 NowVOIPIn the beginning there was POTS
join:2006-03-05
Round Lake, IL | reply to priller
Re: Vonage is just the first!!! DT, i would hate to disagree, but you are wrong. This lawsuit, has bearing on only a select few VOIP companies that actually using the "patented" technology. There are several including Cable that do not use the technology and as such VZ would be powerless to stop them.
--
The revolution will be televised! |
|
priller
join:2000-10-20
Gainesville, VA
1 edit | That could very well be.
However, one key point of Vonage's defense was that they use Commercial Off-the-shelf or OpenSource software to operate the network. If true, that would strongly imply that many others are exposed to the same patent infringement.
If the above is true ... I've often wondered if VZ was going after the right people. Shouldn't they be going after the developers that wrote the software that contains the patents instead of the network operator that is using it? |
|
 LokerPremium
join:2004-07-11
Fargo, ND | reply to NowVOIP
said by NowVOIP:DT, i would hate to disagree, but you are wrong. This lawsuit, has bearing on only a select few VOIP companies that actually using the "patented" technology. There are several including Cable that do not use the technology and as such VZ would be powerless to stop them. Verizon's patents are really quite broad....thats why I am still confident this is going to get tossed on appeal...
If it does not though it could mean hell for a lot of VoIP outfits because of the broadness of the patents...
--
"While preceding your entrance with a grenade is a good tactic inQuake, it can lead to problems if attempted at work." -- C Hacking |
|
Reviews:
 ·Comcast
| reply to priller
said by priller:That could very well be. However, one key point of Vonage's defense was that they use Commercial Off-the-shelf or OpenSource software to operate the network. If true, that would strongly imply that many others are exposed to the same patent infringement. If the above is true ... I've often wondered if VZ was going after the right people. Shouldn't they be going after the developers that wrote the software that contains the patents instead of the network operator that is using it? With verizon doing this. Not only will they kill off some voip providers , but they will also kill off some OSS devs and companies using OSS.
This has a ripple affect , just like sco did. Now people will hawk their wares saying see OSS is bad for business you open yourself up for lawsuits in the future.
Admitting they used OSS is bad, for OSS , but I am sure MS and other closed vendors are licking their chops at this as a side effect.
--
"It's always funny until someone gets hurt......and then it's absolutely friggin' hysterical!" |
|
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
 ·ViaTalk
| reply to priller
If Vonage is using off the shelf hardware and Open source shouldn't Verizion be going after them not Vonage.
Would that not be the equivalent of Company Y saying they have the patents on Gas Caps used in GM trucks then suing UPS for violating the patent. When in fact GM was a fault. (note: I don't know if UPS uses GM trucks or not just an example.) |
|
nozzer
join:2004-06-25
Waltham, MA | reply to Loker
Not only are they broad, they seem to fail the "obviousness" test, making a mockery of the whole idea of "process patents".
I mean the idea that someone could patent something as obvious as using a server to translate IP addresses to phone numbers to route calls, as recently as 2000 seems ridiculous to me. There must be prior art there somewhere.
Thank god I have an overseas (where this kind of process patent ISN'T recognized) VOIP provider as backup |
|
 GooberPremium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
kudos:4 | reply to Loker
said by Loker:said by NowVOIP:DT, i would hate to disagree, but you are wrong. This lawsuit, has bearing on only a select few VOIP companies that actually using the "patented" technology. There are several including Cable that do not use the technology and as such VZ would be powerless to stop them. Verizon's patents are really quite broad....thats why I am still confident this is going to get tossed on appeal... If it does not though it could mean hell for a lot of VoIP outfits because of the broadness of the patents... The thing is, a lot of these patent were filed 10 or so years ago. I can't recall the VOIP landscape back then. I know there were a few companies like Net2Phone that were messing around in that space several years ago, but was it prior to VZ's filings? |
|
 nixenRockin' the BoxenPremium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA | reply to BosstonesOwn
said by BosstonesOwn:This has a ripple affect , just like sco did. Now people will hawk their wares saying see OSS is bad for business you open yourself up for lawsuits in the future. Really? And how've things been working out for SCO, lately?
