backtop

Print 39 comment(s) - last by mogwai403.. on Jun 17 at 12:15 PM
The ITC is investigating Apple after a complaint was filed by Creative for alleged patent infringement

Creative announced today that the International Trade Council (ITC) has initiated an investigation into Apple's alleged patent infringement against Creative over the called "Zen patent". Creative claims that the Zen patent covers the user interface used in its own line of Zen MP3 players and that Apple has copied the interface for use with the iPod family. The investigation is based on a complaint filed by Creative Labs and Creative Technology Ltd. on May 15, 2006.

Creative earlier this year sued Apple for patent infringement claiming Apple violated a patent the company filed in January 2001 the patent was approved by the USPTO in August of last year. Many claim that Creative is acting like a patent troll and only suing Apple now because the iPod and not the Creative Zen family is the dominate music player on the market today.

Apple quickly counter-sued Creative claiming the company infringes on Apples own patents covering the display of data, the editing of mobile data on a desktop PC and computer icons. However, as DailyTech reported last month Creative claims that apple never mentioned the patents in question while Creative and Apple were in discussions with each other.


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Creative..... more like destroy creativity
By Schadenfroh on 6/14/2006 2:47:19 PM , Rating: 2
Creative never tries to gain market share by making better products. They always just send their lawyers in to try to bleed the competitor out. This is what they did to Aureal 3D back when they had competition for gaming sound cards. Aureal won all of the baseless lawsuits that creative slapped on them, but Aureal went under because of all the legal fees. Creative bought them, shelved the technology, fired the engineers and now has successfully stifled creativity in the gaming sound card market.

Creative cannot defeat competing products with their devices, so they just use lawyers.




RE: Creative..... more like destroy creativity
By Trisped on 6/14/2006 3:07:29 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, Creative is the only maker of quality, add in sound cards. Still, most gamers don't own an add in sound card. Most of it is built into the mother board. The real market of Creative cards are audio enthusiasts. Even then I don't think they buy into the Creative market. I like Creative because of all the I/O options and the fact that their sound quality is about equal or better then ICC versions. Yes, their software could use some help, but only an enthusiast would know.


RE: Creative..... more like destroy creativity
By Scorpion on 6/14/2006 3:15:26 PM , Rating: 1
Pffft. Enthusiasts. Enthusiasts, such as myself, or may I regard myself as an Audiophile, use REAL soundcards, not the trash produced by Creative. I currently use an M-Audio card, which is good quality at a decent price, and a professional RME card. Creative cards are junk, unless you're an average PC user or gamer without an ear for quality audio. And even then, they are WAY overpriced. Did I mention their software and drivers are utter junk? Oh wait, you already did that.

Creative is anything but. They don't innovate, they regurtate.


RE: Creative..... more like destroy creativity
By Scorpion on 6/14/2006 3:16:43 PM , Rating: 2
"regurgitate"

blasted lack-of-edit-button.


By Schadenfroh on 6/14/2006 3:19:12 PM , Rating: 2
Dont label me an apple fanboy, I just hate Creative more than Apple.


RE: Creative..... more like destroy creativity
By andrep74 on 6/14/2006 4:56:56 PM , Rating: 2
Funny, not once did you mention _why_ you think Creative products are such junk. SNR is superior even in the X-Fi Music (available for less than the M-Audio) while supporting EAX 5.0, a surround technology that's still being refined as opposed to A3D. Audiophiles, or anyone with a higher appreciation and/or awareness of audio, will resent any implication that they can't really tell the difference, but few have actually participated in double-blind tests of the equipment of which they speak. Nonetheless, my observation is that with a pair of quality cans, the X-Fi lets me enjoy static- and hiccup-free audio and locate objects in 3D space with pinpoint accuracy, something I can't do with my on-board HD-audio solution. At this stage of the game, there's very little separating mid- to high-end audio cards for regular stereo reproduction.

