I don't think it's that simple but it isn't not simple. If you read the patent, which promises much but delivers little, you'll see that it describes something very common on MP3 players. The claims to invention are:
Three categories are to be used in the hierarchical organization of the tracks: Albums, Genre, Artist, as well as Playlists.
You can pick different traversal paths, Genre>Artists>Albums, Artist>Albums>Genre, but not all paths make sense a whole lot of sense in most cases. I'm pretty sure all traversal paths are preset.
Nevertheless, for those claiming that they did this on a file system 50 years ago, could they start at arbitrary root nodes in their classification schemes as they drilled down to find the track(s) they wanted?
This is actually kind of silly. Why limit it to three and Playlists? Playlists is in there because at any point, you can hit play and have all the tracks associated with that point play. If I have 4 categories, Track Length, am I in violation of the patent or have I made an innovation?
The metadata associated with the track will automatically assign its place in the hierarchy.
Okay, duh. How else would it work? For those claiming they already did this 50 years ago, did they have a script that automatically put the file in the appropriate folder based on the file's metadata?
The hierarchy is derived from metadata coming from CDDB and other sources.
Because the hierarchy is fixed, I can only assume this means they adhered to a standard when choosing their categories in the top level claim. You can get a patent for adhering to a standard?
The metadata is stored separate from the unaltered track in one file.
Okay, I can think of only about 4 ways to solve this problem.
Create a file format that includes the unaltered track and metadata or leave the track alone
Put the metadata in an accompanying file.
If the audio format supports metadata, embed it there.
If the file system supports metadata, embed it there.
As the tree is traversed, pressing play at any point, will automatically play all tracks associated with the next subcategory or track if a single track is reached.
yeah, okay.
The UI that displays the hierarchy.
obviously this is going to be different than a tree view on a regular computer because of screen size but, come on, showing each level on a new screen instead of a new pane?
So clearly, this isn't quite as simple as "inventing the treeview" or the "inventing the database search". However, it is pretty simple...and certainly obvious to a reasonably skilled practitioner of the art. Off the top of my head, I can think of three or four innovations that would make it actually interesting.
This can hardly be classed as an instance of an offensive patent (patenting something but not intending to build it) because Creative had actually implemented the algorithms and data structures as well as the hardware required for the patent to be embodied in something. In fact, the patent pretty much well requires it to be embedded in a portable music player.
However, if I put this in software on my laptop, which is not a portable music player per se, is the patent violated? The iPod can hold files, calendars, notes, music files, video files...is it "just" a portable music player? This is where these patents get problematic for the Joe Average programmer who wants to earn a few bits to rub together for his efforts. How do you know that some algorithm you're using (usually revealed through a UI) hasn't already been patented? Programming (and by extension Software) is both science and art. You used to be unable to get patents for algorithms. Picasso said, "Good artists borrow. Great artists steal." Uh, not anymore, Pablo.
I'm not saying that it's a reasonable patent, I'm just saying, let's see what the patent really is and talk about what we don't like. Do we like the patent system but hate the way software is gets tr
2 of the 3 previous pandemics (and certainly the 1918 pandemic) were all caused by bird-strain flu viruses that made the jump to humans and became contagious from human to human.
From what I've been told, all you need is someone with the bird-strain flu and normal influenza at the same time and you have a veritable laboratory for just such a mutation.
Where are you going to find such a laboratory? Among the world's poor...they're the most likely to be exposed to the bird flu and to have not had a regular flu shot.
How fast will such a thing spread? Fairly quickly...but we'll have some warning once very large portions of those populations start dying off.
Of course, in evolution, nothing is a sure deal. The same mutation that makes the bird-strain flu contagious person to person may also make it relatively benign.
The basic problems are (1) we don't know, (2) we're not prepared for the worst, (3) there is very little we can do to prepare, (4) with travel the way it is now, it's going to spread fast.
But the Bible also says, with more clarity, that DIVORCE is wrong...why isn't there a clamoring for a constitutional amendment to outlaw divorce?
More people are affected directly or indirectly by heterosexual divorce in this country than could possibly be affected by gay marriage or ending workplace discrimination. Why aren't we working to end divorce? It seems like that is a bigger threat to the institution of marriage. I'm tired of Christians selectively picking out things their religion believes to be a sin that other people are doing and trying to write prohibitions against them into law. Did you know that Justice Scalia actually laments the fact that masturbation isn't regulated?
I'm very glad you have faith in God if that rocks your world...but you don't get to ruin my life because you're superstitious. I really can't put it any plainer than that. I have no idea what happened between the Age of Reason and now but I thought most of this crap was already settled. We don't care how many angels can dance on the head of a pin because there aren't any angels. Personal Gods should be personal. And although I'm ever so happy that you can hear Him, I'm not confident enough in your faith that I should want to have you legislate for the rest of us what you think He told you.
I'm sorry but you are uneducated. You apparently have no idea of the history of how certain terms in the bible have been translated and retranslated. How the Romans weeded out the various gospels that didn't agree with a strong centralized church. How the Bible is chock full of inconsistencies (starting with 2 creation stories in Genesis that don't match). And don't get me started on the fact that the Earth is not only 6,000 years old!
An alternative view that is based on uneducated, antiquated, pseudo-scientific, superstitious mumbo jumbo should be kept to oneself. It has no place in rational discourse in a modern civil society.
I'm sorry if this post offends but the time has come to say no more of this.