--
Everyday, thousands of new cars are delivered to their new owners with poorly-selected radio station presets. |
|
nixenRockin' the BoxenPremium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA | reply to Goober
said by Goober:said by Loker:said by NowVOIP:DT, i would hate to disagree, but you are wrong. This lawsuit, has bearing on only a select few VOIP companies that actually using the "patented" technology. There are several including Cable that do not use the technology and as such VZ would be powerless to stop them. Verizon's patents are really quite broad....thats why I am still confident this is going to get tossed on appeal... If it does not though it could mean hell for a lot of VoIP outfits because of the broadness of the patents... The thing is, a lot of these patent were filed 10 or so years ago. I can't recall the VOIP landscape back then. I know there were a few companies like Net2Phone that were messing around in that space several years ago, but was it prior to VZ's filings? You're assuming that Verizon didn't buy the requisite patents so that they could put the screws to the rest of the industry.
--
Everyday, thousands of new cars are delivered to their new owners with poorly-selected radio station presets. |
|
| reply to Loker
I doubt Congress will allow the courts to let Verizon's patent tricks kill off every VoIP company.
--
low cost and fast speed is what customers want in broadband |
|
 sitrix
join:2002-04-15
Tacoma, WA | reply to dcurrey
Verizon will, they just needed a win against a known company to reinforce their case...  |
|
| reply to NowVOIP
They definitely won't have much luck against the cable companies. The major providers are using solutions that are based on Texas Instruments or Broadcom solutions so they have huge patent portfolios that they could use against Verizon. At worst they come to an accomodation that the cross licenses the patents that Verizon claims to have. At best the Verizon patents get revoked. |
|
Reviews:
·Comcast
| reply to nixen
sco is dead , but the ripple it caused in the linux / unix world was heard.
Just like sco verizon may have a bad case but they have the money to back it up.
This if it goes mainstream will be a scare tactic to some business that was looking to migrate.
--
"It's always funny until someone gets hurt......and then it's absolutely friggin' hysterical!" |
|
|
|
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
 ·AT&T Southeast
| reply to AJICQ499087
said by AJICQ499087:I doubt Congress will allow the courts to let Verizon's patent tricks kill off every VoIP company. Want to make a bet. Telco's lobby |
|
| said by hayabusa3303:said by AJICQ499087:I doubt Congress will allow the courts to let Verizon's patent tricks kill off every VoIP company. Want to make a bet. Telco's lobby You mean you think Verizon will be the only company allowed to provide VoIP? That would mean no other telephone, cable or any other company could provide VoIP. It would be a court ordered monopoly given to Verizon. There is no way Congress would let that happen.
--
low cost and fast speed is what customers want in broadband |
|
GooberPremium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
kudos:4 | Congress makes the patent laws. The intent explicitly is to grant a monopoly.
On the other hand, ocassionally compulsory licenses will be required. |
|
pandoraPremium
join:2001-06-01
Outland
kudos:1 Reviews:
·ooma
·Google Voice
·Future Nine Corp..
·Comcast
| reply to Goober
said by Goober:The thing is, a lot of these patent were filed 10 or so years ago. I can't recall the VOIP landscape back then. I know there were a few companies like Net2Phone that were messing around in that space several years ago, but was it prior to VZ's filings? According to the Net2Phone about page, they've been in business doing VOIP since 1996.
»www.net2phone.com/about/
--
"People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use." |
|
GooberPremium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
kudos:4 | Unfortunately, my work firewall blocks access to that site. If I recall though, wasn't the early N2P more of a PC to PC calling system? |
|
pandoraPremium
join:2001-06-01
Outland
kudos:1 Reviews:
·ooma
·Google Voice
·Future Nine Corp..
·Comcast
| said by Goober:Unfortunately, my work firewall blocks access to that site. If I recall though, wasn't the early N2P more of a PC to PC calling system? It was PC to phone network. I used it early on when it was free to make some long distance calls to friends with POTS. Quality wasn't great, and there was too long a lag. However, it was VOIP without any doubt.
--
"People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use." |
|
| reply to dcurrey
said by dcurrey:If Vonage is using off the shelf hardware and Open source shouldn't Verizion be going after them not Vonage. Would that not be the equivalent of Company Y saying they have the patents on Gas Caps used in GM trucks then suing UPS for violating the patent. When in fact GM was a fault. (note: I don't know if UPS uses GM trucks or not just an example.) This is exactly what happens in many patent infringement cases. The law allows the patent holder to go after anyone using the patented idea even users. They will usually sue the users with the deepest pockets. |
|
