MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

Nov 16, 07 - 02:46 pm Comment from: Greg Poulos

I was wondering how come we went a couple of days since a lawsuit was announced against Apple.

Now I feel better...

Nov 16, 07 - 02:47 pm Comment from: twilightmoon

injunction from selling copies of Leopard with this feature?

lolz..

good luck with your lawsuit, chumps.

Nov 16, 07 - 02:48 pm Comment from: Willie G

sweet jesus... there is absolutely nothing patent worthy over simple keying technology. It has been around now for 30 + years. Just more jackasses looking for a little spotlight.

Nov 16, 07 - 02:51 pm Comment from: Macromancer

I wonder if this guy will also be slapped with a lawsuit:

YouTube, search: Spirit of Truth

Nov 16, 07 - 02:58 pm Comment from: Spark

Willie,
I don't know about the merits of this case, but iChat certainly doesn't use green or blue screen technology since it replacing a live background for the composited one. I suspect the regardless of the keying technology used, there are probably patents involved, no matter how old. Either Apple developed a new way to do it or licensed the technology from somewhere.

The patent system is broken and the US Patent Office is manned by monkeys with rubber stamps. This is bad news for businesses and consumers, but great news for patent trolls and lawyers.

Ahhh the American Dream... getting rich by having your lawyers legally swindle money from the hard working slobs who actually earned it.

I am suing DBC et al. for patent infringement on my idea of suing companies that use technology to benefit others that is vaguely simiar to something that I have conjured up on my basement computer while warding off acne and herpes.

And i'm suing my mother for not bringing me any more chocolate chip cookies. My company's health has deteriorated as a result and i believe that it was a willful and deliberate act.


FN Patent Trolls . . .

Nov 16, 07 - 03:09 pm Comment from: Regular Reader

I'm going to start suing like crazy since I hold the patent no. 1D10T-56823, which is as follows:

'The method of instigating legal action against an individual or corporation for using some generic patent for a product that fewer than 50 consumers have employed in the last decade. As part of the method, damages will be claimed that are exponential to the real damages (if any), as well as anything else that we can conjure up. The method concludes with either; a) my case being thrown out, or b) out-of-court settlement.'

Watch for letters from my lawyers boys!

Backup your copy of iChat...

Nov 16, 07 - 03:11 pm Comment from: Regular Reader

Oh, and I made up that patent by the way...

Nov 16, 07 - 03:12 pm Comment from: BustingTheSkullsOfIdiots

More flatulation from the asinine butt-monkeys who want to punish the successful. Oh yeah, things like this should never have been patented.

Nov 16, 07 - 03:29 pm Comment from: Grigori

If it doesn't work any better than what's in iChat, who cares?

I love all the patent experts that come out of the woodwork during these infringement suits. Fact is, the general public is clueless about all things patents. But keep going, it's entertaining!

Nov 16, 07 - 04:06 pm Comment from: MCCFR

From what I understand about this feature, it works by using H.264's image processing algorithms to identify the background data that doesn't change and that data is then replaced by a different stream of H.264 data.

If StarFX used the same methodology in a Windows environment (presumably in H.261/T-120), then Apple can look forward to a world of pain: however, given the processing power that was available in 2000, one has to wonder whether the similarity in methodology is even practical at which point DBC (who obviously acquired the patent from the defunct Viewics entity) might be on a hiding to nothing.

Dear Anonymous (assuming that is your real name),

My comment on patents was intended as a joke. I know nothing about patent law. I don't claim to be a patent expert. I was simply making light of the fact that these suits are so incredibly frequent nowadays. It is my personal opinion that many...not all, but many of these are simply attempts to score cash from larger companies.

But at least you're entertained! Mission accomplished.

Nov 16, 07 - 04:10 pm Comment from: Regular Reader

Sorry, I left the last anonymous comment...it seems to have forgotten my name.

Spark and Willie,

I don't know the particulars of this case, but there may be a patented technique involved. There are reams of "automatic traveling matte" techniques on file. The public is most familiar with blue- and greenscreening from its use in film FX. Blue/greenscreening translates easily to video, but digital technology opens a world of new possibilities. The background replacement used in iChat involves first storing a still image of the scene without the person in it. Thus, any pixels in the realtime scene matching the stored image can be "keyed" out. (The background must be static, of course.)

