Hearing On JPEG Compression Patent Set
Posted by Sachin Garg on 5th March 2006 | Permanent Link
InformationWeek: A California federal district judge will hold a so-called Markman hearing March 9 in which evidence on the legal standings of claims in a patent on JPEG compression will be heard.
Defendants include Acer America, Agfa, Apple Computer, BancTec, Canon USA, Concord Camera, Creative Labs, Creo, Creo Americas, Dell, Eastman Kodak, Fuji Photo Film USA, Fujitsu Computer Products of America, Gateway, Hewlett-Packard, IBM, JVC Americas, Kyocera Wireless, Matsushita Electric of America, Microsoft, Mitsubishi Digital Electronics America, PalmOne, Panasonic Communications of America, Panasonic Mobile Communications Development of USA, Ricoh, Savin, Sun Microsystems, Thomson SA, TiVo Toshiba, Veo, and Xerox.
Critics contend those companies were browbeaten into paying licensing fees to avoid costly litigation, that the patent is too broad, and that others developed such compression technology either before or simultaneous with Compression Labs. Besides, they say Forgent acted like a patent troll, waiting years before aggressively enforcing the patent.
Nonsense, responds Forgent CEO Dick Snyder, saying it takes years to identify companies that use the compression technology.
We had featured another recent interview with Dick Snyder where he had made similar remarks.
After taking on the big names Snyder says Forgent is planning to go for another 1,100 companies it says uses its compression technology. The stakes are too high, result of this case will reflect on how bad is the crisis The U.S. Patent System is currently facing.
March 5th, 2006 at 8:19 pm
Some companies like to characterize inventors and companies who create or own patents and who have the audacity to fight back when those patent pirates try to abscond with their property with the slur “trolls” and for some reason media swallows the troll slur without question. So I am writing yet again to give all another perspective on this issue. It is my hope that you will step back and reconsider the whole issue and consider inventor’s perspective and plight.
A handful of inventors, small to medium sized businesses, and universities have deep enough pockets to be able to handle enforcing their patent rights.
For others the risk of expensive patent litigation forces them to standby while their inventions are appropriated by corporate bullies. Fortunately the market has produced a solution for the higher value takings of inventors property rights.
That solution was originally contingency litigators. But this still required an inventor to raise between $100,000 and $500,000 or more to pay costs. For many that amount was still out of reach and patent pirates got away with raping and pillaging our property and the inventors were usually crushed with barely a whimper.
But then a new business model evolved. It is that business model which has deep enough pockets to take on big companies which those companies call trolls. But let me assure you that one persons “troll” is another persons savior. Many inventors have achieved some measure of justice by partnering with these enforcement companies.
Typically a patent enforcement company gets half of any settlements but they take ALL the risk - risk of anything from two million to tens of millions of dollars. For inventors who cannot raise two or more million dollars to pay for a patent infringement case the choice is half of something or all of nothing. For the majority of inventors their reward for inventing was to get nothing, that is nothing except to be raped and have their property pillaged by a patent pirate.
I am appending a speech made by Ray Niro which may enlighten you about the history of how and why the “troll” slur was coined. It is a story which is all too common, a story where a patent pirate abuses the process of law to run a small company out of business and then has the audacity to paint their victims as bad players. That company’s patents were purchased because they have real and significant value and the infringer then howled about a company who had not been able to commercialize because of the patent pirate’s conduct.
You are right that innovation is threatened, but dead wrong as to what the source of the threat is. It is truly ironic that journalists are being swayed by the PR campaign of the patent pirates who are the real threat to those who produce inventions and who cannot continue to produce inventions if patent pirates can simply take what the want with impunity.
