Patent Troll Claims Ownership of Podcasting Patent

The Something Awful Forums > Main > General Bullshit > Patent Troll Claims Ownership of Podcasting Patent

Ofc. Sex Robot BPD: Aug 30, 2008

Patent troll Personal Audio is claiming ownership of a patent for podcasting and is now suing Adam Carolla's ACE Broadcasting company and HowStuffWorks.com. In response, a number of other podcasters - including Marc Maron (of WTF with Marc Maron) and Jeff Ullrich (of Earwolf Podcasting Network) are organizing to fight the litigation, describing Personal Audio's tactics as a "shakedown", and claiming that if the top podcasters open their wallets because it's cheaper to settle, it will set an awful precedent for the small-time hobbyist. Personal Audio previously sued Apple, Sirius and Amazon over a claimed patent to online playlists. Rather than fighting the litigation, those companies settled and began paying a licensing fee.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation is also lending its support to the podcasters:

EFF posted:

“We think Personal Audio's podcasting claims are a classic example of an over-broad software patent,” EFF staff attorney Daniel Nazer wrote in an email to Backstage. “But whether these claims would hold up in court is another question and one that it is too early to speculate on.” He added, “The language in software patents describing the claimed material is typically that broad and vague. It's a huge problem.”

The basis of Personal Audio's claim is a 1996 patent (renewed in 2012) for an:

quote:

Apparatus for disseminating a series of episodes represented by media files via the Internet as said episodes become available, said apparatus comprising:

one or more data storage servers,
one or more communication interfaces connected to the Internet for receiving requests received from remotely located client devices, and for responding to each given one of said requests by downloading a data file identified by a URL specified by said given one of said requests to the requesting client device,

(Read the full patent here.)

Maybe in 1996 this was all sci-fi futurey stuff, but in 2012, what that patent describes is so ubiquitous and simple as to seem ludicrous that it could be covered by a patent. Rather than a new technology or invention, the patent seems to cover a particular arrangement of pre-existing technologies. It'd be like claiming a patent to a particular arrangement of hamburger toppings and then suing McDonalds for infringement. EFF puts it best:

quote:

Of course, as with most software patents, this one fails to explain how that “apparatus” would actually work, apparently letting its owner make the ridiculous claim that essentially any apparatus that disseminates episodes infringes its patent.

Patent trolling is a growing problem. The BBC reported that patent trolls cost US companies and individuals about $29 Billion in 2011, forcing 2,150 to mount 5,842 legal defences in that year. Companies that can afford to typically settle rather than fight in court, as the cases can become protracted messes, and the legal fees can quickly trump any potential savings from a successful defense. In response, House representatives have put forward the SHIELD act. The SHIELD act would force the patent trolls to repay the defendant's legal fees if the litigation is unsuccessful. This is significant because patent trolls win less than 25% of the cases that are challenged in court.

Read more:
EFF on the SHIELD act: https://action.eff.org/o/9042/p/dia...action_KEY=9072
EFF on software patent trolls: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/...e-patent-trolls
BBC on patent trolls: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18598559
Decent article on Carolla & Co.: http://www.backstage.com/news/podca...personal-audio/

I'm sure a lot of you listen to podcasts, and I know there are a bunch of goon podcasters as well. So check it out, read up on these Personal Audio jackasses, and if you're a 'Murrican, maybe contact your representative about the SHIELD act.

e:
To clarify the patent since there is some confusion down thread, Personal Audio's patent does get more specific (kinda):

quote:

1. A media player for acquiring and reproducing media program files which represent episodes in a series of episodes as said episodes become available, said media player comprising:
a digital memory,
a communications port coupled to the Internet for transmitting data requests for data identified by specified URLs, for receiving downloaded data identified by said URLs in response to said requests, and for storing said downloaded data in said digital memory,
a processor coupled to said digital memory and to said communications port for performing a sequence of timed update operations, each of said update operations comprising:
downloading via the Internet the current version of a compilation file identified by a predetermined URL and storing said current version of said compilation file in said digital memory, said current version of said compilation file containing attribute data describing one or more episodes of a series of episodes, said attribute data for each given one of said episodes including one or more episode URLs identifying one or more corresponding media files representing said given one of said episodes,
processing the content of said current version of said compilation file to identify attribute data describing one or more newly available episodes in said series of episodes which were not described by attribute data found in a prior version of said compilation file previously identified by said predetermined URL and previously downloaded by an earlier one of said sequence of timed update operations, and
downloading one or more new media files identified by one or more URLs in the attribute data describing said one or more newly available episodes and storing said one or more new media files in said digital memory, and
an output unit for reproducing one or more of the media files representing episodes in said series at the request of the operator of said media player.

