1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

News Sony sued over Blu-ray patent

Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by CardJoe, 1 Sep 2008.

  1. CardJoe

    CardJoe Freelance Journalist

    Joined:
    3 Apr 2007
    Posts:
    11,343
    Likes Received:
    292
  2. liratheal

    liratheal Sharing is Caring

    Joined:
    20 Nov 2005
    Posts:
    10,250
    Likes Received:
    609
    Mm, another legal dispute.

    Anyone want to bet Orinda get buried in paper for the next milenia?
     
  3. ChaosDefinesOrder

    ChaosDefinesOrder Vapourmodder

    Joined:
    6 Feb 2008
    Posts:
    706
    Likes Received:
    7
    according to Wikipedia, the Compact Disc has been on the market since 1982. Recordable CDs (ie an "Apparatus and method for recording/reproducing optical information and optical disk-shaped recording medium") have been available since 1990!

    1993 is a few years after this, therefore surely the "prior art" argument works for this "patent" thus rendering it invalid?

    Patent trolls should be ordered to make good on their IP within a year of purchasing the patent before they're permitted to bring anything to court. If they bring something to court without any intentions on licensing or using the technology themselves, they should be forced to pay the defendents the same amount they're suing for!

    Go to hell Orinda
     
  4. Arkanrais

    Arkanrais New Member

    Joined:
    14 Jul 2007
    Posts:
    406
    Likes Received:
    5
    freaking patent trolls.
    no sueing over DVD's, CD's UMD's Laser Disc's, HD-DVD's? of course not. they have to wait till there is a large enough company who pretty much owns the current market on the tech and has a good enough pocket of cash to take.
    hey, why don't we devise a patent for devices sending electrical impulses through wires to other devices?

    F*** Orinda sideways. I hope they lose and get counter sued into oblivion for wasting the courts time and being a company of douches.
     
  5. Burnout21

    Burnout21 Is the daddy!

    Joined:
    9 Sep 2005
    Posts:
    8,610
    Likes Received:
    197
    I hope sony sue there arses for this, Sueing WAR!!!
     
  6. Paradigm Shifter

    Paradigm Shifter de nihilo nihil fit

    Joined:
    10 May 2006
    Posts:
    2,059
    Likes Received:
    37
    That is ridiculous - that patent is so vague I'm amazed it was ever granted in the first place. Aside from that, as others have said, 'optical disc shaped recording medium' covers everything from CDs to UMDs to Blu-ray. It's not just Orinda - patent trolls as they are - but whoever granted that patent clearly wasn't doing their job properly.
     
  7. docodine

    docodine killed a guy once

    Joined:
    10 Feb 2007
    Posts:
    5,084
    Likes Received:
    160
    I would love to see this guy begging on the streets.
     
  8. Mentai

    Mentai New Member

    Joined:
    11 Nov 2007
    Posts:
    758
    Likes Received:
    1
    Intellectual property company's should be illegal. They're professional trolls! I agree with the notion that if a patent is not acted on within a year it is made redundant. This system is in desperate need of fixing.
     
  9. identikit

    identikit Active Member

    Joined:
    5 Jun 2004
    Posts:
    1,322
    Likes Received:
    16
    Just wait until software patents take off...
     
  10. pdf27

    pdf27 New Member

    Joined:
    6 Jul 2006
    Posts:
    169
    Likes Received:
    1
    Read the claims in the patent guys. This patent only covers a method of error checking on the disk prior to writing to it with a laser. Hence pressed blu-ray disks aren't covered, nor are read-only drives. CD/DVD burners using this error correction algorithm may be infringing it though.

    [​IMG]
     
  11. Yemerich

    Yemerich I can has PERSUADETRON?

    Joined:
    15 Sep 2004
    Posts:
    1,114
    Likes Received:
    36
    As thousands of scientists struggle for years in developing something, stupid leech lawers study some hours in searching for breachs in the laws to make easy money on the hard workers.

    So, for each technical questions they raise, lawyers raise ten legal issues.

    This is holding science back!

    Intellectual property company... this is outrageous!
     
  12. DXR_13KE

    DXR_13KE BananaModder

    Joined:
    14 Sep 2005
    Posts:
    9,103
    Likes Received:
    357
    i hate patent trolls...
     
  13. ChaosDefinesOrder

    ChaosDefinesOrder Vapourmodder

    Joined:
    6 Feb 2008
    Posts:
    706
    Likes Received:
    7
    According to the wikipedia article on Compact Discs, Recordable CDs have been available since 1990 (as I mentioned earlier), so the error checking before burning has been around that long as well, as I'd find it remarkable if such error checking wasn't included for 3 years after recordable CDs were marketed... especially given that error checking/data redundancy has been present right from conception of CDs...