Now, my gripe with Creative is their lack of support and their buggy drivers and firmware. My original Audigy got the EEPROM bug when placed in an nForce2 system; my X-Fi Music worked flawlessly in that same system, but my X-Fi Platinum will not work in my nForce4 system. I actually place part of the blame on nVidia, actually, since their chipset has a known ACPI flaw; since no one really knows the technical details of the flaw, I could even make the claim that the Creative part only works when installed in a system with a perfect ACPI implementation, which may or may not be unreasonable.

As far as innovation: while they didn't invent SRC, their implementation of it (at -136dB SNR!) is pretty revolutionary. It's Creative's response to the atrocious quality of their SRC in the Audigy series, I'm sure, or else why create an audio processor that dedicates over 50% of its time doing SRC? How "clean" is the M-Audio SRC?

Finally, Creative didn't get its monopoly by "stifling" competition. I don't remember any legal action against Advanced Gravis, which had the best wavetable synthesis engine on the market before going under (yes, I actually owned a GUS!)


By fungry on 6/14/2006 11:55:16 PM , Rating: 2
Yea, all the readers in this forum and elsewhere flame at Creative but never truely and clearly state the reasons. Okay buggy drivers/patches and all, but come on; with that reason any electronic related company could be flamed. Take Bethesda, the producer or makers of Oblivion... released a patch which ruined textures, for some FPS rates and more.


RE: Creative..... more like destroy creativity
By PrinceGaz on 6/14/2006 5:58:28 PM , Rating: 2
Creative most certainly do innovate-- they are the only manufacturer to use X-RAM on their high-end cards. Surely using a totally new type of memory to dramatically improve soundcard technology is what creativity is all about. No doubt other soundcard manufacturers will want to license this X-RAM from Creative for use on their own products, making Creative the leading force in future development. [/sarcasm]


By Schadenfroh on 6/15/2006 9:25:55 AM , Rating: 2
Show me in benchmarks (in games written with x-ram in mind like battlefield 2) where the gimmick that is x-ram is actually useful.

It is just a marketing feature.


RE: Creative..... more like destroy creativity
By d4a2n0k on 6/14/2006 7:31:04 PM , Rating: 2
HEHEHE. Get over yourself. A real "audiophile" would NEVER listen to music on a computer. Way too much interference going on inside that box to come close to even mid-end stand-alone audio gear, even with a top of the line sound card.

So take your "real" soundcard and believe you are getting quality sound from a pc.


By TomZ on 6/14/2006 9:26:26 PM , Rating: 2
Let me guess, you like the sound from vacuum tubes, right?

I always enjoy the elitist "audiophile" view - everything retro is good, like tubes and vinyl, probably 8-track tapes too. All of these modern conveniences like transistors and microprocessors - complete rubbish.


RE: Creative..... more like destroy creativity
By Hare on 6/15/2006 5:55:31 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
HEHEHE. Get over yourself. A real "audiophile" would NEVER listen to music on a computer. Way too much interference going on inside that box to come close to even mid-end stand-alone audio gear, even with a top of the line sound card.

Let's see I have ripped my music to my computer and use an m-audio external soundcard to connect to my external DAC (digital toslink connection). This DAC is connected to my amps. How the heck should this be different than listening to a "audiophile" cd-player. I'll tell you. No difference absolutely. Actually a computer with the use of good error correction during the ripping process actually has better sound and less jitter. I think you should do a little more reseach before giving "audiophile" advice.


RE: Creative..... more like destroy creativity
By mogwai403 on 6/15/2006 2:51:16 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
No difference absolutely.


mmm... so what brand of hearing aid that you are using again?


RE: Creative..... more like destroy creativity
By Hare on 6/16/2006 3:39:11 AM , Rating: 2
If you use an external DAC the only thing moving via the wires is zeros and ones. Zeros and ones sound the same no matter what. It's ridiculous to think that the same zeros and ones sound different if they come from your hd or from your cd-player. No, I'm not using a hearing aid and consider myself somewhat of an audiophile. Thanks for your oppinion without any backing up.


By Hare on 6/16/2006 3:40:07 AM , Rating: 2
Forgot to add. I use lossless compression on the ripped tracks. I'm not talking about 128kbps mp3.