13. Apparatus for acquiring and reproducing media files representing episodes in a series of episodes as said episodes become available, said apparatus comprising: ...
23. An audio program player for acquiring and reproducing audio recording files which represent episodes in a group of episodes, said audio player comprising: ...
31. Apparatus for disseminating a series of episodes represented by media files via the Internet as said episodes become available, said apparatus comprising: ...

In any case, they've basically patented a system of modular components. It even cites other, seemingly legitimate patents for the technology that actually enables this system (none of which are owned by Personal Audio). Perhaps a patent lawyer can clarify, but I do not see a difference between this patent, and a patent for the particular arrangement of Lego blocks to build a house, or the particular arrangement of toppings on a hamburger.

If this is somehow legitimate, I wholeheartedly encourage every goon to start playing Technology Mad Libs, stringing together random technologies into an "apparatus", and then filing patents to troll the hell out of future innovators.

Ofc. Sex Robot BPD fucked around with this message at Mar 4, 2013 around 05:09

# ? Mar 3, 2013 19:28

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 26, 2013 05:46

ashgromnies: Jun 19, 2004

Wouldn't the SHIELD act have the side effect of making people less likely to come forward in cases of actual patent violation?

E.g. you invent something as an individual or small company and Apple or whomever steals it. You might not be willing to challenge them if the SHIELD act was in place -- there's no way you could pay their legal fees as a small business should the judge not see it as patent infringement.

# ? Mar 3, 2013 19:36

Schizophrenic Orb: Nov 16, 2009; Intriguing...

quote:

Apparatus for disseminating a series of episodes represented by media files via the Internet as said episodes become available, said apparatus comprising:

one or more data storage servers,
one or more communication interfaces connected to the Internet for receiving requests received from remotely located client devices, and for responding to each given one of said requests by downloading a data file identified by a URL specified by said given one of said requests to the requesting client device,

That sounds so broad you could argue Netflix and Youtube could fall under that too. I'm impressed.

# ? Mar 3, 2013 19:37

Alereon: Feb 6, 2004; For me but LEFTHANDED

ashgromnies posted:

Wouldn't the SHIELD act have the side effect of making people less likely to come forward in cases of actual patent violation?

E.g. you invent something as an individual or small company and Apple or whomever steals it. You might not be willing to challenge them if the SHIELD act was in place -- there's no way you could pay their legal fees as a small business should the judge not see it as patent infringement.

The SHIELD act only applies to patent trolls ("Non-Practicing Entities"), groups that didn't invent the patent and are not using it commercially, just using the fact that the patent exists to stifle innovation.

Alereon fucked around with this message at Mar 3, 2013 around 19:49

# ? Mar 3, 2013 19:43

Drone_Fragger: May 9, 2007

ashgromnies posted:

Wouldn't the SHIELD act have the side effect of making people less likely to come forward in cases of actual patent violation?

E.g. you invent something as an individual or small company and Apple or whomever steals it. You might not be willing to challenge them if the SHIELD act was in place -- there's no way you could pay their legal fees as a small business should the judge not see it as patent infringement.

The English Rule works fine in basically every other western country, it's only the USA that has this dumb "YOU PAY YOUR OWN LEGAL FEES" (american rule) jazz, which basically opens the door to people patent trolling and wasting court time with frivolous lawsuits because if they use dirt cheap lawyers or just represent themselves they've already won.

# ? Mar 3, 2013 19:54

NeekBerm: Jun 25, 2004; Who are you calling chicken?

There is a really awesome podcast of "This America Life" about patent trolls. It's definitely worth a listen.

http://www.thisamericanlife.org/rad...-patents-attack

# ? Mar 4, 2013 00:01

Squared: Apr 28, 2005; GUYS I RANKED ON THAT FIGHT

NeekBerm posted:

There is a really awesome podcast of "This America Life" about patent trolls. It's definitely worth a listen.

http://www.thisamericanlife.org/rad...-patents-attack

Oh nevermind this is just about patent trolls in general. I do love This American Life though, so I'll listen to it.

# ? Mar 4, 2013 00:06

Lumberjack Bonanza: Feb 27, 2011; I'LL CUT THAT POST TO PIECES!