Ronald J Riley, President
Professional Inventors Alliance
http://www.PIAUSA.org
RJR”at”PIAUSA.org
Change “at” to @”
RJR Direct # (202) 318-1595
==== Document follows ====
http://www.piausa.org/patent_reform/articles/
THE PATENT TROLL MYTH
Trolls are mythological figures in Scandinavian folklore. So what’s the truth about so-called “patent trolls”? Let’s start at the beginning. In July 2001, Brenda Sandburg did an article for an American Lawyer publication called The Recorder. It was titled “Trolling for Dollars.” On page one was a picture of Intel’s then Assistant General Counsel, Peter Detkin, holding a troll; below him was a picture of Jerry Hosier next to one of his five airplanes. On the second page, there was a picture of me with the caption: MORE: http://www.piausa.org/patent_reform/articles/
March 6th, 2006 at 12:49 pm
What you are saying is valid, but it doesnt matters here. You are confusing two different things.
Its one thing to be a small inventor and expect money for the efforts.
And its an entirely different thing to actively look for patents which can possibly cover technologies and standards which are already widely used. So that they can go sue everyone.
All of the Forgent’s recently bought patents fit this bill. What is your opinion on this business model?
March 29th, 2006 at 7:12 pm
Who is Ronald J. Riley? He is not a licensed patent lawyer, not a registered patent agent, not a legal scholar on patent rights and not an ex-employee of The US Patent Office. He is a self-proclaimed “expert” on patent law without any university training in the legalities of this field. He is not a Ph.D. on intellectual property rights and is not part of any effective lobbying group that could seriously lead to change. Ronald J. Riley has created several inventor related organizations and has appointed himself “President” and “Director” of these little known groups. If anyone is seriously looking for legal advice on patent law or the USPTO, you should consult with a qualified professional. Ronald J. Riley may have read a couple of books about patent law, but he is not an attorney or anyone to be taken seriously on these matters.
March 29th, 2006 at 10:09 pm
Who is Ronald J. Riley? He is not a licensed patent lawyer, not a registered patent agent, not a legal scholar on patent rights and not an employee or ex-employee of The US Patent Office. He is a self-proclaimed “expert” on patent law without any university training on the legalities of this field. He is not a Ph.D. on intellectual property rights and is not part of any effective lobbying group that could seriously lead to change. In other words, Ronald J. Riley has absolutely no qualifications for offering his off-the-cuff opinions on the validity of corporate patents. Even though he sounds authoritative and says that he consults with “legal scholars”, he is just a novice trying to sound important. Most of the time, he has no idea what he’s talking about. In addition, Ronald J. Riley has created several inventor related organizations with several websites. He has appointed himself “President” and “Director” of these little known groups and asks for donations on every page. He even takes credit cards! What are these donations for? To support his efforts to write nonsense about the patent system? If anyone is seriously looking for legal advice on patent law or the USPTO, you should consult with a qualified legal professional. Ronald J. Riley may have read a couple of books about patent law, but he is certainly not a patent attorney or anyone that should be taken seriously on these matters.
April 3rd, 2006 at 11:16 am
In response to Sandman, since patent litigation costs start at two million and in cases where there are very deep pockets as is the case with Microsoft can easily run tens of millions there is a threshold for value of infringement which must be met to make it economically worthwhile to go after an infringer. In other words when dealing with a company like Microsoft no one will litigate unless the recovery is in terms of tens to hundreds of millions of dollars.
There are forty or so pending cases and Microsoft has a reputation for running fast and loose with others intellectual property (IP).
Now that Microsoft has been bruised by Eolas there will be more people who own IP stepping up to the bat. There will probably be hundreds of cases over the next few years and based on the likely minimum value and the number of cases, and rather the cases are settled short of litigation or go to trial where the judgments are likely to be much greater, these are all factors in my estimate of $20 to $200 billion.
If you have a better way of estimating the liabilities I would be happy to hear why you think the numbers will differ.
Ronald J Riley, President
Professional Inventors Alliance
http://www.PIAUSA.org
RJR (at) PIAUSA.org
Change “at” to @
RJR Direct # (202) 318-1595
Ronald J Riley, Exec. Dir.