By mogwai403 on 6/17/2006 12:15:54 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
moving via the wires is zeros and ones


well, digital signal isn't that clean, you get phase shift , ENOB (effective number of bits), THD (total harmonic distortion), wave reflection due to cable spec. Even the grounding of the pc components are usually not superb for acoustic applications (there's a reason why SMPS are not exactly for hi-fi)

No matter how much you try to argue, the amount of whiteband noise coming from those PC components are just unavoidable (despite the possibility of when you ripped those tracks that all acoustic features are captured succesively, which is, kind of, unlikely)


Stop promoting Apple
By Trisped on 6/14/2006 2:48:49 PM , Rating: 1
You can't be a patent troll if you actually use the patent. The point of the troll is that you create a patent for tech you will never use, sell, or in anyway make usable to the rest of the market. Creative is using the patent, as noted in the article.

It is an actually legit case of patent infringement. One company owns the market, the other comes up with a good idea to help steal away customers (also called innovation). The mega company then steals the idea, making it impossible for the creative company to compete.

You guys are just iPod and Apple fans, and most of you wouldn't be if
A) iTunes had a real competitor for buying music online.
B) iTunes music could be played on another MP3 player
c) You weren't so in love with Apple

The fact is that the iPod has stifled innovation in the MP3 market, they are impossible to keep clean and scratch free, and are over priced.




RE: Stop promoting Apple
By Scorpion on 6/14/2006 3:08:02 PM , Rating: 2
I don't own an iPod. Not at all. And I doubt I ever will, but this is a typical creative move. I've seen and used both Creatives MP3 players from the original Nomad as well as Apples, and I don't see a case. What I do see is Creative getting a patent that the terrible patent system approved, that now allows them to sue Apple. When was this patent filed and granted? How much has Apples interface changed in that time? I rest my case...


RE: Stop promoting Apple
By Hare on 6/14/2006 4:38:47 PM , Rating: 2
Exactly ! The whole patent system is idiotic. Companies are just patenting everything they think of no matter how small and stupid it may be just so that they can possibly benefit from it in the future if a competition happens to use something even remotely similar. MS is a good example. So many patents each day that the bureau actually granted them a patent on red apples by mistake. Not the company, the fruit !

Small companies are dying because they don't have the resources to fing out if their product might look similar to something these bigger players might have patented. What a great way to support innovation...


RE: Stop promoting Apple
By d4a2n0k on 6/14/2006 7:35:46 PM , Rating: 2
I think Im going to patent the color blue. Think it would work? :)


RE: Stop promoting Apple
By Lonyo on 6/14/2006 4:58:41 PM , Rating: 2
The patent was filed in Jan 2001, as the article states.
The iPod? Well, let's see:
It was unveiled by CEO Steve Jobs on October 23, 2001

So, the iPod Gen 1 was released 9 months after this patent was filed for, and the patent was granted last August.
To be totally honest, ANYONE saying Creative is trolling or doing ANYTHING else has all of no legs to stand on.

What exactly was your case? Because I don't know much about the iPod interface and whether it has or has not changed, but the patent came before the iPod.


RE: Stop promoting Apple
By Lonyo on 6/14/2006 4:59:22 PM , Rating: 2
Bah, looked at the wrong part of the story referring to an earlier patent dispute thing.


RE: Stop promoting Apple
By michael2k on 6/14/2006 5:04:59 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, but the iPod's interface came before the iPod. It was first seen on Steve's NeXTStep in 1986.


RE: Stop promoting Apple
By DigitalFreak on 6/14/2006 9:18:56 PM , Rating: 2
It wouldn't take much for Creative to have found out about the Ipod before it's release, and rush to file a patent. They are bastards, plain and simple.


