02/07/2008, 5:25pm, EST
Thursday, February 7th
Apple sued over iTunes Allowance features
Restricted Spending Solutions has filed a patent suit against Apple over the iTunes Allowance function on its web-based iTunes store. The feature allows members and friends to create accounts for automatically transferring chosen dollar amounts via a credit card to a recipient's iTunes Store account for use by the recipient. RSS cites its own patent, which describes a computer-based method for allocating funds in pre-established accounts for use by customers by creating a customer account file containing a record of funds deposited and limiting how the funds may be spend on audio and video entertainment.
The patent claims domain over computer-based systems implementing the methods as well.
A passage in the patent application reads: "In the coming months many digitized forms of entertainment will be available for downloading from the internet for a free. It is expected, for example, that Napster will charge a fee payable, in part, to the copyright holder of any music file that is copied. [...] Once digitalized forms of entertainment become available for copying from the internet at a reasonable fee, parents and other fund providers will want to control how much money their children/fund recipients spend per week or per month on obtaining copies of the entertainment [...]"
Apple has filed its own iTunes patents in recent months. Most recent is a patent for determining the popularity of a source of serial (sequentially released) online content based upon a number of subscriptions to the source. In other words, the patent calls for a method that would allow Apple to track how popular a stream of content, from the iTunes Store for instance, is based on how many users currently subscribe to it. T
Statistics in the suit suggest that Apple controls 75 percent of online video, 83 percent of online music, and over 90 percent of the hard-drive based media player market.

,
, 10
,
,
,
,
,
,

subscribe to comments
for this article
Vague, general, completely banal. Why, why are people allowed to patent such unoriginal crap? This lawsuit is baseless. If they are going to sue Apple, they will have to sue several others.
"A method where by the tips of one's fingers are curled slightly inward & gentle force applied to an area of the body combined with forward, backward, sideways, or rotational motions of the hand. Also furled & unfurled methods of applying the fingers firmly to the body in a continuous motion."
So, using this sort of allowance system for say eBay purchases would not fit into the patent.
Really, this concept is SO obvious it shouldn't have a patent there. Jeesh.