InventorEd, Inc.
http://www.InventorEd.org
RJR”at”InvEd.org
Change “at” to @
April 3rd, 2006 at 11:39 am
Who is William Scott? Is this their real name? There is no William Scott listed as a patent practioner on the patent office’s web site. Are they a stooge for someone? It is clear that I have gored either their or their employer’s ox. The joys of being an activist. And yes, I do attack disreputable companies and especially invention promotion fraudsters.
http://www.InventorEd.org does take donations from individual inventors but such donations only supply about 10% of our operating budget.
No I am not a patent practioner and if you had actually read my writings on this topic you would know that I do strongly encourage people to use patent attorneys.
I am a commercially successful independent inventor. I do depend on a multitude of patent practioners for expert advice. And when it comes to public policy issues I have depended on recently deceased former patent commissioner Don Banner and top IP law experts Irving Kayton and James Chandler. In addition Pat Choate is deeply involved in the public policy aspects of both InventorEd.org and PIAUSA.org.
My bio is available at http://www.rjriley.com/about-rjriley. I am listed in a multitude of Marquis Who’s Who publications.
I have ventured numerous companies in my career and also worked for others including running an R&D group in a non-energy subsidiary of Sun Oil. I left Sun in early 1990 to pursue my own patents and have worked full time since as both an inventor and an advocate for preserving a patent system which accessible to all.
Having experience as an inventor, knowing many other inventors, and devoting a great deal of time to educating government and media for over a decade I probably have a better grasp of the significance of both corporate and independent inventor’s patents.
Large corporations tend to produce incremental improvements in products while independent inventors tend to produce breakthrough inventions. A few contemporary examples are Dr. Damadian (MRI), Wilson Greatbatch (Pacemaker), and Gordon Gould (Laser). Incidentally I have the pleasure of knowing all of them and many more inventors.
The Alliance for American Innovation and the related trade association of independent inventors known as the Professional Inventors Alliance did mostly prevail in an eight year legislative battle over big company’s vision of a reformed patent system. We had fifteen Inventors Hall of Fame inductees and twenty six Nobel laureates who helped us win that battle. We expect to continue to beat the tar out of patent pirates both on the legislative issues and in patent infringement cases.
Ronald J Riley, President
Professional Inventors Alliance
http://www.PIAUSA.org
RJR (at) PIAUSA.org
Change “at” to @
RJR Direct # (202) 318-1595
Ronald J Riley, Exec. Dir.
InventorEd, Inc.
http://www.InventorEd.org
RJR”at”InvEd.org
Change “at” to @
April 4th, 2006 at 7:37 am
William Scott, Esq. Disbarred! !
See: http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:-k-E11aDKmEJ:www.cftc.gov/opa/adv01/opawa17-01.htm+%22William+Scott+Esq.+%22&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=6&lr=lang_en
In the Matter of Curtis McNair Arnold and London Financial, Inc. Filed April 16, 2001. Curtis McNair Arnold and London Financial, Inc., and their former counsel William Scott, Esq., and the Scott Law Firm, P.A., filed two separate applications under the Equal Access to Justice Act and the Commission’s implementing regulations, seeking awards of attorney fees and other expenses associated with Scott’s debarment as counsel in this proceeding. After a careful review of the record, the applications of Curtis McNair Arnold and London Financial, Inc., and their former counsel William Scott, Esq., and the Scott Law Firm, P.A. for fees and other expenses under the Equal Access to Justice Act were denied. Administrative Law Judge, Bruce C. Levine. CFTC Docket No. 97-12.
It seems that William Scott Esq. was also was a lobbyist for hire and that his current activities would be consistent with the background information I uncovered. After all, just what kind of work would an attorney-lobbyist who was disbarred five years ago be doing today?
Now we all know that patent pirates & invention promotion frauds play really nasty and coincidently William Scott Esq. appears on the scene posting defamatory remarks to a multitude of web sites and even creating a Blog in my name. So the fact is that William Scott Esq. has spent a considerable amount of time attempting to smear me. Time is money and I doubt that William Scott Esq. is doing so for nothing. I think that William Scott Esq. is a paid stooge and I see no reason to believe his claim that he is not the disbarred lawyer-lobbyist.