How the gently caress do you own podcasting? It's not like it's a special file format or technology used, it's more of a concept. It's like owning the written word.

# ? Mar 4, 2013 00:11

GWBBQ: Jan 2, 2005

This kind of poo poo will keep happening as long as the US patent system remains first-to-file and allows individuals and entities to claim exclusive ownership of vague concepts.

# ? Mar 4, 2013 00:18

torgo: Aug 12, 2003

Can I patent a business practice where I sue companies that violate my patent? If business practices aren't patentable, maybe I could patent using a computer database to search for patents in violation of my own. Then I would go around shaking down the patent trolls. I wouldn't even have to worry about the SHIELD law, since I would be making practical usage of my patent.

Of course I probably wouldn't have to worry about the SHIELD law anyway, since any sort of patent reform seems unlikely

# ? Mar 4, 2013 00:30

Waldorf Sixpence: Sep 6, 2004; Often harder on Player 2

So they basically patented "downloading a media file from the internet"? Holy poo poo just shut down literally everything, it's over guys.

# ? Mar 4, 2013 01:32

Technogeek: Sep 9, 2002; The literati sent out their
minions to do their bidding.

GWBBQ posted:

This kind of poo poo will keep happening as long as the US patent system remains first-to-file and allows individuals and entities to claim exclusive ownership of vague concepts.

It's not first-to-file yet, that'll be in effect March 16th. As of today, America is the only nation that isn't first-to-file -- you're probably confusing it with first-to-invent. As for the second, that's really more the fault of getting poo poo for funding.

(Edited because I misread GWBBQ's post.)

EDIT AGAIN: Yes, I know it's technically not first-to-file as practiced by the rest of the world. Still, I believe it's close enough for purposes of this discussion.

Technogeek fucked around with this message at Mar 4, 2013 around 01:57

# ? Mar 4, 2013 01:46

Random Stranger: Nov 27, 2009

Lumberjack Bonanza posted:

How the gently caress do you own podcasting? It's not like it's a special file format or technology used, it's more of a concept. It's like owning the written word.

It's not impossible. Someone has to come up with the idea first and run with it. Not every patent case you hear about online is a troll attempting to extort money and without patent law the people best able to exploit a new concept (big companies) would be able to push out the people who innovate.

That said, this is such an obviously bad patent that it should be Exhibit A on how the US Patent Office has been asleep at the switch for the past twenty years and are actively destroying innovation. It fails at both being nonobvious (which is the real hurdle for anyone who would want to patent the concept of "podcasting") and novel, two of the three fundamental requirements of patents and only passes the third because it's so broad that it's a basis for communication on the Internet.

Edit: It occurred to me after I posted that there is a valid patent on podcasting. The Moving Picture Experts Group holds the patent on the MP3 format. Once you get beyond the concept of turning sound into computer files then it's an obvious leap to radio programs so a patent on that will be pretty hard to defend, but there's a perfect example of a reasonable patent that's connected to this.

Random Stranger fucked around with this message at Mar 4, 2013 around 02:05

# ? Mar 4, 2013 01:58

Godholio: Aug 28, 2002; tighten up tone down tuen thuen

Waldorf Sixpence posted:

So they basically patented "downloading a media file from the internet"? Holy poo poo just shut down literally everything, it's over guys.

I want to see him file to seize everything from the RIAA since they're treading on his turf.

# ? Mar 4, 2013 01:59

McScumbag: Jun 30, 2012; FRONT LINE SOLDIER IN THE FIGHT FOR MEN'S RIGHTS

_{reddit 4 eva}

This is pretty loving stupid. I really don't have much to say here.

# ? Mar 4, 2013 02:03

Hogburto: Sep 26, 2005; BASELESS ACCUSATIONS

Lots of other people invented The Internet. And it sits useless. I shall patent Using The Internet.
I claim: the concept of transmitting and receiving data on The Internet as per its designed capability and most obvious function via hardware and software.

I'm not claiming any other uses of The Internet outside of transmitting data. That bounty is available for future innovators to make use of as they may. Who knows what they'll come up with.

# ? Mar 4, 2013 02:10

bunnyofdoom: Mar 29, 2008; Another
confused
census
taker
?

Man, I thought the SHIELD act involved putting Samuel L Jackson in charge of nation defense.

# ? Mar 4, 2013 02:14

Snatch Duster: Feb 20, 2007; Can't post for 10 hours!

bunnyofdoom posted:

Man, I thought the SHIELD act involved putting Samuel L Jackson in charge of nation defense.

