सभी
← Back to Squawk list
AOPA/Jeppesen rebuff patent trolling provocation from Flightprep
FlightPrep has notified entities that provide online flight planning, including AOPA and Jeppesen, that it would like to meet to discuss the FlightPrep patent. The FlightPrep patent is apparently on very specific methods of online flight planning, which Jeppesen has determined are not used in its flight planning products, including the one developed in partnership with AOPA. Therefore, AOPA and Jeppesen have declined to meet with FlightPrep. (www.aopa.org) और अधिक...Sort type: [Top] [Newest]
I am confused...
ON the FlightPrep website I quote:
"The FlightPrep Mission
FlightPrep is 100% funded by users. Thus, without subscriber revenue, delivering FlightPrep free indefinitely will not be possible."
Wityh the lawsuit this is no longer true - they are now using funds from the lawsuit. Now we all know that trrying to get $$ from free or very low cost website service means they (after all the legal bills) will have ZERO dollars in fact they will loose money with this apporach. I am in the high tech business and SCO tried the same stunt! Now they are completely out of business!
ON the FlightPrep website I quote:
"The FlightPrep Mission
FlightPrep is 100% funded by users. Thus, without subscriber revenue, delivering FlightPrep free indefinitely will not be possible."
Wityh the lawsuit this is no longer true - they are now using funds from the lawsuit. Now we all know that trrying to get $$ from free or very low cost website service means they (after all the legal bills) will have ZERO dollars in fact they will loose money with this apporach. I am in the high tech business and SCO tried the same stunt! Now they are completely out of business!
byrdflyr: Your comments would apply IF patents were indeed issued only to those providing innovation. Far too often, the patent office grants patents without performing even the most basic search for prior art or "obviousness". This leads to costly litigation to defend against patents that should never have been granted, and frequently those companies producing real products with limited resources must "cave" against patent troll firms that do not actually produce anything but lawsuits.
I'm not saying that is the case, necessarily, in the matter of FlightPrep. They actually do have a product.
Another trend I've seen is trolls going after the USERS or CUSTOMERS of a product, rather than just the manufacturers, especially when those customers have big pockets. This should be illegal.
I'm not saying that is the case, necessarily, in the matter of FlightPrep. They actually do have a product.
Another trend I've seen is trolls going after the USERS or CUSTOMERS of a product, rather than just the manufacturers, especially when those customers have big pockets. This should be illegal.
Patents are an important ingredient to our commercial success in the world's economy. I believe that if a person has a unique idea, files for and receives a patent, then they should attempt to stop others from stealing their idea for commercial advantage. Getting patents is expensive, and patent litigation is even more expensive, but that is the system we have, and it promotes innovation. The alternative, where anyone can take and use anyone's ideas, is unacceptable. So let FlightPrep go through the process. If a responsible company believes its position is solid, it will call the bluff, or alternatively it will settle (and pay a license), or will fold. That's the reality, and that is as good a system as there is. If you work hard to innovate and have been through this process, you will understand that all of that is just part of doing business. Thank goodness we have reasonable access to a fair and impartial court system that upholds laws that protect our property rights. I wouldn't want to live under any other system. Time will tell whether FlightPrep is right, or wrong, but I don't blame them for asserting any commercial advantage achieved through the patent process.
[http://flightaware.com/news/article/FlightAware-Statement-on-FlightPrep-Patent/147 FlightAware Statement on FlightPrep Patent]
Depending, Ted.
As I mentioned in the other article, this may be a great case for the Electronic Frontier Foundation to take on. The EFF was created and is extremely useful for situations like this, patent trolls, and other cases involving Fair Use or Prior Art. I still say that someone from RunwayFinder should contact them.
As I mentioned in the other article, this may be a great case for the Electronic Frontier Foundation to take on. The EFF was created and is extremely useful for situations like this, patent trolls, and other cases involving Fair Use or Prior Art. I still say that someone from RunwayFinder should contact them.
I agree that developers of technology have the right to protect their intellectual property. I also agree that the new flight planning software that abounds in the marketplace is a tremendous benefit to aviation and aviation safety. So I sincerely hope that some prior art is discovered to shut this action down.