Apple Sued Over iTunes UI 502
An anonymous reader writes "It apppears that Contois Music Technology is suing Apple Computer over the UI to its iTunes music software. The suit claims patent infringement over a patent owned by Contois."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Apple Sued Over iTunes UI
Related Links Top of the: day, week, month.
"Ninety percent of baseball is half mental." -- Yogi Berra
Sweet! (Score:2, Funny)
Open and Shut Case (Score:3, Funny)
Then again I also voted to acquit Michael Jackson...
Similar... (Score:5, Funny)
But I do have to admit that the two referenced images look eerily similar
-c
Re:Part of the basis... (Score:2, Funny)
Yeah, because you know that no one had ever thought of organizing music by genre, or much less ARTIST, before then!
Re:1995 Prior Art? Project Jukebox (Score:4, Funny)
Re:I can't believe the guts of this lawyer (Score:1, Funny)
Rediculous: Subject to being diculed twice, at least.
Re:Open and Shut Case (Score:1, Funny)
--AC
--I am not a script
Paris Hilton (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Paris Hilton (Score:3, Funny)
Re:LOL! (Score:5, Funny)
"Yeah. And it's only been out for, what 4 and a half years now (Jan 2001)?
Longer, actually.
Apple bought SoundJam MP from Casady & Greene, and used it as the basis for iTunes. In fact, early version of iTunes have dialog boxes and controls identical to SoundJam, right down to screen placement when they're opened.
My SoundJam CD has a 1999 copyright date, and the about SoundJam file indicates a 1998 copyright date.
So poor old Contois, your "patents" have been infringed for far longer than you think, at least for 7 years.
And what about the software used by the first portible MP3 player, that surely must have infringed some of your patents, and yet, you did nothing about it, it seems, until 2005.
Indeed, the folks who own and license the rights to USB and FireWire certainly must be liable for SOME damages, what with their reckless aiding and abetting the transfer of bits to and from hard drives and flash RAM in portible MP3 players.
Such sloth on the part of your legal department surely has earned them all a collective bitchslap!
I would replace them all instantly! I hear that the SCO legal team will be looking for work soon.
I'm blown away (Score:3, Funny)
One skilled in the art will recognize that it is not essential to have the computer system separate from the media playing device. It is conceivable to have the computer system physically incorporated in part or in whole into the media playing device.
It is noted that the embodiment of the invention discusses the use of a standard known computer, where in fact all components of the computer can be replaced with any new advancing technologies, like holographics or voice activated systems and still not depart from the intent of the invention of allowing easier user access to the underlying media data base information.
The preferred embodiment of the invention discusses the control of only a single media playing device, like a player piano. However, one skilled in the art would easily understand how to simultaneously control several media playing devices with the same control system in view of this disclosure. For example, the coordination of the control of a player piano along with a music video is contemplated.
Although this embodiment focuses upon the application of the software to control a player piano or video player, one skilled in the art will realize that this software interface could be used on any media playing device where a user needs to select what media item is to be played from a vast media data base. For example, it is contemplated to operate an electric guitar, a computer controlled multimedia system, a pipe organ, a television, a movie video player, or a computer screen.
Wow. So the player doesn't even have to be outside of the computer. So, iTunes, Zinf (Freeamp), Winamp, Windows Media Player, XMMS, Amarok, RhythmBox, GStreamer, well, just about every media player infringes. Even the holographic, voice-activated system that controls 73 copies of Winamp over the net infringes. Heck, if I use an interface to control playback of something on my computer screen, it infringes (assuming a filesystem counts as a database, which it should). I'm sure several million software writers would be interested to know about this. After reading the whole patent, I'm not really sure what, exactly, if anything, they are patenting. I know it has to do with media, and playback, and maybe something about automatic, but beyond that, I'm lost. Is it on a computer? How about an iPod? Does a stereo count? Is it over the internet? Are the interface and the player seperate, or not? What is a player? Is it a screen, a TV, a Playstation, a pair of speakers, or none (or all) of those?
I though patents were for implementations, not abstract, all-encompassing ideas...
In other news, 5 year-old Sally Jones was sued by Steven Olson of St. Paul, MN, after being observed in her backyard swinging in a way [uspto.gov] such that she infringed on his patent. He is claiming damages of over $1 million.
Re:Of course (Score:3, Funny)
I can't...that's not in the dictionary.
Re:I can't believe the guts of this lawyer (Score:2, Funny)