Look at how wrong you were.

# ? Mar 4, 2013 02:17

Mosaic Perception: Sep 18, 2009

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...-online-retail/
This is a really good read about poo poo rear end patent trolls getting taken to task by Newegg.

# ? Mar 4, 2013 02:30

Onean: Feb 11, 2010

Ha, that's great.

Lee Cheng, Newegg's Chief Legal Officer posted:

For Newegg's Chief Legal Officer Lee Cheng, it's a huge validation of the strategy the company decided to pursue back in 2007: not to settle with patent trolls. Ever.

"We basically took a look at this situation and said, 'This is bullshit,'" said Cheng in an interview with Ars. "We saw that if we paid off this patent holder, we'd have to pay off every patent holder this same amount. This is the first case we took all the way to trial. And now, nobody has to pay Soverain jack squat for these patents."

---

Then they pop up and say, "Hello, surprise! Give us your money or we will shut you down!" Screw them. Seriously, screw them. You can quote me on that.

# ? Mar 4, 2013 03:54

Gazpacho: Jun 18, 2004; 2 MEGA 2 FAIL

I have a real problem with any patent that reduces to "System and method for doing X that comprises: (1) setting up a system (2) having it do X."

# ? Mar 4, 2013 03:58

Chamale: Jul 11, 2010; Men on the moon and men spinning around the earth and there's not no attention paid to earthly law and order.

Gazpacho posted:

I have a real problem with any patent that reduces to "System and method for doing X that comprises: (1) setting up a system (2) having it do X."

I'm going to patent a system and method for flying cars, by means of having a car that travels above the ground. Future me will become rich by patent trolling.

# ? Mar 4, 2013 04:07

phosdex: Dec 16, 2005; Are you tripping, Agent Dunham?

edit: browsing through the patent it actually gets fairly specific.

phosdex fucked around with this message at Mar 4, 2013 around 04:32

# ? Mar 4, 2013 04:21

raditts: Feb 21, 2001; The Kwanzaa Bot is here to protect me.

Schizophrenic Orb posted:

That sounds so broad you could argue Netflix and Youtube could fall under that too. I'm impressed.

Hell, with HTML5 and/or AJAX driven webpages, couldn't

quote:

Apparatus for disseminating a series of episodes represented by media files via the Internet as said episodes become available, said apparatus comprising:

one or more data storage servers,
one or more communication interfaces connected to the Internet for receiving requests received from remotely located client devices, and for responding to each given one of said requests by downloading a data file identified by a URL specified by said given one of said requests to the requesting client device,

pretty much describe any given website these days? I mean what the gently caress comprises a "media file" anyway? I hope this gets shot down swiftly for the dogshit patent it is.

# ? Mar 4, 2013 04:22

Keystoned: Jan 27, 2012

Damnit, this makes me feel even more guilty for the last few electronics purchases I've made where I price checked Newegg vs Amazon and went with Amazon because I get free 2 day shipping with prime. I love Newegg and have used it for years, I need to just suck it up and wait the extra day or two to support them!

(Amazon is great too but poo poo, I buy enough through them that I should really throw Newegg all my electronics business).

# ? Mar 4, 2013 04:25

Gazpacho: Jun 18, 2004; 2 MEGA 2 FAIL

Not any web site, no, because that's not the entire claim. It's claim 31 if you want to read the whole thing.

# ? Mar 4, 2013 04:26

What Fun: Jul 21, 2007; ~P*R*I*D*E~

Patent: A method for filtering oxygen atoms from a gaseous mix of nitrogen and oxygen, via a series of branching air-sacs operated by the movement of a human diaphragm.

# ? Mar 4, 2013 04:27

raditts: Feb 21, 2001; The Kwanzaa Bot is here to protect me.

Gazpacho posted:

Not any web site, no, because that's not the entire claim. It's claim 31 if you want to read the whole thing.

Well there's also

quote:

33. The apparatus as set forth in claim 31 wherein at least some of said media files contain text data which may be displayed or reproduced in spoken audible form by a requesting client device.

which could apply to any webpage being read by a screen reader. None of it still describes what a "media file" is supposed to be, though.

This whole thing reads like loving gobbledygook.

# ? Mar 4, 2013 04:31

Tornado Lazers: Mar 4, 2008; VAGINA AVOIDER; LEADER OF THE BIBLE STUDY GROUP; WETTEST BLANKET

Does the patent office exclusively employ morons or what?

