Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Creative Sues Apple, Seeks Injunction

virividox said:
assuming they can prove it was an invention, and that apple had not invented it themselves yet.

i actually think the first to file is a better system, as it provides for certainty of the law - obviously it has its draw backs, as industrial espionage can be used to steal an idea, then patent it before the creator can patent itthemselves. but you cant have it both ways
Click to expand...

Because the patent was granted, there is "presumption of validity," which means that Apple has the burden to prove that Creative's invention was not patentable for one reason or another.

The idea behind the "first to invent" system is that it helps small inventors who don't have as many resources as a large corporation who could invent later but spend big bucks to hurry through the patent application process. The US system will likely be going away in a few years if for no other reason than to continue to the worldwide patent standardization that has been going on, but the small inventors lobby is fighting it tooth and nail.
 
Assuming Creative do have a case, that would mean they should then sue every other mp3 player manufacturer. Come on people we're talking about a company from an area of the world notorious for copying other products. :rolleyes:
 
Zeke said:
I think Apple may actually be in trouble here. Here's the patent:

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-...LL&s1=6928433.PN.&OS=PN/6928433&RS=PN/6928433

The important stuff:

What is claimed is:

1. A method of selecting at least one track from a plurality of tracks stored in a computer-readable medium of a portable media player configured to present sequentially a first, second, and third display screen on the display of the media player, the plurality of tracks accessed according to a hierarchy, the hierarchy having a plurality of categories, subcategories, and items respectively in a first, second, and third level of the hierarchy, the method comprising: selecting a category in the first display screen of the portable media player; displaying the subcategories belonging to the selected category in a listing presented in the second display screen; selecting a subcategory in the second display screen; displaying the items belonging to the selected subcategory in a listing presented in the third display screen; and accessing at least one track based on a selection made in one of the display screens.

2. The method of selecting a track as recited in claim 1 wherein the accessing at least one track comprises selecting a subcategory in the second display screen and playing a plurality of tracks associated with the selected subcategory.

3. The method of selecting a track as recited in claim 1 wherein the accessing at least one track comprises selecting a subcategory and adding the tracks associated with the selected subcategory to a playlist.

4. The method of selecting a track as recited in claim 1 wherein the accessing at least one track comprises selecting an item in the third display screen and playing at least one track associated with the selected item.

5. The method of selecting a track as recited in claim 1 wherein the accessing at least one track comprises selecting an item in the third display screen and adding at least one track associated with the selected item to a playlist.

6. The method of selecting a track as recited in claim 1 wherein the accessing at least one track comprises one of playing or adding to a playlist at least one track associated with a selected one of the category, subcategory, and item.

7. The method of selecting a track as recited in claim 1 wherein the accessing at least one track is made after the presentation of the third display screen by reverting back to one of the second and first display screens, the second display screen presented sequentially after the third display screen.

8. The method of selecting a track as recited in claim 1 further comprising selecting one of the items displayed in the third display screen and presenting a listing of items associated with the selected item in a fourth sequentially presented display screen.

9. The method of selecting a track as recited in claim 1 wherein the category genre is selected in the first display screen from available categories that include at least artist, album, and genre; and the subcategories listed in the second display screen comprise a listing of at least one genre type and one of the at least one genre type is selected.

10. The method of selecting a track as recited in claim 9 further comprising displaying in the third display screen at least one album associated with the selected genre type and selecting one of the at least one albums displayed in the third display screen and presenting a listing of tracks associated with the selected album in a fourth sequentially presented display screen.

11. The method of selecting a track as recited in claim 1 wherein the category artist is selected in the first display screen from available categories that include at least artist, album, and genre; the subcategories listed in the second display screen comprise a listing of names of artists and a first artist name is selected; and the items displayed in the third display screen comprises at least one album associated with the first artist name.

12. The method of selecting a track as recited in claim 1 wherein the track is a music track, accessing at least one track comprises accessing a track title in the third display screen, and the track is played in response to the access.

13. The method of selecting a track as recited in claim 1 wherein receipt of the selection in the first display screen results in an automatic transition of the first display screen into the second display screen and receipt of the selection in the second display screen results in an automatic transition of the second display screen into the third display screen.

14. The method of selecting a track as recited in claim 1 wherein the category selected in the first display screen is from a top level of the hierarchy.

15. The method of selecting a track as recited in claim 1 wherein the category selected in the first display screen is a category from a level at least one level below the top level of the hierarchy.

16. The method of selecting a track as recited in claim 1 wherein the plurality of categories comprise a list of artist names, the plurality of subcategories comprise a list of album names and the plurality of items comprise a list of track names.

Such broad language is used that very clearly describes the method for organizing used in ipods (even mentions playlists which I thought the Zens didn't even have). Apple will probably have to try and state that what they did was so obvious that they didn't need a patent (like patenting breathing). Hopefully this is the case like this one:

Patent 6,618,857 Method and system for installing software on a computer system.
Click to expand...


I'm a doctor, not a lawyer....in English please. Otherwise you will force me to go into the complete biochemical metabolic pathways of Gluconeogenesis! Mwa-ha-ha-ha-ha! :D
 
i don't get how someone can patent sorting music by artist, genre, and song. what other way is there to do it.

does kenmore have to pay royalties every time they build a fridge with separate drawers for fruits, vegetables, and meats?

it just a simple common sense way of sorting things. i think it is ridiculous that such a thing could be patented in the first place.
 
I think Creative has got no legs to stand on here. They patented a file tree? Apple has used that organization system for a while.

Did Creative develop this media player first or just file the patent? Did they get a notion as to what Apple was doing with the iPod and file it so they could sue down the road?

