toggle

AAPL Stock: 562.29 ( -3.03 )

Creative accuses Apple of violating software patent

updated 10:35 am EDT, Thu September 1, 2005

Creative accuses Apple


Creative Technology today , and said it would consider every option available to defend the patent, including possible legal action. Apple declined to comment on the patent, according to The New York Times. The "Zen Patent," awarded to Creative on August 9, covers the navigation of menus. Craig McHugh, president of Creative's United States operations said Apple was the only company that Creative had identified so far that was in violation of the patent, although Creative was investigating others, according to the report. Apple may request that the patent office re-examine the patent, which would require Apple to provide evidence of "prior art" in court to prove that similar technology existed previous to Creative's use of the technology.


by MacNN Staff

TAGS :

 Apple
toggle

Comments

  1. Philip J. Fry

    Mac Enthusiast

    Joined: Jul 2005

    0

    Wow

    It was only a matter of time. Oh hey, did anyone read that Creative shipped 4000 players with a trojan?

  1. blackbird_1.0

    Mac Elite

    Joined: May 2001

    0

    Heh.

    It never ceases to amaze me...the way Apple's competitors like to try and take credit for something they didn't do.

  1. scotty321

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Nov 1999

    0

    The Patent Office SUCKS

    Um, excuse me, but how do you patent a system for navigating through songs by artist or album?! How ELSE are you going to navigate through your song collection? By the HAIR COLOR of the DRUMMER? This is absolutely ridiculous, and is another reason why the patent office needs to be shut down & rebuilt from the ground up.

  1. Cless

    Registered User

    Joined: Jun 2003

    0

    Software Patents suck

    Actually, it's software patents that are stupid. No one should own a patent on that. No one should own a patent on Exposé, or GIF compression, or any one of the other myriad software ideas that are covered by patents. CODE can and should be protected by copyright (the implementation), but the idea should not be patentable. It just stifles innovation and encourages companies to simply patent ideas and the sue everyone else who actually DOES something with those ideas.

  1. Loert

    Junior Member

    Joined: Nov 1999

    0

    Desperation

    Creative cannot afford a drawn out lawsuit against Apple. Didn't they just post a $32 million loss?

  1. cebritt

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Mar 2000

    0

    Copyright vs Patent

    It seems to me that these are Copyright issues, not Patent issues. Lotus and Ashton-Tate used copyright laws years ago to sue competing products that used the same keyboards commands and menu layouts.

  1. Paul Huang

    Dedicated MacNNer

    Joined: Sep 1999

    0

    destined to be tossed out

    This patent is destined to be tossed out. Sorting things by category is an idea, which has been practiced for centuries. Consider the following:

    last name first name European Japanese American rock R & B Soul new wave techno

    A mechanism may be patentable, but the look and feel? We've already heard the final words from the U.S. Supreme court already.

    Suck it up.

  1. inaudible

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Aug 2005

    0

    apple will win out...

    prior art. period. our legal system gives much more weight to prior art than it does to patents. besides, it's pretty obvious that this is a final attempt on the part of creative to stifle apple in order to gain market share for it's failing portable player division. apple is going to be sued to high h*** in the next couple years over the ipod... every joe shmuck and his mother is scrutinizing the ipod trying to find a feature they can pull out from under it by patenting it. i wish they would just spend their time trying to find the next technology people can't live without instead of suing apple when they do.

  1. outsourced

    Forum Regular

    Joined: May 2005

    0

    patenting hierarchies?!

    Everyone's comments are right on. How the h***, as humans, who identify things by categorizing them in specific hierarchies, are we to navigate an ordered system like music stored on an iPod?

    Ridiculous frivilous suit by a company (Creative) who doesn't know how to compete other than by suing.

    I hope Apple's lawyers slay them.

    To the U.S. Patent Office: IDIOTS!

  1. pastusza

    Mac Enthusiast

    Joined: Nov 1999

    0

    Hmm...

    If you can't beat them, sue them. This is a good example of why software patents should not exist. It would not surprise me if Apple just bought Creative and killed their whole product line. Then they would own the patent in question and be able to go after other mp3 player makers, though I doubt they would do that. Suing people is expensive.

    My question here is, why are they only suing Apple? Should they be suing all the other ones out there, such as Sonic and Dell?

    My next question is, when did Creative change it's name to SCO?

    Andy

Login Here

Not a member of the MacNN forums? Register now for free.

 
close
Photo
toggle

Network Headlines

toggle

Most Popular

MacNN Sponsor

Recent Reviews

iHome iW2 AirPlay speaker

iHome generally isn't known as a luxury brand when it comes to audio, but it is prolific -- the company's docks and speakers are every ...

Logitech Ultrathin Keyboard Cover

One of the iPad's main weaknesses has always been productivity. It's not a question of apps; while it has taken a little time for a na ...

Logitech UE Air Speaker

If maybe a little more slowly than Apple would like, AirPlay is becoming a staple of the wireless speaker market for iOS devices. The ...

toggle

Most Commented