This is not the first time I've heard of this technique, and I even tried my own thumb-fingered approach to it once. I never had a system stable enough to be marketed, but then I never tried to patent the idea, either.

Is this really a product? I googled it and.....nada.........

Lots of "anonymous" comments showing up here, including me, yet my name is visible in the input dialog. MDN, you're not using a Vista server, are you?

Nov 16, 07 - 04:24 pm Comment from: The Other Steve

If one California company is sewing another California company, they shouldn't be allowed to file in Illinois or pick n choose whatever state will skew the results in their favor.

Nov 16, 07 - 04:39 pm Comment from: Wade Smith

"Lots of "anonymous" comments showing up here, including me, yet my name is visible in the input dialog. MDN, you're not using a Vista server, are you?"

Sign in.

Nov 16, 07 - 04:42 pm Comment from: effwerd

Their really only suing since Apple made their stuff look like it was programmed by eight year olds on crack.

This just in....Newport Beach, CA company Digital Background Corporation is now suing all California movie studios who have created any digital effect using a blue or green screen, stating that "the Hollywood studios infringe on its 1998 patent entitled 'Real-Time Method of Digitally Altering a Video Data Stream to Remove Portions of the Original Image and Substitute Elements to Create a New Image,'" The complaint has been filed with a court in Yugoslavia.

Nov 16, 07 - 05:28 pm Comment from: Hm...

Fortunately, some juries are starting to wake up to the idiocy.
  Acacia loses!

What's even better in the Acacia case is that the jury has invalidated the patent! YeeHaw! Let's all send this link to the stockholders of Digital Background Corp.

Nov 16, 07 - 06:05 pm Comment from: LorD1776

I wish someone would develop a plague that only affected lawyers. A nice little blend of syphilis, dysentery, ebola, elephantiasis and athletes foot. Stinkin' blood suckers. Hey, is this considered hateful speech? Naw, probably not, since about everyone in the world feels the same about these parasites.

They must've spent their last few dollars on the lawyers.... cuz i can't even get to http://www.viewics.com/

Another failing company trying to save themselves at the expense of others ?

Nov 16, 07 - 06:20 pm Comment from: Anonymous©

Y'all need to stop using my screenname or I'll slap you with a lawsuit!

I wonder if anyone has thought that maybe Apple has licensed a patent usage of this feature from Disney Corp? I would not be surprised to find that a prior patent exists and that if this went to trial DBC's patent would be invalidated.

The US, UK, Australia, European Patent Office, all find duplicate patents every year.

Now the other thing is that if the patent depends on a mathematical formulae it will be disallowed challenge as all mathematical formulae are deemed by the patent office to be independently derivable and therefore not patentable.

My tuppence worth.

Nov 16, 07 - 06:43 pm Comment from: neomonkey

That screenshot of StarFX sure looks like the same thing...oh wait, it looks like crap.

Nov 16, 07 - 08:36 pm Comment from: Ampar

Digital Background Corporation was going to use footage in their suit of a videoconference call with Steve Ballmer featuring a backdrop of firefalls, demons writhing and burning pits of sulfur. Then, one of their lawyers recognized Uncle Steve's secret summer hideaway. He recalled that it's got a cute, woodburned sign over the cave entrance that reads, "Abandon All Stock Options All Ye Who Enter Here!" Good times.

Nov 16, 07 - 10:04 pm Comment from: Unfettered

I remember reading about fake backdrops for video phone users in Mad Magazine when I was a kid in the 1970's. Doesn't that count as prior art?

For example, one featured a fake office background at a bar phone for husbands calling home to apologize for "working late."

Nov 16, 07 - 11:04 pm Comment from: SKY LARK

Regarding the SCUM Acacia and other patent TROLLS

THIS SITE IS VERY INTERESTING

AND THIS OFFERS YET MORE

Nov 16, 07 - 11:49 pm Comment from: Mac4lfe

That comparison screenshot really has me convinced.

I'm convinced that these motherfuskers have really lost their minds.

Nov 17, 07 - 09:50 am Comment from: Net-Weary

Still no Privacy Policy? Go ahead Fools, sign away. Dare you look here and perhaps become enlightened.

From the title only, sounds like a possible case. If Apple has unintentionally (or otherwise) transgressed, I suspect a settlement will come quickly.

Are we all still Anonymous?

Nov 17, 07 - 05:28 pm Comment from: Ampar

"Are we all still Anonymous?"

Nope.