off the sound board to a recording device and have some dude hit a button at the end of every song to signal 'put this as a new track'?

    --
    Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
  10. T'Pol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My boss's son is the CEO of Live Nation. The son is married to Jolene Blalock, aka T'Pol. So he still wins /. nerds.

    1. Re:T'Pol by FauxReal · · Score: 1

      Yeah?

      Well his company is still run by a bunch a pricks.

  11. Evil Empire Yellow Book? by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 5, Funny

    These days we seem to have a plethora of Evil Empires. Evil Empire of software, Evil Empire of Domain Registration, Evil Empire of Music Labels, Evil Empire of Movies, Evil Empire of Pizza chains, Evil Empire of dry cleaning, Evil Empire of Milwaukee area Dairy Producers. The list just never stops. We need a onestop resource to look up the Evil Empire of a good or service, if we want to keep it all straight, or if we want to keep our purchasing and use of services of Evil Empires to a minimum. So we should put them in a Directory book. Yellow is actually aready taken, so is blue and red, How about the chartreuse book of Evil Empires?

    --
    Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
    1. Re:Evil Empire Yellow Book? by iminplaya · · Score: 1

      How about the chartreuse book of Evil Empires?

      I was thinking paisley.

      --
      What?
    2. Re:Evil Empire Yellow Book? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We need a onestop resource to look up the Evil Empire of a good or service

      I believe the Evil Empire of Evil Empires has already published something like that. It's only got the one entry, and anybody who looks at it goes blind. Now that's evil!

    3. Re:Evil Empire Yellow Book? by Criffer · · Score: 1

      I believe this case is most definitely the Evil Empire of Red Book.

  12. Two-sided coin by peipas · · Score: 1

    This is good news for those who consider Live Nation to be the Evil Empire when it comes to concert promotion. And it is bad news for those who consider Live Nation to be the Greatest Philanthropy of our time.
    1. Re:Two-sided coin by IvanTheNotSoBad · · Score: 2, Informative
      What are you talking about? If that were the case, I would think that fact would show up rather fast on a google search or perhaps wikipedia. Wikipedia says:

      Live Nation NYSE: LYV is a live events company based in Beverly Hills, CA. Live Nation, formed in 2005 by a spin-off from Clear Channel Communications Perhaps you're thinking Live Aid?
    2. Re:Two-sided coin by peipas · · Score: 1

      Perhaps you're thinking Live Aid? No, I was making fun of the presence of the last sentence in the summary, which seems totally out of place. But apparently my attempt at humor failed.
  13. Discouraging predatory patents by Aliks · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Surely the main reason to celebrate is that obvious patents can and will be struck down.

    If my business plan is to register a load of bogus patents and hope that some will stick and make money, the last thing I want is to invest time and money only to see the community shoot me down.

    A relatively small number of wins like this will kill off a lot of small to medium operators.

  14. Nice Try by Mateo_LeFou · · Score: 1

    Live Nation's technology is nor prior art for any patent that might be filed going forward

    --
    My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
    1. Re:Nice Try by justzisguy · · Score: 1

      Sure it is. Their patent, while invalid, is still published and ready to be used against new patent applications. The invalidation does not wipe away the knowledge.

    2. Re:Nice Try by Mateo_LeFou · · Score: 1

      heh. my sentence is supposed to read "Live Nation's technology is now prior art..." So we're both right

      --
      My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
  15. Re:A tragedy, actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    have you ever been to a Phish show?

    noone knows what the hell track they are playing, they are just 50 minute jams.

  16. Thank God. by ZPWeeks · · Score: 2, Interesting

    With all of the royalties attached to albums and performances, bands do NOT need another thing sucking away at their money. A lot of the bands that do this are independent, non-RIAA artists that play in non-Clear Channel venues. I've used the service, but prefer online ones like digitalsoundboard.net that sell DRM-free FLACs of the concerts [/plug]. Artists actually MAKE a sizable chunk off of these recordings, unlike their albums or even live show tickets. They don't need one more royalty to pay. This service is one of the few examples of what I think the music industry *should* be about. Supporting (and paying) quality artists for great music, without any strings attached.