Now the only question is who William Scott Esq. is working for.
Ronald J Riley, President
Professional Inventors Alliance
http://www.PIAUSA.org
RJR (at) PIAUSA.org
Change “at” to @
RJR Direct # (202) 318-1595
Ronald J Riley, Exec. Dir.
InventorEd, Inc.
http://www.InventorEd.org
RJR”at”InvEd.org
Change “at” to @
April 10th, 2006 at 4:07 pm
My Dear Ronald J. Riley,
Well sir, you are certainly living up to your reputation. As you undoubtedly know, the disbarred William Scott that you spent hours trying to find is NOT me.
Why don’t you contact him to verify my claim (if he’s still alive). If he is alive, I’m sure he won’t appreciate your accusations that he is the writer of my posts. You’d better be careful - he might hit you with one of those SLAPP suits that you’re so fond of. I suggest that you refrain from blaming this innocent man before I contact him and inform him of your nonsense.
But, once again, here is the Ronald J. Riley technique in action. Never getting your facts straight, never bothering to check them out properly and never worrying about wrongly accusing innocent people that could be convenient scapegoats for you.
Thank you for proving my point about you. I’m sure if you look hard enough, you’ll find an attorney named Ronald Riley who has been disbarred over the past 20 years.
You’re a deviously clever fellow Mr. Ronald J. Riley. But, then again, you know that all ready.
I’m not surprised by your response. Once again, your natural tendency is to attack and belittle those who try to tell the truth about you.
You may be able to fool the naive inventor as well as the novice reporter, but you can’t fool patent attorneys or anyone else who has a true understanding of the patent system.
On invention-related blogs your tactics are several. Sometimes, you pose as an innocent inventor who has been taken advantage of. Sometimes, you play the part of the successful inventor who never states the amount of royalties he’s received. Other times, you offer baseless predictions about the outcome of selected patent infringement lawsuits. Other times, you’re the vigilant patent reformer who is going to “kill” legislation single handedly. And then, there’s the egotistical Ronald J. Riley who knows everything about every patent related issue, and who ceaselessly touts his great accomplishments of which I’ve seen no proof of whatsoever. I’ve also seen your contradictory posts on different blogs, your constant pleas for donations, and your tireless attempts at self-promotion.
I’ve seen your amateurish websites, and have read your inflammatory language and personal biases. I’ve seen your “amexsux, northworstair, taubman sucks comments, skippy-scam” and other “sux” websites that make you feel important. I can’t imagine that anyone takes you seriously. In fact, Mr. Riley, you are your own worst enemy by participating in such pursuits.
When you offer information about invention scams under your fake name “inventor ed”, that is actually somewhat of a noble endeavor, but when Ronald J. Riley offers his opinions on patent law, patent infringement, confident predictions on who will prevail in patent infringement cases and advice on licensing matters, you are so far out of your league that sometimes I laugh out loud when I read your posts. I will say this much, you are very entertaining.
You should be careful about offering any patent related advice to anyone. Only registered patent attorneys and patent agents can offer legal advice to individuals on many of the matters that you prattle on about.
If you want to protect small inventors so badly against all the big, bad corporations, why don’t you go to law school and become a patent lawyer? Instead of preaching, editorializing and spreading propaganda, you could ACTUALLY DO SOMETHING instead of just writing about what you “know” is going to happen in the future. Judging from the amount of time you spend promoting yourself and your websites, it appears that you certainly have the time to go to law school. On the other hand, if your blogs are any indication of your reasoning ability, then I seriously doubt you’d make it past the first year.
I truly feel sorry for you Mr. Ronald Riley. If your legacy turns out to be the person whose patent rhetoric never accomplished anything, then you’ve wasted your life by trying to sound like a patent attorney, but not having the credentials or the knowledge to offer any credible patent advice.”
Please continue making your ridiculous, immature and irrational comments. Your absurd posts speak volumes about who you really are.
