HH: As I have been saying for years, MicroOS is a file management system for flash memory and has no relevance to hard disk memory.
Because e.Digital is now trying to ride the coattails of PTSC regarding patent infringement, they are emphasizing only flash memory as that's all the patents address. In the past they claimed MOS was in every product with which they had any relationship.
Notice that there is no mention of MicroOS in the eVu. They now say "based on e.Digital’s proprietary digital video technology." Proprietary does not mean patented.
MOS has not been used in any of the hard disk devices, including the digEplayer. I'm sure that Wood never thought he owned "MicroOS." I believe that e.
e.Digital now claim that their patented technology is the utilization of "flash" memory:
...a leading innovator of secure digital video technology and products, and patented technology in the utilization of flash memory in portable devices
e.Digital's patents are very limited in scope - 2 or 3 are patents on the design of the original voice recorder and the other 2 or 3 are one type of flash file management. There are dozens of alternative flash file management patents that have also been approved, with the same and greater claims.
Although it's extremely doubtful that anyone other than e.Digital uses MOS, e.Digital would have NO ability to determine if it was used. There is no specific performance issue that is exclusive to MOS. There are many proprietary and non-proprietary ways to accomplish what is claimed.
Shareholders should insist that Putnam explain how e.Digital could possibly determine if a device infringes on MOS. When it is known that they can't determine this, it will be clear that this whole patent monetization issue is pure hype.
They should also be willing to state who is "evaluating" the patents.
I have no doubt that they will drag this IP thing on as long as they can, but that they already know it will go nowhere.
AI
