|
-
POSTING RULES

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

12-17-2010, 09:32 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Ankeny, IA
Posts: 210
|
|
Airnav
Airnav definitely used to show sectionals on their airport data pages.
M
|

12-17-2010, 09:54 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,378
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loboflyer
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.
|
I'm assuming Dave reads this thread so I will simply say that if he feels the need to set one up, I will plan on participating. His call of course, but I think he needs to know support does exist. This foolishness needs to stop with Dave. AOPA and JEPP are not going to help the innovators...they are going to circle the wagons and protect their own crumbling empires.
|

12-17-2010, 10:01 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Davenport, IA
Posts: 1,390
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peterk
I'm assuming Dave reads this thread .........
|
Maybe he is too busy to keep up with it and maybe we can get Doug Reeves can be our conduit with respect to any monetary assistance he may want.
|

12-17-2010, 10:10 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: NE Where
Posts: 339
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Lee
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?
|
Yes, until yesterday there was a sectional on the AirNav pages, in addition to the roadmap. Thank you FlightPerp!
George
|

12-17-2010, 10:40 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Waco, Texas
Posts: 1,658
|
|
Airnav used SkyVector.
Now for the bad news. If you read the SkyVector site, they were dumb enough to accept a temporary license.
http://skyvector.com/forum/%5Btitle-raw%5D-12
All it takes is one idiot to validate FlightPrep has a licensable product by accepting a temporary license to operate. SkyVector's move was terrible for everyone who's trying to defend their own sites.
Nice job, SV!! You ate the apple and now you're going have to live with the results. You didn't make any friends in the process either.
Phil
|

12-17-2010, 11:14 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 531
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil
Airnav used SkyVector.
Now for the bad news. If you read the SkyVector site, they were dumb enough to accept a temporary license.
http://skyvector.com/forum/%5Btitle-raw%5D-12
All it takes is one idiot to validate FlightPrep has a licensable product by accepting a temporary license to operate. SkyVector's move was terrible for everyone who's trying to defend their own sites.
Nice job, SV!! You ate the apple and now you're going have to live with the results. You didn't make any friends in the process either.
Phil
|
Let's not beat up on SkyVector too much because they didn't risk financial ruin to fight licensing what is a legal patent, and with no prior case results to look to. It sucks and doesn't help the rest of the playewrs, but it's a really terrible position to be in as the little guy... Probably a smart move for them. I of course, have incredible respect for what Dave is trying to do...I hope it works out well for him.
This is not easy stuff to handle when you are in the crosshairs and stand to lose everything... I think we need to keep this focused vs. diluting across the widest net of association.
__________________
-Rick Greer, VAF #2492
Last edited by DCat22 : 08-12-2011 at 01:16 PM.
|

12-17-2010, 11:26 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: 57AZ - NW Tucson area
Posts: 10,011
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlndRvtr
Yes, until yesterday there was a sectional on the AirNav pages, in addition to the roadmap. Thank you FlightPerp!
George
|
No sectional, or even a link to a sectional...
These are the only links you get on an airport page
Road maps at: MapQuest MapPoint Yahoo! Maps Google Rand McNally
Satellite photo at: TerraServer Virtual Earth
__________________
Gil Alexander
EAA Technical Counselor, Airframe Mechanic
Half completed RV-10 QB purchased
RV-6A N61GX - finally flying
Grumman Tiger N12GA - flying
La Cholla Airpark (57AZ) Tucson AZ
|

12-17-2010, 11:32 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Waco, Texas
Posts: 1,658
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by DCat22
I worked for EV1Servers.net when they chose to license SCO Linux. It was a simple business decision...and oh, man...I feel SkyVector's pain. (To put it in perspective, there still may be a few IT folks reading this that brand me for even being related to that incident.)
|
I've been in the IT industry for 17 years now and involved in several software technologies that were patented and others who have cloned our products claiming an invention on their behalf. We currently hold 385 legitimate patents. Stuff like this comes up occasionally but intellectual property (IP) is the thing that gets challenged more in today's environment. This patent is non-sense and I have no sympathy for the folks at SkyVector.
On a side note, I wonder if Al Gore has considered filing a lawsuit against Flightprep for inventing something that uses the internet?   
Last edited by Phil : 12-18-2010 at 12:02 AM.
|

12-18-2010, 12:13 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 426
|
|
"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."
Dave, I hope you may be reading these posts but this is not correct. In order to infringe you only need to infringe any one claim, but you must have all the elements of that claim in your product or device. Thus you if you have all elements of either of claim 1, 11, or 21 that would be not good. In addition in order to infringe claim 2 for example, you need all of claim 1 and claim 2, since claim 2 is claim 1 combined with claim 2. If you do not have the elements of claim 1 you can not infringe any dependant claim 2-10 for example.
The simple test (but not complete) is do you not have the elements in 1, 11, or 21? If not that is good for you.
I am not a lawyer, so my advice is worth what it costs.
__________________
John Adams
Seattle
RV7 600+hrs
Paid 12/2014
Last edited by RV7AV8R : 12-18-2010 at 12:17 AM.
|

12-18-2010, 05:02 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 94
|
|
Pete & Marty, there is already an outfit with a fairly good track record of invalidating bogus patents called Electronic Frontier Foundation. Contact them at www.eff.org. They may be a great source of help in this situation.
Certainly hope so.
|
| Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
|
| Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
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.
|