Creative Sues Apple, Seeks Injunction

[synp]

If they have a leg to stand on, why didn't they do this years ago?

It just smacks of "well, looks like we can't beat them with our products, so we'll have to beat them in a courtroom".

If they prevail, Apple may change their interface to something not covered by the patent. Apple will be forced to pay for each iPod that's already out there. The longer they wait, the more "paying" iPods are out there.

I don't know about the US, but in some countries waiting too long may be taken as evidence that they don't mind the infringement. I'm sure Creative's lawyers would time it correctly.

 

[synp]

The US patent system is far, far worse than what you describe: computer science degrees aren't acceptable credentials for patent examiners. You have, at best, non-CS electrical engineers (computers are electrical, right?) examining what are essentially software patents, and they are quite frankly clueless as to the state and history of the software art. They aren't merely "making mistakes", they're patently unqualified for the job. To make matters worse, patents are written in an absurd legalese (see above) that's difficult for an experienced software engineer to decipher. Anybody else has no chance, but they're likely to grant the patent anyway because they don't want to appear ignorant.

The expertise of the patent examiners is beside the point. The big issue is incentives. If creative file a patent application and the patent examiner rejects it, then Creative sues the patent office. The examiner gets deposed, has to testify, and generally wastes his time. It's far far easier for the patent examiner to just check that the application looks OK, is well-formatted and uses the correct language, and they accept them.

After the patent has been accepted, if there are any legal complications, it's somebody else's problem - Apple gets sued rather than the patent office. That's the way they like it.

This is the reason why companies like BT manage to patent the hyperlink. That's also the reason why 90% of patents are deemed unenforceable the first time they're challenged in court.

 

[steve_hill4]

iPod shipped well before any versin of OS X with column views did.

Well, NeXTSTEP, (1988), relied heavily on column view and since OS X was an evolution of NeXTSTEP......

 

[steve_hill4]

11 positives? What's wrong with you people?

Hoping that Creative will lose, forced into bankrupcy and fade away into the ether?

Seriously, I think a lot around here want to see this expose Creative for a bunch of greedy, unimaginitive suits. Creative were and are a good sound card company. They branched out by buying up an mp3 player company in 2000, entered the market a little too early with some bad products, got overtaken by Apple, now decided they are too far behind and losing too much money so they'll try to eliminate the competition.

In many ways, I hope Apple have also filed some patents regarding the use of touch sensitive devices built into mp3 players, (touch/scroll/click wheel), and they can stop the manufacture of most others on the market until a redesign.

I also hope any lawyer/judge asks why just Apple and not all other manufacturers if they are genuinely trying to protect their intellectual property.

 

[RacerX]

And the point you make about filtering the data is important - not the column view. Unless someone is going to how me something really cool I didn't know about my Mac, I can't use column view to perform this sort of filtering - it works on Files and Directories in the file system, not meta-data contained in / describing the files (I don't about the actual implementation details of the SmallTalk object browser but this remains a different application).

That is because your only experience with this is in the Finder... lets look at other examples (which predate 1999 so that they qualify as prior art).

NetInfo Manager

Project Builder

​

Ironically, the more I read this thread, the more I am beginning to think Creative might have a case - it is different from a simple column view, it is a novel application of filtering data that solves a specific problem.

The problem is that using column view to filter data isn't a novel idea at all. I know that the idea has been in use at NeXT and within the NeXT community since 1989 (and I'm not talking about as a file viewer, I'm talking about data structures).

Need other examples of this in action... addresses from NeXT Mail and Rhapsody MailViewer, DarkForrest from NEXTSTEP/OPENSTEP and Nisus Thesaurus from Mac OS X.

Nisus Thesaurus

​

Using column view for organizing and presenting data is neither unique to Creative or a new and novel application of the presentation.

When I say they have nothing... I really mean they have nothing. They should never have been awarded this patent, and the real break down in the system is the fact that patents are not being properly refereed (due in large part to the flood of patents over the last few years).

 

[mattyturner]

This is really bad for Creative, this reminds me of AMD suing Intel not long ago. As others have said, why are they just suing Apple, plenty of other people make MP3 players with broadly similar interface.

Creative will not win and they'll just have more egg on their face.

 

[hvfsl]

This is just Creative's way. They sued Aureal Audio back in the 90s (who made better sound cards than Creative, some of the Aureal tec is still better than what Creative use). Aureal ran into financial trouble so Creative bought them and then just sat on the tec so now one else could use it.

 

[SPUY767]

This reminds me of Howard Stern:

"I invented files and folders robin. . ."

"You tell 'em Fred!"

 

[kresh]

My last thought on the matter...

By the time it takes 2 years to go to trial and the 2 to 3 year appeal process, Apple will have developed something radically different.

The rapid advance in the technology of this product class is going to outrun the outcome of this case. My only concern would be if the court awarded a license fee per iPod that was sold between x to y time period.

Hopefully Creative won't survive that long.

 

[SPUY767]

the overall maturity level of the boards just dropped 30%. Do you REALLY think a judge is going to base his or her decision on the wares they own?

No, but they will think about their pocketbooks. My bet is that the judge will be a heavy investor. Given that I can't think of a single mutual fund that has creative as a stock, but I can think of plenty that hold Apple, and the chances that he has Aooke stock might be pretty good, don't fool yourself into thinking that won't be in the back of his mind. In a case this obvious, something like protecting one's finances will take a front seat, believe me.

 

[iAlan]

How is Creative's stock price on this announcement?
If they loose where will it go then?

Not a good strategy to keep your company afloat...

 

[iJawn108]

How lame, they copy the iPods... uhh everything it fails to be the most sucessful player and than they hire their lawyers to find any little loophole they can use against apple.