It sounds to me like Creative is just bitter over their inability to grab much of the market. They surely didn't patent the integration of iTunes and the iPod. They also didn't patent the scroll wheel or the exact interface. They just described a branching organization pattern similar to many HD directories.

Too bad this will be in the US and no the UK. It'd be nice to force the loser to pay all court costs. Maybe that would prevent people from filing silly lawsuits.
 
Zeke said:
I think Apple may actually be in trouble here. Here's the patent:

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-...LL&s1=6928433.PN.&OS=PN/6928433&RS=PN/6928433

[...]

Such broad language is used that very clearly describes the method for organizing used in ipods (even mentions playlists which I thought the Zens didn't even have). Apple will probably have to try and state that what they did was so obvious that they didn't need a patent (like patenting breathing). Hopefully this is the case like this one:

Patent 6,618,857 Method and system for installing software on a computer system.
Click to expand...

First, you don't need to patent everything you invent. A patent offers legal protections against competitors doing the same thing, but just because you don't patent something doesn't mean someone else can jump in after you've invented something, patent it, and steal your ideas.

Second, related to the first, I agree that this is broad enough to encompass iPods. However, I think it's been pretty universally opined that there is massive prior art here and the patent itself shouldn't have withstood the initial approval stage, much less a full court challenge.

Unfortunately, patent investigators are human. Worse, they are often hopelessly over-worked humans. They make mistakes. Lots of them. Those mistakes stand, however, until they are challenged in court as Creative is doing.

Again, unless I'm missing something, this will only result in Creative's patent being torn up. Anyone see anything in there which is not covered by prior art?

Heirarchal organization: Any file system since around 1981 or so.

Metadata-based heirarchal organization: Practically any media organizer from the early-mid-90's would apply there. And the patents don't claim to predate that so far as I can tell.

Playing the track when clicked: Macintosh interface, 1984.

The only "unique" claim here is "Limited User Interface", which isn't really a highly specific term, and could just as easily describe keyboard navigation within Finder column views as iPod navigation. Seems to be a distinction of dubious value.

Again, I might be missing something. Maybe this will bring Apple down for good, who knows. We haven't had a good "Apple Death Knell" lately. But, I doubt it. It just looks like a PR stunt from a floundering company devoid of any original ideas.
 
This is absurd. America is addicted to lawyers and suing. If Creative held a better market share of portable music players in the U.S. this lawsuit would never have happened...:rolleyes:
 
Hmmm........funny how this arrises again with the announcement of URGE. Creative and Microsoft working together to battle the competition? :rolleyes:
 
I can see it now....

Apple's lawyer speaking to the jury:

"Creative claims we have violated their hierarchial file display and selection methodology patent for an MP3 device. We only make one, so called, MP3 device and it's an iPod Shuffle and it does not have a display so it does not violate Creative's patent.

Apple is one of the world's oldest computer companies, the iPod and the Ipod Nano are the two smallest iterations of our computers.

See they play games, have a calendar, a clock, keep your contacts, stores/displays photos, and acts as a hard drive when connected to another computer. The iPod even plays video to a television screen. Oh, and they also play MP3's, as well as music in other formats.

We have been using a file hierarchy system in our computers since the 80's and the iPod and iPod Nano continue in that venerable tradition.

Thank you"

Creative loses. I just see it coming.
 
Oh my god, get over it Creative. Your products aren't as appealing as apples, so you decide to try to sue them?


Lame... so lame. Get a life:rolleyes:
 
Xtremehkr said:
My first MP3 player was a Creative Nomad III, but it was expensive and did not really hold all that much music.
Click to expand...

My first MP3 player was a Creative Nomad and it was cheap because it was part of a deal Apple did before the iPod came out... it held a WOPING 32MB and cost about $100 on this special deal although I scored it for free.
:D

I tell you what... those were the days when you could listen to the same monotone album again and again and again................... yeah, no, it really sucked
 
Does anyone know where creative players are made?
if this goes a head wont they have to stop importanting their own MP3 players along with every other MP3 device
what about everything eletronic
 
The PTO actually gave a patent for this crap?

They do use computers over there, right? Have they ever heard of a file tree before?

Un-fing-believeable.
 
Welcome to sue happy-land

Creative does not want Apple to stop. They want a piece of the pie. Don't rule out getting some nut job judge that will rule in favor of Creative. It is Apple vs. everybody else.
 
1984 said:
The iPod interface is based on the OS X columns view interface so if anything Creative are the ones who copied Apple.
Click to expand...

iPod shipped well before any versin of OS X with column views did.
 
Zeke said:
I think Apple may actually be in trouble here. Here's the patent:

The important stuff:

What is claimed is:

1. A method of selecting at least one track from a plurality of tracks stored in a computer-readable medium of a portable media player configured to present sequentially a first, second, and third display screen on the display of the media player, the plurality of tracks accessed according to a hierarchy, the hierarchy having a plurality of categories, subcategories, and items respectively in a first, second, and third level of the hierarchy, the method comprising: selecting a category in the first display screen of the portable media player; displaying the subcategories belonging to the selected category in a listing presented in the second display screen; selecting a subcategory in the second display screen; displaying the items belonging to the selected subcategory in a listing presented in the third display screen; and accessing at least one track based on a selection made in one of the display screens.


Patent 6,618,857 Method and system for installing software on a computer system.
Click to expand...

OK, I need to file a patent for some SQL I just wrote the other day at work. I populate one list box with states then when a user selects a state, I populate another with list of counties in that state. When user selects a county I populate with list of cities in that county. Cool! My first patent.
 
Prior art is of course the portable music player called Macintosh.

- portable (it had a handle)
- hierarchical interface (folders within folders)
- music player (according to Apple Corps.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back