RE: Stop promoting Apple
By michael2k on 6/14/2006 5:05:23 PM , Rating: 2
The iPod stifled innovation? How so, by being successful?
1) The iPod was the innovator.
A) Universal Mass Storage Device out of the gate in 2001, first Firewire then USB, both Windows and Mac
B) Fast upload using Firewire, then USB, first in 2001 to be followed later by Creative
C) First easy and usable interface, in 2001, soon followed by Creative (despite Creative owning the patent, Apple implemented it first in 1986 in NeXTStep computers)
D) First portable high density format, in 2001, followed by Creative in 2004 with the Zen Touch and Zen Micro

2) iTunes Music Store was the innovator
A) First store to sign on all the major labels
B) Stood it's ground on $0.99 per song price
C) Terms of service included the ability to burn to CD, backup the files, transfer to a portable, and play on multiple computers, all firsts with the iTMS
D) First to add music videos
E) First to add TV shows
F) First to add Audible content
G) First to add podcasts
H) First to add educational content

3) You hate Apple
A) You are blind to the fact that Apple introduced the form factor EVERYONE now uses; 1.8" HDD for the iPod, 1" HDD for the iPod mini, when everyone else was using 2.5" HDD.
B) You are blind to the fact that Apple made the MP3 player both popular and populist, when before it was only accessible to geeks willing to wait hours to upload over a serial port or USB1 port
C) You are blind to the fact that Apple's success is not due to hype but good design, good marketing, good price, good usability, and good function. No, it is not perfect, but neither is anyone else.


RE: Stop promoting Apple
By redbone75 on 6/14/2006 8:43:14 PM , Rating: 2
You might have a decent point with iTunes, but can you transfer iTunes purchased music to other media devices? (Really, I don't know, that's why I'm asking. Don't own an iPod.) But on your first point, hmm... let's see:

1) The Nomad Jukebox came out well before the iPod as a hard disk based media player. All Apple did was make it smaller, which I really don't see all that groundbreaking considering it's the next logical step for these devices. Kudos, though, to Apple; they do have good designs, but they didn't come up with the idea. Actually, Creative was in talks with Apple to release such a device, but Apple backed out and then released their own. Sounds a bit suspicious to me.
A) Umm, I have always been able to use my Nomad Jukebox C as a mass storage device. As for firewire, why wouldn't Apple promote their own transfer method? They were forced to adopt USB because, while not faster, it quickly became the preferred method of transfer. Firewire is still not as prevalent as USB. And if I remember correctly it took a while for the iPod to be fully supported on the PC.
B) Once again, the whole USB vs Firewire thing. Firewire was faster, but USB was more prevalent. Firewire was an expensive option on mobo's at the time.
C) That is a somewhat valid point, but I never saw the user interface on the Jukebox as being difficult. I'm not Paris Hilton, though, so I guess it could be difficult for people of that mental capacity.
D) The ultra portable HDD's were not available at the time Creative designed the Jukebox. Apple came along at a good time. I also think they had exclusive rights to them for a while, but my memory is a bit fuzzy on that so feel free to correct me. Besides, had Creative followed suit immediately they would have been mercilessly attacked as having ripped off Apple's design. Between an apple and a hard place, they were.

Yes, Apple hit it big with the iPod, no denying that. But they did get a rather huge boost when one aforementioned hotel heiress was spotted sporting one as an accessory. Once again, though, major kudos to them for their marketing. If I were making mp3 players I'd be envious of their success as well. But it seems people have forgotten the awards the Jukebox garnered for being the first of its kind. It was revolutionary, the iPod more evolutionary, so who copied who? As far as price, well, no. IPods were always more expensive than their competitors. And sound quality was always a strong point of Creative's players, Apple took a couple generations to catch up. And Creative never had a class action lawsuit against them concerning hearing damage, have they?


RE: Stop promoting Apple
By akugami on 6/14/2006 11:06:55 PM , Rating: 2
Geeks made the iPod popular. There I said it. Not Paris Hilton. Not Steve Jobs. Geeks. Unless I was mistaken in reading about all those Windows PC users buying up iPods and using hacks and beta software to run them on PC's. Apple taking the obvious route ported their iTunes software to Windows and the rest was history.