What do you think they were trying to do all those years with shock therapy? What about long-time prisoners who return to heterosexual behavior upon leaving? Get a blow job from another guy a sufficient number of times and the next thing you know you're picking out china and shopping for antiques?
Behaviorists never cease to amaze me. Step away from the Skinner; put Walden II on the floor in front of you and no one will get hurt.
Reminds me of these whacked out sociobiology-based conservatives who think that evolution somehow proves that homosexuality is unnatural when the father of sociobiology argued exactly the opposite.
What else could those anti-gay marriage voters possibly buy? Are they all going to turn to Linux? Apple? I don't think so.
The Southern Baptist Convention--the largest protestant congregation in the US--has tried unsuccessfully for years to boycott Disney because of progressive non-discriminatory policies and "gay days".
There's something decidedly odd about all of this.
Slashdot Mirror
So clearly, this isn't quite as simple as "inventing the treeview" or the "inventing the database search". However, it is pretty simple...and certainly obvious to a reasonably skilled practitioner of the art. Off the top of my head, I can think of three or four innovations that would make it actually interesting.
This can hardly be classed as an instance of an offensive patent (patenting something but not intending to build it) because Creative had actually implemented the algorithms and data structures as well as the hardware required for the patent to be embodied in something. In fact, the patent pretty much well requires it to be embedded in a portable music player.
However, if I put this in software on my laptop, which is not a portable music player per se, is the patent violated? The iPod can hold files, calendars, notes, music files, video files...is it "just" a portable music player? This is where these patents get problematic for the Joe Average programmer who wants to earn a few bits to rub together for his efforts. How do you know that some algorithm you're using (usually revealed through a UI) hasn't already been patented? Programming (and by extension Software) is both science and art. You used to be unable to get patents for algorithms. Picasso said, "Good artists borrow. Great artists steal." Uh, not anymore, Pablo.
I'm not saying that it's a reasonable patent, I'm just saying, let's see what the patent really is and talk about what we don't like. Do we like the patent system but hate the way software is gets tr
because even aliens probably have bored teenagers with too much time on their hands trying to prove they're |_337 with ancient technologies.
"What are we going to do today?"
"Let's hack that small bluish planet they were talking about it in ancient computer systems."
"Cool..."
That's actually the problem...
2 of the 3 previous pandemics (and certainly the 1918 pandemic) were all caused by bird-strain flu viruses that made the jump to humans and became contagious from human to human.
From what I've been told, all you need is someone with the bird-strain flu and normal influenza at the same time and you have a veritable laboratory for just such a mutation.
Where are you going to find such a laboratory? Among the world's poor...they're the most likely to be exposed to the bird flu and to have not had a regular flu shot.
How fast will such a thing spread? Fairly quickly...but we'll have some warning once very large portions of those populations start dying off.
Of course, in evolution, nothing is a sure deal. The same mutation that makes the bird-strain flu contagious person to person may also make it relatively benign.
The basic problems are (1) we don't know, (2) we're not prepared for the worst, (3) there is very little we can do to prepare, (4) with travel the way it is now, it's going to spread fast.
If Asia drops dead, I'm calling in sick.
But the Bible also says, with more clarity, that DIVORCE is wrong...why isn't there a clamoring for a constitutional amendment to outlaw divorce?
More people are affected directly or indirectly by heterosexual divorce in this country than could possibly be affected by gay marriage or ending workplace discrimination. Why aren't we working to end divorce? It seems like that is a bigger threat to the institution of marriage. I'm tired of Christians selectively picking out things their religion believes to be a sin that other people are doing and trying to write prohibitions against them into law. Did you know that Justice Scalia actually laments the fact that masturbation isn't regulated?
I'm very glad you have faith in God if that rocks your world...but you don't get to ruin my life because you're superstitious. I really can't put it any plainer than that. I have no idea what happened between the Age of Reason and now but I thought most of this crap was already settled. We don't care how many angels can dance on the head of a pin because there aren't any angels. Personal Gods should be personal. And although I'm ever so happy that you can hear Him, I'm not confident enough in your faith that I should want to have you legislate for the rest of us what you think He told you.
I'm sorry but you are uneducated. You apparently have no idea of the history of how certain terms in the bible have been translated and retranslated. How the Romans weeded out the various gospels that didn't agree with a strong centralized church. How the Bible is chock full of inconsistencies (starting with 2 creation stories in Genesis that don't match). And don't get me started on the fact that the Earth is not only 6,000 years old!
An alternative view that is based on uneducated, antiquated, pseudo-scientific, superstitious mumbo jumbo should be kept to oneself. It has no place in rational discourse in a modern civil society.
I'm sorry if this post offends but the time has come to say no more of this.
You've got to be bloody joking.
What do you think they were trying to do all those years with shock therapy? What about long-time prisoners who return to heterosexual behavior upon leaving? Get a blow job from another guy a sufficient number of times and the next thing you know you're picking out china and shopping for antiques?
Behaviorists never cease to amaze me. Step away from the Skinner; put Walden II on the floor in front of you and no one will get hurt.
Reminds me of these whacked out sociobiology-based conservatives who think that evolution somehow proves that homosexuality is unnatural when the father of sociobiology argued exactly the opposite.
What else could those anti-gay marriage voters possibly buy? Are they all going to turn to Linux? Apple? I don't think so. The Southern Baptist Convention--the largest protestant congregation in the US--has tried unsuccessfully for years to boycott Disney because of progressive non-discriminatory policies and "gay days". There's something decidedly odd about all of this.