Acacia

JerryW · 11-16-2002

I looked over their first patent and it's bogus. It would fail both the prior art and the obviousness tests.

Far-L, you should be talking to Apple. They were developing Quicktime prior to the filing date of the first patent (1991) and no doubt have prior art on this. I used to work for a company that worked on pre-release copies of Quicktime in 1989-1990 and we did stuff that was covered by that patent. One of my co-workers wrote Premiere while I was there, before it was sold to Adobe, and he was passing edited video around on the servers for testing.

Last edited by JerryW at Nov 16 2002, 07:21 AM

11-16-2002	#1
JerryW Members Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Spain Posts: 146	I looked over their first patent and it's bogus. It would fail both the prior art and the obviousness tests. Far-L, you should be talking to Apple. They were developing Quicktime prior to the filing date of the first patent (1991) and no doubt have prior art on this. I used to work for a company that worked on pre-release copies of Quicktime in 1989-1990 and we did stuff that was covered by that patent. One of my co-workers wrote Premiere while I was there, before it was sold to Adobe, and he was passing edited video around on the servers for testing. Last edited by JerryW at Nov 16 2002, 07:21 AM __________________ Programer available: C/C++/C#, PHP and MYSQL, Windows and Unix. Experience with video, photos, web site development, custom browsers and data collectors, games, etc. ICQ 321 950 261 Email: webmaster @ rgt4.com

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode