Slashdot Mirror
Apple, Burst Reach Settlement
An anonymous reader writes "In 2005, Microsoft settled Burst's lawsuit for infringements on media player patents for $60 million. Many thought that Apple would be a ripe target next. However, Apple successfully voided 14 out of 36 Burst.com's patent claims in their iPod lawsuit. Apple would have gone after the remaining 22 claims. Today, Market Wire announced that the case was settled out of court: "Apple agreed to pay Burst a one-time payment of $10 million cash in exchange for a non-exclusive license to Burst's patent portfolio, not including one issued U.S. patent and 3 pending U.S. patent applications related to new DVR technology. Burst agreed not to sue Apple for any future infringement of the DVR patent and any patents that might issue from the pending DVR-related applications." The big winner would be the lawyers who reduced the settlement to approximately $4.6 million."
More like the big winner would be Burst, who can collect future licensing fees from other companies, since they will continue to hold the remaining 22 patent claims.
Burst alleges that Apple's iTunes Music Store, iTunes software, the iPod devices, and Apple's QuickTime Streaming products infringe Burst's U.S. Patents 4,963,995; 5,995,705; 5,057,932 and 5,164,839.
Bit more than, err, one-click I think. And check out the dates on those patents.
How we know is more important than what we know.
OK, I really don't know squat about how patents are done. But I did take a look at the two highest-numbered patents there. What did I see?
The abstract: word-for-word identical.
The description: word-for-word identical.
The claims: claim #1 is the same, but there's a lot more verbiage in the second patent. Patent #1 then goes on to claim method #1 over a whole slew of different communication channels, each as their own claim - this patten repeats itself throughout patent #1. Claim #8 in patent #1 is the same claim as #1, just with the wording tweaked. Claim #6 in patent #2 has all the same wording again.
Shall I go on?
Seriously: WTF? Did the examiner even read these things? 5,995,705 looks like nothing more than a time-extension of 5,164,839, which is itself an extension of 5,057,932. Is this not a classic patent troll? Keep dressing up the same patent over & over again to get more time under the patent to litigate against the true innovators?
If this is typical for real patents, then patent law is even more screwed up than I already thought it was.