The patent (6,226,677) was submitted by (and the USPTO says still assigned to) LodgeNet.
Inventors: Slemmer; Michael W. (Sioux Falls, SD) Assignee: LodgeNet Entertainment Corporation (Sioux Falls, SD) Appl. No.: 232386 Filed: January 15, 1999
I know Dave Bankers (the LodgeNet CTO) fairly well (Wayport has/had a fairly good relationship with them.) Maybe I can get him to call off the dogs unless Acacia really did buy the whole thing.
I can also attest (in-court, as a (free to you, expensive for them) expert witness if necessary) that there is a plethora of prior art on this, so much so that I decided to not even bother filing a patent application on c(r)aptive portals back in the day. Never mind that it was obvious to one "skilled in the art" (I thought up Wayport's implementation while driving to Dallas one day with Wayport's CEO blathering in my ear about some other subject. *Thats* how much thought it takes.)
The situation is highly similar to the crapfest that Nomadix puts up about their precious patents. I think I've been clear on my intended actions in response should Nomadix start inflicting their patents on anyone.
Finally, it appears that Lodgenet may not have cited all of the prior art it knew about at the time of filing. Certainly Wayport had its "captive portal" up and running, as well as many others. If true (and a court or the PTO would need to decide), it could be grounds for the PTO reversing the patent, as well as "fraud on the patent office".
You should feel free to include a copy of this message in your communication with Acacia Research. You may wish to mention that I was the CTO and VP of Engineering at Wayport between 1997 and 2000.
IANAL, and this isn't legal advise, but in your shoes, I'd send the FOAD letter too.
All this patent stuff really pisses me off. Yes, I filed several while @ Wayport, it was part of my job description.
Jim
Ross Finlayson wrote:
Today I received in the mail a letter from "Acacia Research", claiming that a wireless hot spot that I run infringes upon their US patent #<http://tinyurl.com/5ho2g>6,226,677, and asking that I "enter into a licensing agreement" with them. From the mailing address that they used, it is clear that they got my address by searching for web pages that describe wireless access points. Therefore, I wouldn't be surprised if other people on this mailing list receive similar letters.
Their 'patent' basically describes a specialized TCP proxy that controls access to the Internet from the user's computer. Because my network doesn't use such a proxy (it provides a direct connection to the Internet), there's no possible way that it could infringe. However, for those of you who run 'captive portals', it's not inconceivable that they might be covered by this patent.
One important thing to note, though: This patent was filed on January 15, 1999, and awarded on May 1, 2001. Therefore, there is almost certain to be *lots* of prior art covering this.
It turns out that this company - Acacia Research - has been buying up lots of patents, and does business by trying to shake down several (mostly small) companies that it clams is 'infringing' upon them. For more information, see <http://www.fightthepatent.com/> and <http://www.paidcontent.org/pc/arch/cat_acacia.shtml> (search for "<http://tinyurl.com/5ho2g>6,226,677").
In response, I'm going to be sending "Acacia Research" a strongly worded letter, telling them basically to FOAD.
**Finally, a warning to any other parasites out there who may be reading this: I have been involved in Internet-related research for more than 20 years. Believe me, you *do not* want to get into a fight with me over 'prior art'. Don't even think about it!**
Ross Finlayson LIVE.COM <http://www.live.com/>
_______________________________________________ BAWUG's general wireless chat mailing list [unsubscribe] http://lists.bawug.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
_______________________________________________ BAWUG's general wireless chat mailing list [unsubscribe] http://lists.bawug.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