No aliases are needed. To quote a phrase, “you can’t handle the truth.”
Mr. Ronald J. Riley is obviously upset because he’s been unmasked as a layman who likes to pretend he’s a patent lawyer.
In case you’re not aware, there is a legal statute prohibiting you from offering legal advice without a law license.
I know that you think you’re above the law and that the First Amendment will allow you to offer legal advice on the internet. But, think again.
May 24th, 2006 at 11:56 am
Riley. Ha!
This dude cracks me up.
http://www.inventored.org/
Inventor? Maybe.
Web site designer? Reminds me very much of the work done here:
http://www.subgenius.com/
Anyway, he appears to be a remora.
And hey, William Scott, excellent use of the Esq. appendage! I love seeing that too!
June 9th, 2006 at 7:50 am
I found this excellent blog that is a compilation of Ronald Riley’s comments about the patent system, inventions and companies he doesn’t like:
http://ronaldjriley.blogspot.com
August 4th, 2006 at 8:00 am
Ronald J Riley is hate-filled and irrational. He posted literally thousands (3970 to be exact) of sick accusations against American Express and their employees, including these comments:
“Is it true that American Express has a breeding program where they are crossbreeding their most obnoxious and ignorant staff to produce a superior race of Amex shills?”
http://www.amexsux.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?num=1058324149/4#4
“I believe that this is their form of foreplay, and that they are getting ready to mate. I surmise that they are planning to produce genetically tailored offspring for American Express.”
“the way you conduct yourself comes across as a young male with raging hormones. Either that or you have one of the worse cases of thingy envy I have ever seen in a women. This condition is usually associated with older bitter females who are generally alone. “
http://www.amexsux.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?num=1061706817/21#21
“I am willing to bet that all three of them can’t figure out when they need to wipe unless head stooge tells them.”
About himself:
“My IQ puts me at the one in a million people on the famous Bell curve.”
http://www.amexsux.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?num=1086781104/15#15
“If I am in the mood for a bit of fun I stick the phone between my legs and pass gas.”
http://www.amexsux.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?num=1058456956/1#1
“I still command respect in the inventor community, various advocacy communities, and where it counts in politics. And in the political arena I even manage to instill a bit of fear in those politicians who are corporate stooges. They know that I will extract retribution, costing them political capital. Sometimes fear is a more valuable commodity then respect.”
http://www.amexsux.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?num=1065095047/13#13
“I have been kicking the tar out of NWA for about eight years and they have been totally powerless to stop me. I estimate that the negative PR has cost NWA millions of dollars.”
“To be blunt, I make my living by eating CEO’s lunches. I am very good at it.”
“I am a credentialed investigative journalist.”
And….
“Just close you eyes and imagine the corporation as a cone. Now visualize a slurry of dodo being dumped at the top. The top dogs are most full of dodo and as the dodo spreads out each successively lower tier gets covered. Granted the lowly reps have less on them, but they still smell nearly as bad as those at the top.”
http://www.amexsux.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?num=1019133123/5#5
This is a TINY sample of what Ronald Riley, inventor ?, posted. There are thousands of posts like this. To see it all first-hand, just look on http://www.amexsux.com.
Here’s the kicker….someone found out that his claim against American Express was completely bogus!
October 22nd, 2009 at 8:58 am
I havent watched that many episodes. ,
October 23rd, 2009 at 10:06 am
Hello, I can offer the replacement for JPEG. It is my patented technology #7315266. It works with the same quality. Compression 10:1 before you see any difference, 25:1 when differences are noticeable but small and over 50:1 when differences are significant. It is same fast as JPEG. The demo and clear description is available at http://ezcodesample.com/pre_image_reduction.html
It can be both lossless and lossy. The concept is in reduced variety of low order bits counter parts. High order bits are well compressed and decompressed without losses and all low order parts are saved into compressed look up table in a special tricky way that they can be uniquely associated with high order parts when image is restored. If Snyder’s patent seams unaffordable talk to me. I’ll see what I can do for you.