    What's confusing is that the title of the patent has nothing to do with error correction, so that's a rather ambiguous patent in the first place. That's like patenting a "cyclindrical aqueous based beverage container" (i.e. a mug) and then specifying that the patent only covers the mug handle!

    Also, that flow chart could be applied to hard disk based media...
     
  14. pdf27

    pdf27 New Member

    Joined:
    6 Jul 2006
    Posts:
    169
    Likes Received:
    1
    Indeed. And if that method of error checking was used elsewhere, that constitutes prior art and the patent is invalid. If (as the claims state) this is an improved method of carrying out error checking, the patent is valid.

    Seriously, that is pretty clear as some patents go. I've got one going through at the moment (w00t - it's finally been published if not yet granted) and even I have to read carefully to understand what they're going on about.

    Yep. And if Sony can demonstrate that someone else was using an identical or substantially similar method of error checking on a hard disk (such that doing so to a CD would be obvious to "someone well versed in the art") then there is no inventive step and the patent is invalid. Of course, that also leaves them open to being sued by whoever invented the HDD error checking method ;)
     
  15. hitman012

    hitman012 Active Member

    Joined:
    6 May 2005
    Posts:
    4,877
    Likes Received:
    19
    Well, then it's a good thing they don't grant patents based on a glance at the title. If you actually read the patent and look at the 'Description of the Prior Art' section then it explains why it is different to a conventional CD.
     
  16. Bluephoenix

    Bluephoenix Spoon? What spoon?

    Joined:
    3 Dec 2006
    Posts:
    968
    Likes Received:
    1
    here's where history is fun.


    Sony originally invented the recordable CD and music CD, so they can claim that patent infringes upon their previous research.

    (the reason a recordable CD is the size it is is because the head of Sony BMG at the time loved symphonies and wanted all of beethoven's 5th on a single disc in uncompressed format.)

    this isn't going to hold up.


    also if they didn't want it thrown out on stupidity they'd have to sue every optical disc mfg. from 1993 until now, or it gets thrown out as selective application.
     
  17. saxman

    saxman New Member

    Joined:
    21 Feb 2005
    Posts:
    173
    Likes Received:
    0
    This seems so stupid that a company can actually be profitable by buying patents solely for the purpose of suing another company for a very widely used technology. The whole purpose of a patent is to protect the original inventor from being exploited for his/her hard work. I would be plain pissed at Orinda just for being total pricks and trying to capitalize on some of my work without the slightest interest in using it.

    As far as the patent reads it is a method not only for error checking but also how to allow the drive to understand where the data is if there is a bad sector and it needs to be placed somewhere else on the disk. Also the fairly standard affair of redundant information on an optical disk, I am still not sure how much of this is really important to sony's BRdisks or how similar the process is but I kinda doubt it is all that similar.

    By the way google has a wonderful patent search function now.
    This is the patent in question.
    Happy Searching:D
     
  18. sleepyhollow

    sleepyhollow New Member

    Joined:
    4 Jul 2008
    Posts:
    4
    Likes Received:
    0
    So Sony invented the cd me thinks not

    In March 1979, one week after the press conference in which the CD player had been shown to the world, a large Philips delegation set off for Japan. The Japanese Ministry of Industry and Technology (MITI) had decided to convene a conference in which the industry would come together and decide upon a standard for the audio disc. In order to increase the opportunities for the Philips system, it seemed a good idea to collaborate with a Japanese partner. That is why a tight schedule of demonstrations was planned at all leading Japanese electronics companies.



    The development of the CD took a decisive turn just before the return journey. The demonstrations in Japan had gone extremely well. As Joop van Tilburg, head of the audio division, was packing his suitcases, he received a telephone call from the president of Sony, Akio Morita. The offer of joint further development was accepted. In the months that followed, Philips and Sony engineers flew backwards and forwards in turn to see each other. Their aim was to agree upon a joint standard for the CD. Both companies would then be able to develop their own products in accordance with this standard.
     
  19. Amon

    Amon inch-perfect

    Joined:
    1 Jun 2007
    Posts:
    2,467
    Likes Received:
    2
    I want to s**t in this guy's mouth.
     
  20. Spaceraver

    Spaceraver Ultralurker

    Joined:
    19 Jan 2006
    Posts:
    1,363
    Likes Received:
    5
    Haha.
    1. They sue for something that has been around for decades in terms of electronic devices.
    2. They only sue one company that would be big enough to pay big money.
    3. There is "previous art" of the aforementioned technology, so the claim should be /dev/null.
    4. This lawsuit is so utterly ridiculus that it should result in insta-fail.
     
Tags: Add Tags

Share This Page