RSS
Twitter
Copy Protection Patent Holder Demands Twelve Percent Of iTunes' Revenue
from the good-luck-with-that-plan dept
Not even sure where to start with this one. Someone who owns a patent on a copy protection technique is apparently claiming that Apple's iTunes offering is in violation, and therefore, he deserves 12% of all of the revenue from iTunes. He's obviously hoping for a good chunk of change in a settlement, but maybe this is just one more argument why companies shouldn't bother with copy protection. It just gets them all messed up in patent lawsuits. Darn those intellectual property laws... oh wait, that's what they were trying to protect with the copy protection in the first place. Of course, next thing you know, we'll find out that someone claims the patent on offering non-copy protected music files.
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
sounds like the original Circuit City Divx
"My client developed a software method for verifying subscription on-line prior to allowing download."
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
What if this guy weren't greedy and had a valid pa
Patented technology is supposed to be USED. Charging 12% defeats the whole system.
Suppose people who held software and algorithm patents routinely charged .01% instead of 12%? They'd still make a lot of $$, and the poeple who make products could afford to license a dozen patents (or more) in a product.
Nonetheles I'm against software patents, as they are awarded far too stupidly. (And I was involved in one of the earliest attempts to patent software, in 1970.)
- the Precision Blogger
http://precision-blogging.blogspot.com
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: What if this guy weren't greedy and had a vali
While I agree strongly with Precision Blogger, I think the point that everyone is overlooking here is that we're talking about 12% of the revenues of iTunes... What does that work out to, about $14 and change? Do they even make any money off of iTunes or is it all still coming from the sale of iPods?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Add Your Comment