InvestorsHub Logo

kokonutguy

02/20/09 9:30 PM

#154030 RE: success622 #154025

They can say whatever makes them feel better but the bottom line is that Neomedia owns it out right and their patents are rock solid. In other words, NEOM won, EFF lost.

krays

02/20/09 9:41 PM

#154031 RE: success622 #154025

That's just funny, I love this line in particular.

"if you're trying to decide what course of action to take in light of the reissued patent, you may want to hire a patent attorney to discuss with you the specifics of your plan".

Suggested edit - suggest you hire a damned good patent attorney in other words, avoid those of us at the EFF!!

Thanks for posting rwandrw

jonesieatl

02/20/09 10:03 PM

#154032 RE: success622 #154025

Why did NeoMedia say ....

"All ninety-five claims of this Barcode Lookup Patent have been confirmed as being patentable by the PTO."

and

"We are pleased that this patent has withstood the intense scrutiny of the PTO's re-examination process"

and

" .... confirming all ninety-five claims as being patentable", said Tony Barkume of Barkume & Associates, P.C., patent counsel for NeoMedia."

When, as the author states, NeoMedia canceled 6 of the claims?

Why couldn't NeoMedia just be accurate and forthcoming ... for once ... in their PR and mention "The amendments narrowed the claims by adding several additional requirements."?

I don't see the EFF backpedaling at all. Kwun seems to be going after NeoMedia.

How accurate are the comments by Kwun quoted below? Will we be tied up in court for another year and half? How long do these patents run before they expire? If we really have 'rock solid' patents that actually tie up this 'nascent industry' and will force licensing, royalties or per-click compensation ... PUTTING SOME MONEY IN NEOMEDIA'S TREASURY ... why isn't the stock at least a paltry penny a share?

"even the narrowed claims are of suspect validity.

Is it really novel to add the feature of having a remote database of predetermined relationships? (You'd think that UPC barcode systems would have done that years before.) Or the features of reading data client-side and doing a lookup based on that data server-side? (Standard fare in millions of client-server systems.) Or using the resulting information client-side? (Again, common practice in all sorts of client-server systems.)

Given that those features are the basis for the PTO's decision to reissue the amended patent claims, and given that those features were well known long before before the NeoMedia patent application was filed, the amended patent claims are obvious and thus invalid unless the combination yields novel and unexpected results. Where are the novel and unexpected results here?"

Although most of the U.S. or global population certainly aren't at all aware of NeoMedia or 2d barcodes for that matter ... certainly every mobile barcode related company was watching for the PTO's decision. Carriers, brands, brand managers, advertising agencies, phone manufacturers, on and on, everybody on some long list I saw posted here earlier.

That has to represent quite a few people .. and their friends .. and their brokers .. and their friends ... and their brokers. At .004/share and in the absence of even "3 days in play" after the decision , it might seem the majority of those who were actually watching this play out don't sense a monetarily lucrative 'win' here?

jonesie

lesnshawn

02/21/09 1:10 PM

#154116 RE: success622 #154025

success622: I don't know though...

The EFF may have a valid point w/ this argument...

http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/07/when-reeses-peanut-butter-cups-principle-doesnt-ap

It doesn't appear to me that the ScanBuy case and the other TX case are going to be slam dunks. I think they're going to use this very line of reasoning and hit it hard.

I wouldn't call this case a done deal yet.

lns

stock_raving_mad

02/21/09 4:07 PM

#154129 RE: success622 #154025

I think EFF is delusional at best. I think these numskulls are beyond belief! LOL!!! How can they say that all 95 claims did not hold up. The way I see it the claims that were dropped were no longer relevant, and the claims that were changed were made to be more concise, focused, and more readable, but not narrowed. NeoMedia’s patent attorneys made it clear.
http://www.barkume.com/Site/Reexam_Win.html

I especially like this part;

This decision cannot be appealed by EFF or any other third party.

The claims of the '048 patent as clarified once again will enjoy the presumption of validity and have been strengthened as a result of the process.


PS. And yes by all means,……..ScaMbuy,……….“PLEASE” use the EFF lawyers when defending yourself against NeoMedia’s patent infringement law suit!