The insane spitfire video clip

Hey Jay, just a heads up on using video clips.
There is a company called Acacia that claims to own the patent on recorded
streaming media.
They are asking that people pay them huge amounts of money to license their DMT
patents. How do I know about this, because we got a letter from them asking us
to pay them $10k to license their patents. They are not playing around, they
even sent these letters to universities, online radio stations and so forth.

Jeff

Jay Honeck wrote:

If you haven't seen this yet give it a look. It's a Spitfire practically
mowing the lawn during a wheels-up flyby at the camera. WTF?!

This is rated R for (wholly appropriate) use of strong language.

http://alexisparkinn.com/oh_my_god.htm

Glad you like it -- I think it's the best one of the bunch! (I'll bet they
ever used that footage in the documentary they were filming -- at least not
with sound! :-)

Sorry about not being able to save the video -- I've received several
requests for instructions on how to save it. For some stupid reason, my
setting the video up on its own page seems to eliminate the ability to
"right click and save" it.

I'll be working to fix that.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

There is a company called Acacia that claims to own the patent on recorded
streaming media.
They are asking that people pay them huge amounts of money to license
their DMT
patents. How do I know about this, because we got a letter from them
asking us
to pay them $10k to license their patents. They are not playing around,
they
even sent these letters to universities, online radio stations and so
forth.

They claim a patent on ALL streaming media? Wow -- that's arrogance of
Microsoftian proportions.

Well, I suppose if they want to stop our fun, they can have a whack at me.

But they'll have to stand in line to do it. ;-)

(What's a "DMT patent"?)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Thats what their patent claims, so far, some of the biggest companies, Hustler,
wicked, Vivid, lodge net, and others, have signed their license agreement. After
our attorney reviewed the patents, we signed it also. Its no joke, they are
going after everyone, they have had the courts shut down alot of sites that
refused to pay licensing fee's.
A few places are litigating it, I am sure the out come of the trial will
invalidate the patents, but as of now, they are enforcing them.

BTW they havnt been standing in any lines, they have been pushing their way to
the front of it

This is the same company who in 2000, claimed they held the patent on the V-chip
technology, alot of companies paid up, a few went to court. after 2 years,
acacia lost. But as Rob Berman said in a radio interview "we made 200 million
dollars, so did we really lose"



Jay Honeck wrote:

There is a company called Acacia that claims to own the patent on recorded
streaming media.
They are asking that people pay them huge amounts of money to license
their DMT
patents. How do I know about this, because we got a letter from them
asking us
to pay them $10k to license their patents. They are not playing around,
they
even sent these letters to universities, online radio stations and so
forth.

They claim a patent on ALL streaming media? Wow -- that's arrogance of
Microsoftian proportions.

Well, I suppose if they want to stop our fun, they can have a whack at me.

But they'll have to stand in line to do it. ;-)

(What's a "DMT patent"?)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

On Tue, 28 Oct 2003 14:58:03 -0800, Jeff wrote:

Thats what their patent claims, so far, some of the biggest companies, Hustler,
wicked, Vivid, lodge net, and others, have signed their license agreement. After
our attorney reviewed the patents, we signed it also.

How long ago was this? Your attorney could have easily requested a
stay on the court date until the current lawsuit against Acacia is
settled (which will more than likley invalidate their patents).


Its no joke, they are
going after everyone, they have had the courts shut down alot of sites that
refused to pay licensing fee's.

Which is misleading, and almost makes it sound like Acacia acutally
presented a case in their favor, which is not the case.
The only time Acacia has won anything in court, was when the defendant
refused to appear.... and is not "a lot" of sites, just a handful run
by a few select companies.

If their pantent held *any* weight, companies like Yahoo, MS, AOL, etc
would be the targets.

Acacia definitely seems to be pros in this area... milking a puchased
pantent for all they can before the courts deem them invalid.

On Wed, 29 Oct 2003 11:05:51 -0600, Do What? wrote
in Message-Id: :

Acacia definitely seems to be pros in this area... milking a puchased
pantent for all they can before the courts deem them invalid.

Aren't patents issued for the purpose of generating law suits? :-)

Larry Dighera wrote:

Aren't patents issued for the purpose of generating law suits? :-)

Certainly the Wright brother's patents were.

George Patterson
You can dress a hog in a tuxedo, but he still wants to roll in the mud.

On Wed, 29 Oct 2003 11:05:51 -0600, Do What?
wrote:

On Tue, 28 Oct 2003 14:58:03 -0800, Jeff wrote:

Thats what their patent claims, so far, some of the biggest companies, Hustler,
wicked, Vivid, lodge net, and others, have signed their license agreement. After
our attorney reviewed the patents, we signed it also.

How long ago was this? Your attorney could have easily requested a
stay on the court date until the current lawsuit against Acacia is
settled (which will more than likley invalidate their patents).

Just to correct myself... there is no lawsuit against Acacia, but
there are finally a group of defendants (11) that are well prepared to
challenge the Acacia claim (something that has yet to be done).

Either way, one could make a very strong case for a stay until those
play out in the courts.

actually there are law suits against acacia by a couple of different companies. Not
directly against the DMT patents, but as a result of them and ongoings around them.

There is a group (whom I know personally and recently talked to on the phone) who has
been in litigation with acacia for awhile.
This isnt a new thing, its just recently they have been really pushing their license
thing. I think they will win, there is ALOT of people helping them find prior art. We
were first "asked" to sign their license agreement 3 months ago. The company in
litigation was first "ask" to sign it last year.

Do What? wrote:

On Wed, 29 Oct 2003 11:05:51 -0600, Do What?
wrote:

On Tue, 28 Oct 2003 14:58:03 -0800, Jeff wrote:

Thats what their patent claims, so far, some of the biggest companies, Hustler,
wicked, Vivid, lodge net, and others, have signed their license agreement. After
our attorney reviewed the patents, we signed it also.

How long ago was this? Your attorney could have easily requested a
stay on the court date until the current lawsuit against Acacia is
settled (which will more than likley invalidate their patents).

Just to correct myself... there is no lawsuit against Acacia, but
there are finally a group of defendants (11) that are well prepared to
challenge the Acacia claim (something that has yet to be done).

Either way, one could make a very strong case for a stay until those
play out in the courts.

how long ago, last week was when we sent them the check.


Do What? wrote:

If their pantent held *any* weight, companies like Yahoo, MS, AOL, etc
would be the targets.

actually this was asked of them during a live interview, their response was the law
allows them certain latitude, they decided to go after websits because they can make
more money.
But remember they already signed lodgnet (the people who provide in-room movies to
hotels) and are trying to get money from Universities right now.

patent law suits are expensive, its not something you want to fight if you dont have
to.

On Wed, 29 Oct 2003 17:51:28 -0800, Jeff wrote:

how long ago, last week was when we sent them the check.


Do What? wrote:

If their pantent held *any* weight, companies like Yahoo, MS, AOL, etc
would be the targets.

actually this was asked of them during a live interview, their response was the law
allows them certain latitude, they decided to go after websits because they can make
more money.

Yeah, after receiving my "notice", I've come across quite a bit of
more-than-interesting info about this whole ordeal.

One thing that really stood out was their Q3 conference call last
week.... one of the shareholder asked if there was any open
litigation. Acacia's response, "no"
Pretty bold to mislead shareholders... and while Im not securities
guru, is this not against the law?

Funny thing is, that neither my sites, nor the sites I link to violate
their patent.....