It's true that Apple did not have the first DAP nor the first DAP with an HD but for Apple's iPod it's the whole package. The click wheel coupled with the hierarchical menus made navigating the iPod nearly idiot proof. There was almost no learning curve. That's what helped make the iPod as popular as it is today.

What have the other players in the DAP market done? FM radio, wow big deal, how about AM radio which I consider more important than FM radio. More audio file format support. Whoopee, more obscure files supported when the overwhelming majority of users use mp3's. Until the last two years or so, most of the DAP's out there had clunky interfaces so is it any wonder people liked the simplicity and ultra usability of the iPod's clickwheel?

Sound quality. I hate this argument every time I see it. The iPod's sound quality will never ever ever please audiophiles. It's not meant to. The fact is, the iPod's sound quality is not that different from those of Creative, Cowon, Samsung, iRiver, etc. Take into consideration the fact that the overwhelming majority of users use mp3's or some other lossy format and you really have to wonder about the sound quality argument. Now add in the fact that most people are using a cheap, at best $30, pair of earbuds or headphones and I really really don't see how you can make an argument about sound quality since the average user's listening environment is with low quality hardware and audio files.

In today's market, the iPods are not the most feature rich but most of the features of the other players are more niche than deal makers/breakers. Most users do not care about FM support. They don't care about Ogg or FLAC support. They don't care about gapless playback. I know the geek in all of us always wants more features but the simple truth is Joe Consumer doesn't need, know about, nor understand what the heck some of those features and file formats are. And iPods have been quite price competitive with other players for a long while now.

And don't talk to Apple about being the first to market with an innovative product and then watching as someone copies your work and surpasses you. They really don't want to hear about it.


RE: Stop promoting Apple
By michael2k on 6/15/2006 1:28:53 PM , Rating: 2
Regarding your points:
1) Why did it take them four years to go from 2.5" HDD to the 1.8" HDD? Really, Apple was the only one to go "the next logical step" by using 1.8" HDD in 2001 and 1" HDD in 2004. Creative released their 1.8" HDD Zen Touch in 2004 and then their 1" HDD Zen Micro in October of 2004.

2) We are talking about the Nomad Jukebox using USB 1, at a paltry 12megabits/s while the iPod used Firewire then USB2. USB2 didn't exist yet, so Firewire really was the only logical choice.

3) Firewire was faster, USB was more prevalent, but I could upload at 12 megabytes per second while you were stuck at 1 megabyte per second. When Apple adopted USB2, then the PC iPod revolution really took off. Apple released a Firewire PC-iPod and a USB2 PC-iPod before Creative released a 1.8" HDD based Nomad

4) The UI on your Nomad requires 2 hands, the UI on the iPod requires 1 hand. It really is difficult for people of average mental capacity :)

5) The ultra portable HDD called the IBM microdrive was released in 1999 at 170MB and 1". The Toshiba 2GB 1.8" HDD was released in 2000. Apple didn't have access to anything Creative did not when the iPod was released in 2001. Creative really should have been first :D


RE: Stop promoting Apple
By fungry on 6/14/2006 11:59:37 PM , Rating: 2
Quite true really. The chromed or whatever mirror coating on the back of the iPod looks fantastic, but scratches at such a great rate it ruins the look. In addition, iTunes is a good piece of software but the fact that the music can only be played on an iPod is just, self interest for Apple.

Not to mention, it's really brand name too. Apple has been known for great quality and products and some eye-catching advertisement where as companies like Creative, I never see their adverts on the TV. Let alone some of the buses.


Please Open your eyes people...
By Scorpion on 6/14/2006 2:33:23 PM , Rating: 3
...to the attrocity that is Creative. Over and over again they flex their legal muscle to keep their pockets full of $$$. Then they turn around and sell you an overpriced rehash of the same audio card with slight improvements. They have no competition.

Please stop buying Creative components and start supporting their competators. Creative needs a strong rival to make something happen in the audio market.




RE: Please Open your eyes people...
By WelshBloke on 6/14/2006 5:16:55 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Then they turn around and sell you an overpriced rehash of the same audio card with slight improvements. They have no competition.