 

[SPUY767]

I just had an epiphany! Creative should sue NewEgg.com! Check out NewEgg's drill down feature! It's exactly what is described by Creative's patent with the exception of columns. Or, on second though, they shouls shut the *#$(&^($&@#(&$&@_#$(@#&$(*!@&#)!@^#()!@#$ up!

 

[MrCrowbar]

FYI, all stores are down:

 

[gleepskip]

I love it when the stores go down.

Hey, I wonder if the 5th Avenue store will close when new product arrives and they have to remerchandise the store?

It's supposed to be a 24x7 store, right?

Another question: Will the 5th Ave cube remain as it is (glass only) or will Apple use the space for posters or other merchandising?

 

[MrCrowbar]

I love it when the stores go down.

Hey, I wonder if the 5th Avenue store will close when new product arrives and they have to remerchandise the store?

It's supposed to be a 24x7 store, right?

Another question: Will the 5th Ave cube remain as it is (glass only) or will Apple use the space for posters or other merchandising?

LOL. Guess it would be lame just ringing new stuff on the shelves while custumors are shopping. I'd love to see a stickie note with "We'll be back soon." at the frint door when they put up the new products.

Store discussion on https://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=2414149&posted=1#post2414149

 

[goosnarrggh]

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.

It's more than a patent for a filesystem.

If you read the abstract, it seems clear that it's a patent for an overlapping hierarchy of categories that exist based on a database that goes beyond the physical layout of the files. The novel idea, apparently, is that a single media track can exist as the endpoint of several different top-level categories.

eg. you can reach a song by starting at the top level with the Artist name, then browsing down to the Album name, and then reaching the list of individual tracks by that artist on that album. Or, you can start with the music genre at the top level, then browse down to the individual Artist, and then get a listing of all relevant tracks. Or, you can start by looking for an Album name, and view all songs on that album regardless of the Artist responsible for the track. (Think compilation album here...)

Would this way of organising tracks necessarily have seemed obvious to somebody back in 2001 before any Nomads or iPods had yet been sold?

At the very least, though, it seems clear to me that the iPod Shuffle certainly doesn't fall under the reach of this patent.

 

[PCMacUser]

How lame, they copy the iPods... uhh everything it fails to be the most sucessful player and than they hire their lawyers to find any little loophole they can use against apple.

They're all corrupt greedy companies - Apple included. All they want is your money. And they'll get it at any cost!
ENDPROC

 

[AlmostThere]

That is because your only experience with this is in the Finder... lets look at other examples (which predate 1999 so that they qualify as prior art).

(images cut)

The problem is that using column view to filter data isn't a novel idea at all. I know that the idea has been in use at NeXT and within the NeXT community since 1989 (and I'm not talking about as a file viewer, I'm talking about data structures).

Need other examples of this in action... addresses from NeXT Mail and Rhapsody MailViewer, DarkForrest from NEXTSTEP/OPENSTEP and Nisus Thesaurus from Mac OS X.

Thank you for that full reply.

I agree that the thesaurus example is similar to media browsing, although the class browser and netinfo are not because, from the examples posted, I do not see how they allow parallel or upwards movement up the hierarchy (while moving left to right on the display). For example, a class browser would need to allow navigation down an inheritance path to a child (left to right) and then up to parents (left to right). Just to clarify - this makes a lot more sense in terms of multiple inheritance.

[second edit]Does the thesaurus predate this patent? OS X is 2001, no?
In fact going further, many of these programmes are simply appear to be using a column view as a hierarchical representation of the hierarchical data structures. The point about the media is that, for example, an Album is a choice at several different levels of the tree. That is the similarity that needs to be made - the data is inherently flat (unlike a class hierarchy which isn't).

Using column view for organizing and presenting data is neither unique to Creative or a new and novel application of the presentation.

I don't think you have demonstrated this, in terms of showing prior art.

The problem with a media player is presenting and navigating a hierarchy with the limited screen resources of a mobile device. This is what needs to be demonstrated as prior art, not assorted examples from a computer screen where multiple columns are used.

IMHO, this is the difference in the actual application when compared with the many small screen devices that were around in the 90s (and even today) where many still try and apply the window / menu / icon displays that everybody is familiar with.

This is not to say that prior art of this application does not exist, but just a significant difference in my opinion between the examples I have seen in this thread and the use on a media player.

[edit: clarified grammar / language in second half]

 

[JFreak]

They're all corrupt greedy companies - Apple included. All they want is your money. And they'll get it at any cost!

Yes, they're evil. Apple is the most evil of them all, because they make so tempting products that I'm almost forced to buy something every year. I'm not going to make it full 12 months without giving them my hard-earned money! Evil.

 

[MrCrowbar]

MACBOOK IS THERE:

http://www.apple.com/macbook/

 

[50548]

Yessssssssssss!!

It's here YEAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!

www.apple.com

It's DAMN AMAZING!!! GO APPLE GO!!

I want a BLACK ONE!!! YEAH!

 

[johnmcboston]

Would this way of organising tracks necessarily have seemed obvious to somebody back in 2001 before any Nomads or iPods had yet been sold?

Yes - it's called sorting. We've been doing such multi-indexing in databases for decades. Why is it something new because it's done on a music player? Hey, why don't I patent sorting, then I can sue everyone.

sigh.

 

[50548]

Oh yeah, MacBooks have Intel GMAs...let the whining begin!!

 

[swano]

I would like to sue apple on the basis that it's ipods are white or black in colour. I've been wearing white and black clothes since I was born in 1977. Sound insain....YUP....maybe creative should get Lars Ulrich in on this..he seems to always be around to ruin a good thing.