Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Software Patents Shut Down RunwayFinder

blog.runwayfinder.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 89 posts

Re: Software Patents Shut Down RunwayFinder

#21

Post by lutorm »

cuchoperl wrote: post #14
moge wrote: post #12

knowing nothing about the company or history the line about lost revenue just made my blood boil. 22k unique visitors = 3.2 million in lost sales. 100% conversation. There is so much fail going on here and that before you include the insanity of the 'patent'.

The line in question is a good example of law-fi literature: "...that your website had 22,256 unique visitors in July 2010. Each visit represents a potential lost sale of our client’s patented invention at $149 per sale. This damage calculation exceeds $3.2 million per month in lost revenue."

Interesting how the "potential" got lost between lost sale and lost revenue...

Re: Software Patents Shut Down RunwayFinder

#22

Post by mwg66 »

RyanONeill1970 wrote: post #17
mwg66 wrote: post #3

Is it possible for RunwayFinder to be hosted outside of the US? For example, if RunwayFinder is not premium (and not sold to the US), why can't the service be hosted in the UK or Europe where the patent is not valid?

You would hope so, in fact I have a business that I'm working on that has dumb obvious patents filed in the US but I'm a UK citizen. I still reckon they'll come after me though, they love to waste time and think because they 'had an idea' that they own the rights.

Good for you. I would suggest that Runway Finder moves to Europe and let's the lawyers chase them.

Re: Software Patents Shut Down RunwayFinder

#23

Post by jrockway »

regularfry wrote: post #8

Invoking the "every visitor/download/viewer represents a lost sale" argument? Seriously? Isn't that like Godwinning a legal exchange these days?

Suing someone is expensive and risky. If the "victim" can just be bossed around with scary numbers like "33 million dollars per month", then that's excellent; they get what they want without even having to work for it.

(Personally, that amount would be more than I could ever pay off in a lifetime, so I wouldn't worry about it. I would just join some teach-kids-to-read-in-Africa chairty, leave the world of material wealth behind forever, and never pay a dime of the settlement. Just to spite them.)

Re: Software Patents Shut Down RunwayFinder

#24

Post by NelsonMinar »

This story is big news in the little world of general aviation. RunwayFinder was an excellent free product, well loved, and a lot of pilots are angry about it being bullied offline. RunwayFinder says they don't infringe. It seems likely to me, between the prior art, the obviousness of the patent, and the specificity of the patent claims (including language about using "housekeeping frames"). But they lack the means to defend themselves. I blogged some more analysis at http://www.somebits.com/weblog/aviation/flightprep-patent-76...

FlightPrep tried to go after the deep pockets in the industry, too, Jeppesen. Jepp's apparently blown them off: http://www.aopa.org/flightplanning/articles/2010/101214AOPA_...

Re: Software Patents Shut Down RunwayFinder

#25

Post by mmastrac »

Vivtek wrote: post #11

Oh, good Lord, when the patent was filed, RunwayFinder was already online . Talk about prior art! This kind of abuse just boils my blood, especially when it involves this kind of penny-ante bullshit, the whole rent-seeking mentality of identifying a niche market that could really benefit from more open information and then trying to dominate it for chump change.

EDIT: A comment below notes that this is a divisional patent and might have a date in 2001: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2008772

On the other hand, there's lots of prior art for drawing flight information on maps. Here's a video game from the 1980's that I played: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OC9i1drUg8c#t=2m15s

===========

It's easy to validate the claims that RunwayFinder forms prior art for the patent, assuming that RunwayFinder hasn't changed significantly since then:

First blog post:

http://blog.runwayfinder.com/2005/07/

Slow snapshot from archive.org:

http://web.archive.org/web/20051030165731/http://www.runwayf...

Patent filing date:

09/28/2005, via http://www.freepatentsonline.com/7640098.html

Re: Software Patents Shut Down RunwayFinder

#27

Post by gjm11 »

shrikant wrote: post #18

RunwayFinder says: They won’t talk to me. Instead I’m stuck dealing with their lawyers who twice said that if RunwayFinder pays a license fee (would you like 10% or 20% of zero?) or removes the website that they will drop the lawsuit. Unfortunately, they are now reneging on that and posturing for more. They are claiming damages of $3.2M per month. FlightPrep responds: http://blog.flightprep.com/2010/12/regarding-runw…

What's the betting that the terms of that "free" licence involve some sort of admission of RunwayFinder's guilt, or of the validity of FlightPrep's patent?

Re: Software Patents Shut Down RunwayFinder

#29

Post by ppruitt »

AvWeb interviewed Ross Neher from FlightPrep. At 5:02 they discuss the RunwayFinder suit:

http://www.avweb.com/podcast/podcast/AudioPodcast_FlightPrep...

As a student pilot, I hope this gets sorted out soon. RunwayFinder has the best VFR-sectional-over-Google-Maps interface of the available online tools. Skyvector.com is a close second, but they don't seamlessly stitch together charts (you must manually switch between them).

Re: Software Patents Shut Down RunwayFinder

#30

Post by HeyLaughingBoy »

Vivtek wrote: post #11

Oh, good Lord, when the patent was filed, RunwayFinder was already online . Talk about prior art! This kind of abuse just boils my blood, especially when it involves this kind of penny-ante bullshit, the whole rent-seeking mentality of identifying a niche market that could really benefit from more open information and then trying to dominate it for chump change.

when the patent was filed, RunwayFinder was already online

Doesn't matter. Patents are awarded by first to invent not first to file.

Post reply on HN