Which is, of course, totally unlike Apple and their Ipods.


RE: Please Open your eyes people...
By michael2k on 6/14/2006 6:21:40 PM , Rating: 4
Or Toyota and their Camrys, or Honda and their Civics, or IBM and their Thinkpads.

I think the iPods have changed tremendously since 2001:
1) Added USB2 support in order to better address the PC marketplace
2) Moved from a mechanical scroll wheel to a touch-wheel to reduce moving parts related issues
3) Moved from 4 cardinal buttons to 4 buttons embedded in the scroll wheel itself
4) Added a higher resolution color screen
5) Added higher quality codecs; AAC and ALE
6) Added video support
7) Added TV-out
8) Increased the storage capacity
9) Decreased the size of the player
10) Reduced the cost of the player


RE: Please Open your eyes people...
By WelshBloke on 6/14/2006 6:43:19 PM , Rating: 2
??? Toyota, Honda and IBM all have plenty of competition in their respective fields.

And to your other points, so you think Creative sound cards have not changed much in 5 years? Less so or more so than Ipods?


RE: Please Open your eyes people...
By michael2k on 6/14/2006 7:16:47 PM , Rating: 2
And of course, so does Apple have plenty of competition as well:
Sandisk
Sony
Creative Labs
Cowon
iRiver
Mobiblu

No, not at all, my point was to counter your, I believe sarcastic point, that:
1) Apple has no competition
2) Apple sells you an overpriced rehashed iPods with only slight improvements

So my point is that everyone does that; Honda, Toyota, and IBM, and that, like Apple, they all have competition. Their success lies in creating enough improvements to convince upgrades as well as to attract new buyers, which Apple has successfully done with their iPods.


By WelshBloke on 6/14/2006 7:43:03 PM , Rating: 2
My point was more about Creative than Apple


RE: Please Open your eyes people...
By redbone75 on 6/14/2006 8:03:28 PM , Rating: 2
And exactly how are all these changes revolutionary?


By michael2k on 6/15/2006 2:49:48 PM , Rating: 2
1) Everyone can use an iPod; before not everyone was technically skilled enough to use a Creative Nomad Jukebox
2) The iPod can fit inside a shirt pocket, a quarter pocket, or a jeans pocket, meaning you can use it in more places than a Creative Nomad Jukebox, which is the size of a Mac mini or two thin CD players
3) The iPod's UI allowed a person to easily access their entire music collection (or at least 5gb, now 60gb worth), where with the Creative UI you had to use push buttons to navigate.

So ease of carry, ease of use, and ease of access meant music was listened in places not easily accessed before. If Creative turned a HDD into a 100 CD changer in your backpack, Apple turned a HDD into a 100 CD changer you could place in your pocket and use with one hand.

Evolution? Yes. Revolution? That depends on who's viewpoint, but all these little things together add up to the iPod, much like adding graphics, adding a mouse, shrinking the package, turned the Mac into a revolution, rather than an evolution, of the Apple II.


Blame the system
By crystal clear on 6/14/2006 3:37:20 PM , Rating: 2
Business rivalry/trade disputes/patent -copyrights disputes
etc are a part of business life.They have existed & continue
to exist in the future.One has to accept it -like it or not.

It is the legal system that causes all the damage to both
sides or parties.The system is slow,time consuming,expensive
& frustrating.Courts should be able to provide swift judgements & stamp out those footdraging legal trickery those lawyers use.More judges,more courts are also needed.
Every judge should set a deadline (date) by which the case
is settled.
I have in the past also suggested ARBITRATION as a method
of quick settlement of disputes.
The legal system/courts/judges must accept- TIME IS MONEY.

The Justice dept should act on this matter urgently.




Hopefully...
By Acanthus on 6/14/2006 2:14:40 PM , Rating: 1
Hopefully both companies will destroy each other with court costs.




"Nowadays you can buy a CPU cheaper than the CPU fan." -- Unnamed AMD executive











botimage
Copyright 2012 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki