|
-
POSTING RULES

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

12-27-2010, 09:22 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Brookshire, TX
Posts: 1,036
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowflake
You're still mixing up two separate issues here... One, whether FP's patent is valid or not (I think we all agree it isn't, but that still needs to be proven in court), and two, whether inventing something is enough to get a patent for it.
Remember, their patent isn't just for online flight planning. It also incorporates drawing a track on an online map, and other features. If they were the first to put all those features together, the sad reality is that they may deserve the patent. I hope not.
Showing that their invention was obvious to someone skilled in the art is extremely difficult after the fact, and again will probably require a court to settle.
|
Quite frankly, to me it doesn't matter if they were the first people to put a track on an online map. Drawing that magenta line is not an invention; the apparatus that draws that line is the invention. In this particular case, that apparatus is a mass of code that was developed by FlightPrep. Now if someone else starts with a clean slate and builds a similar product, I don't consider that to be an identical or derivative invention. It particularly irks me to read FlightPrep referring to RunwayFinder using "their technology." That is utter bullcrap. The only way someone could be using their technology is if they got a hold of FP's source code, copied and/or massaged it, and then passed it off as their own creation.
Now, I am nowhere near being a lawyer, nor am I versed on patent law, so don't think that I'm trying to pass this off as anything but my opinion. But this is the reason why, regardless of the legal status, I have a problem with this whole patent infringement issue.
__________________
Philip
-8 fuselage in progress (remember when I thought the wing kit had a lot of parts? HAHAHAHAHA)
http://rv.squawk1200.net
|

12-27-2010, 10:23 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,256
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by N546RV
Quite frankly, to me it doesn't matter if they were the first people to put a track on an online map. Drawing that magenta line is not an invention; the apparatus that draws that line is the invention. In this particular case, that apparatus is a mass of code that was developed by FlightPrep. Now if someone else starts with a clean slate and builds a similar product, I don't consider that to be an identical or derivative invention. It particularly irks me to read FlightPrep referring to RunwayFinder using "their technology." That is utter bullcrap. The only way someone could be using their technology is if they got a hold of FP's source code, copied and/or massaged it, and then passed it off as their own creation.
Now, I am nowhere near being a lawyer, nor am I versed on patent law, so don't think that I'm trying to pass this off as anything but my opinion. But this is the reason why, regardless of the legal status, I have a problem with this whole patent infringement issue.
|
I saw a very similar series of events many years ago (and I'm sure it's happening all over all the time) when I did GPS work. Some jerk decided he would "patent" the "method" for putting a point on a map (in fancy terms, georeferencing). Might as well "patent" the equation for computing distance...****, why not? He then proceeded to try to extort money from anyone and everyone who ever made a box that, oh, you know, actually *did the work* of computing fixes, loading and displaying maps, and showing a position on said map. After quite a while, he did, eventually, lose the case.
People who do this kind of **** should be hauled into court for fraud and sued to the ends of their means. I read the "patent" in the current case, and from where I sit (and no, I'm not a lawyer), it's just one big bucket of bushwa.
I swear, I'm going to patent the quadratic equation or something equally incredible and start going after everyone who solves an equation. Patent and copyright law has *not* kept up with the times. Moreover, individuals and companies who act like this will get NONE of my money, now or in the future. And I don't give a rip about the niceties of "they are two indiependent companies"...you own 'em, it's all the same to me...
I'll be sure to pass this info on to the flight club I belong to, as well...I'm sure the several hundred members, mostly comprised of people who earn a living in endeavors where ethical behavior and intellectual openness are considered key, will similarly take a dim view of this kind of extortion.
__________________
Steve "Flying Scotsman"
Santa Clarita, CA
PP-ASEL, ASES, Instrument Airplane
RV-7A N660WS flying!
#8,000
|

