Re: Here we go... in http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r19833725 en Sun, 06 Dec 2009 05:20:14 EDT Sun, 06 Dec 2009 05:20:14 EDT Re: Here we go... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19838148 knightmb :
said by PDXPLT See Profile :

Well then, which specific claims in which specific patents should not have been allowed by the USPTO? You're saying that there is at least one claim that is a "general idea" and thus unpatentable. Care to tell us what it is; i.e, provide the exact text for it?
All of these, the patent system shouldn't be able patenting obvious ideas of software. The patent system was invented well before "software" existed and as such companies are taking advantage of this. That's why patent reform is needed in the US patent system anyway, I can't to speak to the patent system in other countries.

»v3.espacenet.com/textdoc?DB=EPOD···S6430275

»v3.espacenet.com/textdoc?DB=EPOD···S6137869

»v3.espacenet.com/textdoc?DB=EPOD···S6104711

»v3.espacenet.com/textdoc?DB=EPOD···S6282574

»v3.espacenet.com/textdoc?DB=EPOD···S6298062

»v3.espacenet.com/textdoc?DB=EPOD···S6128304

»v3.espacenet.com/textdoc?DB=EPOD···S6359880]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19838148 Sun, 20 Jan 2008 05:29:55 EDT Re: Here we go... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19837249 russotto : Several of the essential claims cover using a new type of DNS record to indicate the gateway for a phone number. Since this is the exact sort of thing DNS is designed to do, it's neither novel nor non-obvious.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19837249 Sat, 19 Jan 2008 23:43:47 EDT Re: Here we go... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19837042 PDXPLT : Well then, which specific claims in which specific patents should not have been allowed by the USPTO? You're saying that there is at least one claim that is a "general idea" and thus unpatentable. Care to tell us what it is; i.e, provide the exact text for it?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19837042 Sat, 19 Jan 2008 23:08:03 EDT Re: Here we go... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19835464 supergirl :
said by knightmb See Profile :

said by supergirl See Profile :

I doubt VZ will win this one. Cox won't be hiring idiot lawyers like Vonage. And, why not bring up all the other Cable outfits doing it too? That really does not make much sense. I can see suing Vonage since they were not paying connection fees but Cox does. I pay that $6.50 FCC Access Fee on Cox like I did on Bellsouth.
Unfortunately, it's less about details more about convincing a bunch of non-technical people. Verizon vs. Vonage is a good example of that.
Vonage wasn't paying access fees. That's what VZ was pissed over. Cox pays them. Personally, I think IP based calling systems shouldn't be patentably period. It is the future. :o :uhh:
--
Saving the world keeps me busy. However, I find Earth very primitive from my home planet of Krypton.
-Supergirl]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19835464 Sat, 19 Jan 2008 17:41:53 EDT Re: Here we go... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19834933 bogey780 : 'It's paramount to patenting seeing images in your web browser'

That's a bad analogy. The method for viewing images online had to be created by someone. Just like TCP/UDP/et all had to be created by someone somewhere. An annex to existing technology is still a creation. Now coming up with the idea that people could view images on a browser is to nebulous to patent. But coming up with a way for people to do as such is not.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19834933 Sat, 19 Jan 2008 15:58:20 EDT Re: Here we go... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19834351 knightmb :
said by supergirl See Profile :

I doubt VZ will win this one. Cox won't be hiring idiot lawyers like Vonage. And, why not bring up all the other Cable outfits doing it too? That really does not make much sense. I can see suing Vonage since they were not paying connection fees but Cox does. I pay that $6.50 FCC Access Fee on Cox like I did on Bellsouth.
Unfortunately, it's less about details more about convincing a bunch of non-technical people. Verizon vs. Vonage is a good example of that.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19834351 Sat, 19 Jan 2008 13:44:10 EDT Re: Here we go... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19834048 supergirl : Verizon Communications Inc. (NYSE: VZ - message board) is once again in the plaintiff's seat in a patent infringement case, this time going after Cox Communications Inc.

Verizon filed papers in Eastern District Court of Virginia on Jan. 11 alleging that Cox violated eight patents related to the technology used for completing IP voice calls. Four of the patents were included in Verizon's suit against Vonage Holdings Corp. (NYSE: VG - message board) last year. (See Vonage Ordered to Pay $58M to Verizon.) Verizon was eventually awarded $120 million in damages in that case.

