|
-
POSTING RULES

-
Donate yearly (please).
-
Advertise in here!
-
Today's Posts
|
Insert Pics
|

12-17-2010, 02:58 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Davenport, IA
Posts: 1,390
|
|
RunwayFinder TO FIGHT!!!
Hooray!!!! RunwayFinder will FIGHT FlightPrep per a recent post in Dave's blog. Please support Dave anyway you can!! See his blog.
http://bit.ly/dFqNSj
If ANYONE knows his e-mail address, please post it. I want to offer my support.
|

12-17-2010, 03:12 PM
|
 |
Forum Peruser
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Austinville, Alabama
Posts: 2,458
|
|
RunwayFinder to Fight Back!
Wow, I just read his most recent update on his blog and all I can say is "This is going to be interesting!" And to think that RunwayFinder is not even Dave's full time job! It tells me that he really believes in RunwayFinder to the point that he is willing to fight for it. Wow, it's like the skinny little kid that got the sand kicked in his face by the big bully is going to fight back, not with brute strength but with brains! I always did like those kinds of story lines.
Dave, I wish you the best! I'll be pulling for you!! 
__________________
Don Hull
RV-7 Wings
KDCU Pryor Field
Pilots'n Paws Pilot
N79599/ADS-B In and Out...and I like it!
?Certainly, travel is more than the seeing of sights;
it is a change that goes on, deep and permanent, in the ideas of living." Miriam Beard
|

12-17-2010, 03:35 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 531
|
|
http://blog.runwayfinder.com/2010/12...-road-forward/
Quote:
The Road Forward
December 17, 2010 in News by Dave | No comments
I?m starting a new post that is dedicated to the dismantling of the FlightPrep patent and their lawsuit against RunwayFinder. I spent some time last evening reading over their patent and some of the documents in their patent application. I think there is a clear path toward fighting the lawsuit against RunwayFinder, and potentially a way to invalidate their patent. I am going to represent RunwayFinder myself at least initially in the lawsuit. The help from everybody so far is much appreciated.
I?ve had some good interest in putting the website code into open source. Regardless of how the lawsuit works out, I?ll work on that once the current situation is under control.
I?ve had several requests for the summons and complaint that was filed in Oregon District Court. I?ve posted it here. I didn?t scan Exhibit 1 as it?s an exact copy of the FlightPrep patent 7,640,098.
First off, a little background on patents. If you know all of this, feel free to skip this paragraph. The most important part of a patent in an infringement suit is the claims section. Ironically, the claims sections starts on nearly the last page of the patent. FlightPrep has 23 claims in their patent. You?ll notice that many of these are linked together. Claims 2-10 are all linked to claim 1. Claims 12-20 are all linked to claim 11. And 22-23 are linked to 21. The linked claims are called dependent claims. In order to be infringing on a patent, a person or entity must be infringing on every one of the claims that are linked together. Thus, an infringement would need to be on all of claims 1-10, or all of claims 11-20, or all of claims 21-23 for this patent.
I?ve also posted what?s called the ?file wrapper? for the patent. This includes all of the original application plus any amendments and the correspondence with the patent examiner. A couple of interesting things I?ve noticed after reading through it more carefully. First, their application for a patent was not rejected just once. It was rejected 7 times, including one ?final rejection.?
Additionally, as I mentioned in an earlier post this patent is a divisional patent. In other words, the original patent application was split into two applications. I?ve also posted the file wrapper for the original FlightPrep patent application. It was eventually abandoned. It?s interesting to compare the claims in the original patent application to what they ended up with in the final patent. I?ll be reading through those differences more carefully, but they substantially modified and added to their claims over the course of 8 years adding a housekeeping frame and navigation waypoints. Most of the modifications were done in the 2006-2009 timeframe, well after websites like Google Maps, RunwayFinder, and SkyVector had been online for years. Even going back to their original 2001 patent application, it can be argued that their ?invention? was basically taking what MapQuest did back in 1996 with online maps and making an obvious extension by applying it to aeronautical charts. From what I understand, the best way to get the patent invalidated is to write directly to the patent examiner with prior art that he did not consider in his original review of the application.
As for the lawsuit, reading through their patent more carefully I can make a very clear and convincing case that RunwayFinder does not infringe. Every one of their independent claims starts with the concept of ?compositing? a navigation chart. This is basically how Google Maps creates their road maps. They start with a blank slate, add roads, add cities, add text, etc. However, RunwayFinder is only displaying a digital representation of paper VFR and IFR charts. Even in the patent they say, ?In this invention, the charts are not the traditional paper charts, but are charts generated electronically using a computer software system, this will become apparent further in this description. [sic]? RunwayFinder does not generate the charts. There are many other angles I can take as well, but this seems to be the most convincing as it is the basis for their entire patent.
I must respond to their summons by December 28th. Convenient that this lands right on Christmas week. I?ll be working on my ?answer? over the weekend, and will post a draft on this blog.
|
__________________
-Rick Greer, VAF #2492
|

