Believing everything I read on Internet forums, of course, <sarcasm off> he has apparantly done worse. Apparantly he has written at least one event organizer telling them of his patent. The obvious implication is, of course, "be careful which photographer you hire because he might be in violation of my patent". If this is true, and I do not know if it is, then Mr. Wolf has definitely stepped over a very big line.
I'm sure Mr. Wolf is getting a very ugly reception at Imaging USA this week.
Can I start a business like PhotoCrazy®?
The concept of offering event photos for inspection, selection and distribution via the Internet is protected by U.S. Patent No. 6,985,875.
I got hit with a speeding ticket from DC metro police. A vehicle with similar tags to mine was photographed speeding. From what I can tell from my research, a camera was placed near a road. The camera uses speed and timing devices to determine speed of the vehicle and trigger the photo. Photo interpretation software reads the license tag. That information is posted on a website for collection of fines. A letter is mailed to the owner of record directing them to go to that site and pay the fine. Luckily I was able to prove that the software was incorrect and the QA person did not do their job.
Is there any interest in an article on business method patents for photographers? What magazine/web site should it go in? I'm a patent agent specializing in this area.
Are these the sorts of topics that might be of interest?
So what happened with the meeting? I feel like you left us all hanging. I just read through this entire thread and wanted to know what happened.
There was a mention of 2 people living in the same town as the guy who has this patent, and that they were going to meet up.
Andy even commented on keeping the debate civil.
Go back to the posts around Feb.2006.
Reviewing the claims sections 1-15 and 16-40
Does this patent only apply to sporting events with competitors?
I see the use of participants in claims 1,2,3,11 and competitors
16, 17, 24, 29 in 29 w/ 29 also using participant competitor
Looking at two sections 1-15 and 15-29 was the intent to include participants general and competitors as well.
It sure got quiet....
Ever hear of William Wallace?
There are allot of fine Scotts out there.
Remember the speech in Braveheart Mel Gibson gave in front of all those Scotts getting ready to leave the battleground.
Fight and maybe die... or live and you will surely die.
...when someone can patent distance = velocity * time.
Does that mean the system is broken? No...it may mean that the necessary resources just were not available at that time.
Part of the patent involves a participant in a distance event (for example, a 5K run) inputting when they started and what their total time was. The patented system knows how far from the starting position the camera was located. It knows approximate participant average speed. The patented system thus knows what time-stamps of photos to show the runner.
Hence, he's patented distance = velocity * time.
This system is broken because the patent office was changed to give an economic incentive to the patent office for the granting of patents faster.
I work in the semiconductor industry, and we generate a lot of patents. Many of them we *know* are useless and silly. Its an inside joke.
Note the defendants listed.
It doesn't matter if the inventor thinks that its silly.
I wonder what the status of the lawsuit currently is. I haven't seen any new info post on that link.
I imagine many photographers are watching this case closely.