12-27-2010, 11:53 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 35
|
|
Its a poor business model that rather than being better, relies on destroying others work using 'The System' to establish its own superiority.
... but that is the system we have. We all use it to our own advantage if we can, mainly in small ways. But it can be used in larger ways if you have the gonads. FP are trying to show us the size of theirs....
... but to my mind its only those who are 'challenged' in that area who feel the need to go about bullying (legal or not). And, as such I would not purchase any product from someone who behaves as if their competitors are so much better that they couldn't be beaten in a fair fight (product-to-product in this case).
The world has several examples where these system-(mis)using tatics were successful. As a result of this, have we ended up with better products? Or just what was left?
So, I too will not support or recommend anything from FP, not only because I disagree with their use of the system, but primarily because their behaviour implys to me that even they appear to not believe their product is better!
__________________
Will Sasse
Melbourne, Australia.
(Dreaming of a -8 christmas)
|

12-28-2010, 06:40 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Venice, Fl
Posts: 1,020
|
|
Excellent Read
Quote:
Originally Posted by MartySantic
|
This article, in a community respected aviation news source, says it all. Time is running out for Flight Prep to DO THE RIGHT THING. Cancel all pending legal action and start figuring out what is best for aviation and it's pilots. That may end up earning FP the trust (and business) of the aviation community back. But, as I said "Time is running out" Flight Prep.
__________________
Gary Palinkas - Gman.... VAF #161
Venice, Fl
RV-6 "Sassy" Flying 400 hrs since Oct 2011
Lycoming 0-360 A1A, FP Sensenich Prop
SARL #19 .... Van's Calendar March 2015
Although exempt several ways, =VAF= Dues paid to support this awesome site/family
|

12-28-2010, 06:59 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: West Plains, MO
Posts: 246
|
|
The avweb blog article is very good, and I commend Russ Niles for putting it out there.
This morning, AeroNews also has a great article about the situation. They also mention that FlightPrep has possibly threatened legal action to them for their coverage of the issue.
Last night, I got on and put my money where my mouth was and donated to the RunwayFinder legal defense fund. I was an occasional user of RunwayFinder, but I felt it was necessary for those of us that care about aviation and the aviation community to vote with our dollars. Since I wasn't a FlightPrep subscriber either, the only way I could "vote" was to contribute to the RunwayFinder fund.
I intend to continue contributing to the cause. I encourage all of you that are concerned, to contribute.
I would suggest that since a year subscription to FlightPrep is around $150, that might be a good starting point for a contribution, as a symbolic gesture.
__________________
--
Brent Humphreys
PPSEL
RV-10 (Starting Empennage )
Status: Elevators
N411BE Reserved
Build Log
|

12-28-2010, 09:23 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Davenport, IA
Posts: 1,390
|
|
Here is the link.....
FlightPrep threatens Aero News Network (ANN) for their coverage of the RunwayFinder issue. Just amazing!
http://www.aero-news.net/news/genav....2391&Dynamic=1
Last edited by MartySantic : 12-28-2010 at 09:47 AM.
|

12-28-2010, 09:26 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: West Plains, MO
Posts: 246
|
|
That link was broken I will try Here it is
__________________
--
Brent Humphreys
PPSEL
RV-10 (Starting Empennage )
Status: Elevators
N411BE Reserved
Build Log
|

12-28-2010, 10:38 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: KRTS
Posts: 1,798
|
|
I'm waiting for Flightprep to go after Falconview and PFPS (military mission planning software) since it all works the same.
Lets see them sue those outfits.
__________________
Next?, TBD
IAR-823, SOLD
RV-8, SOLD
RV-7, SOLD
Last edited by Mike S : 12-28-2010 at 11:19 AM.
Reason: offensive language
|

12-30-2010, 05:55 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: West Plains, MO
Posts: 246
|
|
If anyone still harbored a thought that FlightPrep was acting reaonably. Read this.
http://bit.ly/gTNpbX
__________________
--
Brent Humphreys
PPSEL
RV-10 (Starting Empennage )
Status: Elevators
N411BE Reserved
Build Log
|
| 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.
|