  17. Evil Empire Emporium by mrbluze · · Score: 1

    Get your personalized Evil Empire today! We also sell Wars for/on Evil Empires, chartreuse coloured Evil Empire cups, caps, cardigans, parkas, thumbs, thumb screws, trench coats, pith helmets, whips, lawn seed, and other wares. Join our Evil Empire dating service, find your mate and leave others chartreuse with envy!

    --
    Do it yourself, because no one else will do it yourself. [beta blockade 10-17 Feb]
  18. Re:A tragedy, actually by Watson+Ladd · · Score: 1

    Just because they lost their patent doesn't mean they have to go out of business. Now the bar to entry is much lower.

    --
    Inventions have long since reached their limit, and I see no hope for further development.-- Frontinus, 1st cent. AD
  19. Not possible. by raehl · · Score: 1

    As whoever had the prior art has missed the 'window of opportunity' to successfully patent it, which is one to two years, depending.

    1. Re:Not possible. by justzisguy · · Score: 1

      The inventor/applicant must file the patent application no later than exactly 1 year from the first disclosure of the invention (i.e. printed publication, patent, public use, or offered for sale). It's a statutory bar, meaning that you can't get around it.

      According to 35 U.S.C. 102 (b):

      A person should be entitled to a patent unless--
      (b) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of the application for patent in the United States
  20. psh by FMota91 · · Score: 1

    Should've been titled "PTO finally says no to a patent after much nagging."

    --
    09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C1 bottles of beer on the wall. Take one down, pass it round... Oh, umm...
  21. Best idea ever by xrayspx · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It's the only good idea Ticketmaster ever had, apparently. Every show I've been to that's offered a live CD, I bought it. One was instant live (Bauhaus), and the rest required you to wait (Pixies, Throwing Muses, Tori Amos). The Pixies CD distributor made a point of saying it was so they could get it in the studio, on proper equipment, fix levels, etc, and it is a very high quality product. The Bauhaus Instant Live one isn't bad though. I honestly don't understand why every band wouldn't do this. The only way a band makes actual money signed to a major is A:) T-Shirts, B:) Ticket Sales. C:) is clearly "sell the shows as you play 'em", because the lines were very, very long at each event. Who wouldn't want the CD of the show you just saw? They KNOW they're playing to a house full of fans, why not let them take the performance home? Cheers to any bands that do this. I dislike Ticketmaster (livenation) as much as anyone, but I know Throwing Muses did it themselves, and the Pixies one was through another small distributor, seems like it's win, win, win? My wife and I probably went to about 2 or 3 dozen shows last year, and would have bought CDs of all of them.

  22. Not novel or innovative by AdmNaismith · · Score: 1

    Any decent digital recorder allows you to place markers and begin new tracks on the fly. The recording service sounds like a great idea, but none of the procedures are novel or innovative.

  23. Used to be done with Vinyl by flyingfsck · · Score: 1

    Concerts used to be recorded live on vinyl and records sold at the door when the crowd exit.

    Yes, I am that old...

    --
    Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
    1. Re:Used to be done with Vinyl by tablebeast · · Score: 1

      When? Where? How? On vinyl? That never happened. Ever.

    2. Re:Used to be done with Vinyl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have no idea if it's ever been done like the GP stated. But I have seen records cut in "real time" on a record lathe. How you could do enough simultaneously to be able to sell them, well, I can't say. But it is possible to record live to vinyl.

  24. I did a double-take when I saw this by ElForesto · · Score: 1

    I happen to be working with Live Nation on implementing my company's software for them. Thank goodness it has nothing to do with this little tidbit.