# ? Mar 4, 2013 04:32

Zo: Feb 22, 2005; LIKE A FOX

Tornado Lazers posted:

Does the patent office exclusively employ morons or what?

The USPTO is notoriously awful. Unprofessional and dysfunctional.

# ? Mar 4, 2013 04:45

dis astranagant: Dec 14, 2006

They're also pretty swamped under the waves of business method and software patents that exist in no law passed by Congress but in some case law from the 80s. 30 years ago they'd have just pointed you to the copyright office for filing this poo poo.

# ? Mar 4, 2013 04:50

Zo: Feb 22, 2005; LIKE A FOX

dis astranagant posted:

They're also pretty swamped under the waves of business method and software patents that exist in no law passed by Congress but in some case law from the 80s. 30 years ago they'd have just pointed you to the copyright office for filing this poo poo.

Irrelevant. The work quota for each examiner is set so the increase in caseload just extends the backlog, and shouldn't affect their examining.

It's just that most of them are literally retarded.

# ? Mar 4, 2013 05:02

Ofc. Sex Robot BPD: Aug 30, 2008

Gazpacho posted:

Not any web site, no, because that's not the entire claim. It's claim 31 if you want to read the whole thing.

I updated the OP to clarify the patent a bit. It's still ridiculously broad and appears to describe an apparatus of technologies without describing any proprietary hardware or software.

"Here are a bunch of things other people invented and patented, but if you string them together this way, now it's my patent."

# ? Mar 4, 2013 05:11

Maldoror: Oct 5, 2003

I still remember back in the late 90's when people would post a RealMedia or MP3 file of themselves talking on their geocities or aol page and call it Internet Radio.

How that went to a "podcast" which is supposed to be better except it isn't still confuses me deeply, even moreso than patent trolling it.

# ? Mar 4, 2013 05:23

Phone: Jul 30, 2005; brb, shortcut

Software patents are a plague in the US. Apple literally has patents for a 4x4 grid of icons and rounded edges on buttons.

# ? Mar 4, 2013 05:51

Gazpacho: Jun 18, 2004; 2 MEGA 2 FAIL

SpaceMost posted:

I updated the OP to clarify the patent a bit. It's still ridiculously broad and appears to describe an apparatus of technologies without describing any proprietary hardware or software.

I'm not a patent attorney, but I will point out one thing: The clauses in the claims explaining that the apparatus has a memory and a processor etc. are boilerplate stuff in computing patents, including valid ones.

Some of the claims in this patent seem stronger to me than others. Claim 31 looks especially weak because I don't see any element of innovation in it, even in the context of 1996. The only thing offered as an innovation is that the server serves an episode list file and media files, but a server that serves any files whatsoever accomplishes the same thing. The player claims (1, 13 and 23) seem stronger in that the player has to apply the semantics of the different files and do other things besides.

Gazpacho fucked around with this message at Mar 4, 2013 around 06:17

# ? Mar 4, 2013 06:06

raditts: Feb 21, 2001; The Kwanzaa Bot is here to protect me.

Maldoror posted:

I still remember back in the late 90's when people would post a RealMedia or MP3 file of themselves talking on their geocities or aol page and call it Internet Radio.

How that went to a "podcast" which is supposed to be better except it isn't still confuses me deeply, even moreso than patent trolling it.

Podcasts are pretty much what you're talking about, but on an RSS feed.

# ? Mar 4, 2013 06:22

WoodrowSkillson: Feb 24, 2005; It's my new shirt

Maldoror posted:

How that went to a "podcast" which is supposed to be better except it isn't still confuses me deeply, even moreso than patent trolling it.

These things called "ipods" became very popular about 10 years ago.

# ? Mar 4, 2013 06:28

Agent Escalus: Oct 5, 2002; Link had high spirits, but lost his bottle of gin after drinking to the pint of no return. Dis-spirited over his ale-ment and at Lagerheads, he sought brew-prints for beer.

This is probably going to put them right in the crosshairs of Annonymous and other hacktivist vigilante groups. Not that getting targeted and attacked will deter them, but I fully believe some sparks will fly.

# ? Mar 4, 2013 07:20

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 26, 2013 05:46

ded: Oct 27, 2005; Kooler than Jesus

Wait. So you can patent voice recordings in a digital format. Sweet. I'm going to patent farts and makes millions.

# ? Mar 4, 2013 08:04

«‹›2 »

The Something Awful Forums > Main > General Bullshit > Patent Troll Claims Ownership of Podcasting Patent