12-17-2010, 03:38 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 531
|
|
From the lawsuit http://blog.runwayfinder.com/wp-cont...mons_claim.pdf :
Quote:
|
13. As a direct and proximate result of Runwayfinder's conduct, Stenbock has suffered and will continue to suffer irreparable injury, for which it has no adequate remedy at law. Stenbock has also been damaged, and, until an injunction issues, will continue to be damaged in its business and reputation in an amount yet to be determined. Moreover, the wilful and deliberate nature of Runwayfinder's infringement renders this an exceptional case, and this Stenbock is further entitled to treble damages, as well as its actual attorneys' fees and litigation costs.
|
From the FlightPrep blog, on http://blog.flightprep.com/2010/12/r...ting-down.html :
Quote:
|
This latest move of RunwayFinder, electing to shut down its website, is another example of an attempt to inflame the pilot community.
|
...just quoting as written. Of course, you should read both in full for any context. May contain typos.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MartySantic
If ANYONE knows his e-mail address, please post it. I want to offer my support.
|
He had it published as dave [@t] runwayfinder [d0t] com ...
__________________
-Rick Greer, VAF #2492
Last edited by DCat22 : 12-17-2010 at 04:16 PM.
|

12-17-2010, 04:27 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,378
|
|
There is no question that Dave can write code with the best of em. I do get anxious when non-JD types plan to represent themselves in legal issues against experienced JD types. I remember seeing offers of assistance on this thread....I think...a good thing. Personally, I think Dave is on target with trying to get the patent destroyed. That would make Dave a hero not just to us but to the other small plans that have already folded.
|

12-17-2010, 04:54 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Rock Hill, SC
Posts: 390
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peterk
There is no question that Dave can write code with the best of em. I do get anxious when non-JD types plan to represent themselves in legal issues against experienced JD types. I remember seeing offers of assistance on this thread....I think...a good thing. Personally, I think Dave is on target with trying to get the patent destroyed. That would make Dave a hero not just to us but to the other small plans that have already folded.
|
The blog post quoted a couple of posts above contains some significant incorrect statements about how patent law works. If Mr. Parsons intends to defend this suit, he ought to find a competent attorney right away.
__________________
Jonathan Hines
Charlotte, NC
|

12-17-2010, 05:41 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 531
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHines
The blog post quoted a couple of posts above contains some significant incorrect statements about how patent law works. If Mr. Parsons intends to defend this suit, he ought to find a competent attorney right away.
|
+1
Law if a complex beast, especially for engineer types. And I mean that with fond respect to both lawyers and engineers...

__________________
-Rick Greer, VAF #2492
|

12-17-2010, 08:26 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 97
|
|
And to think I liked Golden Eagle until now.
Is there a legal defense fund we can help out with? I'm all for intellectual property but some of these software patents are just out-of-my-freakin-mind ridiculous.
__________________
-Jeff B.-
Albuquerque, NM
RV-7A (Preview Plans Stage), VAF# 1149
Assisting/designing panel for flying RV-6A
|

12-17-2010, 08:30 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,275
|
|
Someone mentioned that airnav.com was impacted. Yesterday I looked and saw a generic road map type picture of the airport and surrounding area. Was that a sectional picture prior to this situation?
Last edited by Ron Lee : 12-17-2010 at 08:44 PM.
|

12-17-2010, 08:32 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Schaumburg, IL
Posts: 2,053
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Lee
Someone mentioned that airnav.com was impacted. Yesterday I looked and saw a generic road may type picture of the airport and surrounding area. Was that a sectional picture prior to this situation?
|
No, that's the way it's been for as long as I can remember.
__________________
Tony Phillips
N524AP, RV 9 (tail wheel)
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:50 AM.
|