    --
    There is a difference between "insightful" and "inciteful" other than spelling.
  25. Re: How hard is it to run a line off the board by rlh100 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Having mixed live sound I know that a board mix is fine for the band, but a real disappointment for a concert goer: not enough reverb, strange EQ, improper balance between the musicians. When you are mixing live sound, you are taking into account the musical wash (mush) coming off stage, the room sound, and the sound of the speakers. A good concert recording requires a separate mix and with the better recordings a separate mixer with EQ and effects. Sometimes the FOH (front of house) engineer can do both mixes, but it is a stretch. The FOH engineer's primary responsibility is the FOH sound. The flip side of the board mix is that if you buy it and take it home and it sucks then you will feel
    ripped off and might wonder if the concert was really as good as you remembered it.

    Been there, done that.
    RLH

  26. Patent Pending? by Bazar · · Score: 1

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but can't you can apply for a patent, and advertise your concept all you want, without mentioning that its patent pending, and then once you get your patent, announce it as patented, and collect revenue.

    The companies that have committed themselves to that patent will be forced to pay your royalties, face legal action, or back out of production. All of which can be extremely costly.

    --
    To avoid criticism; Say nothing, Do nothing, Be nothing.
    1. Re:Patent Pending? by Ecuador · · Score: 1

      Did you ever read the grandparent post I was replying to? It was suggesting that whoever was responsible for the prior art can NOW many many years later file for a patent.

      What you are saying is completely different and of course can be done in many cases. However, you cannot use your participation in an industry standards commitee to steer them towards adopting your technology without mentioning it is patent pending ;)

      --
      Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Polar Scope Align for iOS
    2. Re:Patent Pending? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I dont think you can patent anything once its in the public domain.

  27. Re:A tragedy, actually by Nethead · · Score: 1

    Ever heard of a Grateful Dead show? The Internet was developed to distribute GD set-lists and show recordings.

    --
    -- I have a private email server in my basement.
  28. Re:How can patents ever be lawful? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well if this "Alan" dude wants to come over and write me out this list of things I must not do I might take some notice.

    But if you think I'll listen to some scmo follower "interpreting" the will of Alan for me then forget it.

    Thanks.

  29. Re:A tragedy, actually by malraid · · Score: 1
    --
    please excuse my apathy
  30. TAO recording by wiredlogic · · Score: 1

    TAO Recording is a feature that has to be supported by the firmware of the burner. It certainly isn't an innovation on the part of Live Nation. I've read that their operation consists of a trailer filled with banks of commodity burners. The only custom bit here is the software for managing the dissemination of data to multiple burners as it comes available.

    --
    I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
  31. Not quite. by raehl · · Score: 1

    You can file a preliminary application that buys you another year to file the real one.

    1. Re:Not quite. by justzisguy · · Score: 1
      While you can file a provisional patent application, in order to claim that priority date (the date that prior art must beat), the provisional must still disclose the entirety of the claimed invention. It's really just a cost saving tool. From the USPTO website,

      the written description and any drawing(s) of the provisional application must adequately support the subject matter claimed in the later-filed non-provisional application in order for the later-filed non-provisional application to benefit from the provisional application filing date. Therefore, care should be taken to ensure that the disclosure filed as the provisional application adequately provides a written description of the full scope of the subject matter regarded as the invention and desired to be claimed in the later filed non-provisional application. There is no requirement that the written description and any drawings filed in a provisional application and a later-filed non-provisional application be identical, however, the later-filed non-provisional application is only entitled to the benefit of the common subject matter disclosed in the corresponding non-provisional application filed not later than 12 months after the provisional application filing date. Additionally the specification shall disclose the manner and process of making and using the invention, in such full, clear, concise and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which the invention pertains to make and use the invention and set forth the best mode contemplated for carrying out the invention. See 35 U.S.C. 112, 1st paragraph.
  32. Re: How hard is it to run a line off the board by Rich0 · · Score: 1

    Parent knows what he is talking about. You're not going to accomplish much trying to run two mixes at once unless all you're doing is just ballparking everything and not adding anything creative.

    Additionally, I'd also comment that the record mix should be done somewhere with sound isolation from the main event. Technically it isn't needed from an electronics standpoint, but good luck getting a good mix when the engineer is surrounded with 120dB of noise. I normally consider myself a half-decent mixer and when I've listened to CDs I've created in this sort of environment I cringe!