The suit against Cox raises the question of whether Verizon will go after other Cable MSOs in court as well. "They all adhere to the CableLabs PacketCable architecture," says Alan Breznick, senior analyst with Heavy Reading. "So conceivably they could."

-----

Shouldn't they be suing everyone?

The patents Verizon says Cox is infringing upon:

U.S. Patent No. 6,970,930 (not in Vonage case)
U.S. Patent No. 6,104, 711 (Vonage was found to have infringed)
U.S. Patent No. 6,430,275 (Vonage found not to have infringed)
U.S. Patent No. 6,137,869 (Vonage found not to have infringed)
U.S. Patent No. 6,282,574 (Vonage was found to have infringed)
U.S. Patent No. 6,335,927 (not in Vonage case)
U.S. Patent No. 6,292,481 (not in Vonage case)
U.S. Patent No. 6,636,597 (not in Vonage case)

»www.phoneplusmag.com/hotnews/81h···359.html

I doubt VZ will win this one. Cox won't be hiring idiot lawyers like Vonage. And, why not bring up all the other Cable outfits doing it too? That really does not make much sense. I can see suing Vonage since they were not paying connection fees but Cox does. I pay that $6.50 FCC Access Fee on Cox like I did on Bellsouth.
--
Saving the world keeps me busy. However, I find Earth very primitive from my home planet of Krypton.
-Supergirl]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19834048 Sat, 19 Jan 2008 12:50:10 EDT Re: Here we go... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19834042 knightmb :
said by Electro960 See Profile :

If someone stole your protected idea and then used it to take away "lots" of your customers, I'm sure you would sue as well. When I say "lots", thats lots enough to make a cable company brag at the 2008 CES that they're now the 4th largest phone company in the US. Thats a major accomplishment in such little time.
I agree that they shouldn't steal, but such a general idea never should have been patented to begin with. It's paramount to patenting seeing images in your web browser. Sure, you can patent a format format, say xyz for example. But don't go into lawsuit mode just because someone uses jpg files instead of yours to view images with. That's about sums up the whole VoIP fiasco we keep hearing about. They have a patent on something general, just not specific and yet they win in court due to non-technical judges and a jury that was composed of idiots in my opinion. That's why you get to pick out a jury anyway. :p]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19834042 Sat, 19 Jan 2008 12:49:26 EDT Re: Here we go... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19833891 John Galt :
said by ropeguru See Profile :

And I agree with the stealing part but that was NOT my point. If they are going to sue these competitors for infringement, then they should not be able to pick ONLY those that are competition.
They will get around to them all...don't worry about THAT.

What was that comment that Robert Duvall made about the bulls in the movie "Colors"...?

Verizon is an old bull.
--
A is A]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19833891 Sat, 19 Jan 2008 12:21:53 EDT Re: Here we go... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19833749 ropeguru :
said by Electro960 See Profile :

If someone stole your protected idea and then used it to take away "lots" of your customers, I'm sure you would sue as well. When I say "lots", thats lots enough to make a cable company brag at the 2008 CES that they're now the 4th largest phone company in the US. Thats a major accomplishment in such little time.
And I agree with the stealing part but that was NOT my point. If they are going to sue these competitors for infringement, then they should not be able to pick ONLY those that are competition. I cannot believe that none of the other ILECs that are non-competition aren't using these patents also in their VoIP products. All they are trying to do is run everyone else out of business that competes with them. When you get as big as Verizon and subsidized by the govt to get started and then allowed through regulation to become a monopoly, which they essentially are, then it is wrong.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19833749 Sat, 19 Jan 2008 11:59:12 EDT Re: Here we go... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19833725 Electro960 : If someone stole your protected idea and then used it to take away "lots" of your customers, I'm sure you would sue as well. When I say "lots", thats lots enough to make a cable company brag at the 2008 CES that they're now the 4th largest phone company in the US. Thats a major accomplishment in such little time.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19833725 Sat, 19 Jan 2008 11:54:03 EDT Re: Here we go... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19833377 gaforces : Im sure they are asking everyone and anyone who looks like they are using their IP for money.
Then taking them to court if they think they can win one at a time, so as not to overwhelm their legal team.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19833377 Sat, 19 Jan 2008 10:34:10 EDT Here we go... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19833355 ropeguru : Cash cow for the incumbents and major losses for anyone else. I can almost guarantee that other ILECs are using the same technology. Why haven't they sued each other yet. Oh wait, that's right, they won't so they can own it all and our government in its current state will let them.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19833355 Sat, 19 Jan 2008 10:26:32 EDT