View Single Post
Old 10-23-2003   #34
FightThePatent
Members
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 303
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Paul Markham@Oct 22 2003, 11:17 PM
So what is in "Vivid and Wicked's, for example" best interests? Purely as a "Business Decision"
I have heard from different sources, that the defense for companies like Hustler, Vivid, and Wicked Pictures to settle was that a small part of their business is internet-based.

That sounds true to me... but, Acacia's patents cover video-on-demand (VOD)... they already convinced LodgeNet (the leading provider of video on demand to hotels) to pay the license... so if Digital Video is more towards their core business, then they have EVERY reason to worry about Acacia.

And let's not forget USA Video, who's patent claims to owning the process of downloading video from a web server, also covers VOD.

I read somewhere that an Acacia-lover believed the LodgeNet deal to be worth about 50K/year.



Fight the Patent!
__________________
Learn more about Acacia and other patent abuse cases at: http://www.FightThePatent.com | find the goldmines of traffic
FightThePatent is offline   Reply With Quote