[HN Gopher] Google infringed on five Sonos patents, according to...
___________________________________________________________________
Google infringed on five Sonos patents, according to preliminary
ruling
Author : ckrailo
Score : 38 points
Date : 2021-08-15 18:41 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (techcrunch.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (techcrunch.com)
| [deleted]
| omarhaneef wrote:
| This article had a cursory description of the patent(s) that was
| (were) allegedly violated:
|
| https://www.engadget.com/sonos-google-itc-compliant-initial-...
|
| Looks like the primary, initial complaint was around the tuning
| feature for the speakers. There is a link to subsequent
| complaints.
|
| If you have a Sonos, when you first set up a speaker you use wave
| your mobile around while the speaker emits a tone and your phone
| mic sends it feedback on how to optimize the sound.
| rasz wrote:
| Werent there audio system calibrators in the nineties doing
| room calibration in similar manner (microphone on a cable)?
| Justin_K wrote:
| Yep my Denon did this in 2000
| cosmotic wrote:
| What are the patents?
| jand wrote:
| 8,588,949 - Method and apparatus for adjusting volume levels in
| a multi-zone system
|
| 9,195,258 - System and method for synchronizing operations
| among a plurality of independently clocked digital data
| processing devices
|
| 9,219,959 - Multi-channel pairing in a media system
|
| 10,209,953 - Playback device
|
| 10,439,896 - Playback device connection
| Tuna-Fish wrote:
| 9,195,258: System and method for synchronizing operations among
| a plurality of independently clocked digital data processing
| devices https://patents.google.com/patent/US9195258B2/en
|
| 10,209,953: Playback device
| https://patents.google.com/patent/US10209953B2/en
|
| 9,219,959: Multi-channel pairing in a media system
| https://patents.google.com/patent/US9219959B2/en
|
| 8,588,949: Method and apparatus for adjusting volume levels in
| a multi-zone system
| https://patents.google.com/patent/US8588949B2/en
|
| 10,439,896: Playback device connection
| https://patents.google.com/patent/US10439896B2/en
| AlbertCory wrote:
| Pro tip #1: Just read Claim 1, to get the gist. That doesn't
| suffice for a serious analysis, of course, but it pretty well
| tells you what the patent is about.
|
| Generally, these are about two or more output devices
| (speakers?) coordinating with each other. There might be
| dependent claims about waving your phone around, but I didn't
| read that far.
|
| Pro tip #2: the priority date(s). These seem to be 2003,
| 2004, and 2006. Those were all well within the internet era.
| So if you think "everyone was doing that!" you have to prove
| it with prior art _before_ those dates. You can be certain
| the tech advisors in Patent Litigation have been trying to do
| that.
| cosmotic wrote:
| These are pretty low-quality patents. I'm curious if Google
| tried to attack the non-obvious requirement. These seem
| like straight-forward naive UIs.
| AlbertCory wrote:
| On legal matters: those who know, don't talk, and those
| who talk, don't know.
|
| That said: I don't know. The claims weren't about UIs,
| AFAICT -- they were mostly about network sync'ing of the
| speakers.
|
| I also never dealt with ITC matters. Quite different from
| a "regular" infringement suit.
| amanzi wrote:
| Hopefully, once they've sorted out their patent squabbles, Sonos
| and Google can enable better integration between their systems.
|
| Right now, Sonos's Google Home/Assistant integration feels half-
| baked, and playing music is a much better experience on iOS due
| to the AirPlay 2 integration.
| aardvarkr wrote:
| That's entirely on Google and it pisses me off. It goes beyond
| squabbles as Google has repeatedly dealt in bad faith with
| Sonos to the detriment of the consumer. I still remember seeing
| Sonos demoing both Alexa and Google active on one speaker and
| also remember the hissy fit Google threw and the fallout when
| they withdrew from the project. It took two years for Google to
| come back to the table and the result is the intentionally
| crippled implementation that you see today
| encryptluks2 wrote:
| This is ridiculous. Pretty soon you don't be able to stream to a
| Raspberry Pi connected to a speaker without violating a patent.
| Their failure to even state what the patent is leads me to
| believe it is something basic like this which means I will never
| buy a Sonos product.
| beervirus wrote:
| > Their failure to even state what the patent is
|
| Yes, TechCrunch is garbage.
| lrem wrote:
| > Pretty soon you don't be able to stream to a Raspberry Pi
| connected to a speaker without violating a patent.
|
| I think you must have blinked. For a couple decades.
| dmoy wrote:
| > you don't be able to stream to a Raspberry Pi connected to a
| speaker without violating a patent
|
| Nobody is gonna send you a c&d for personal use
| monocasa wrote:
| Will they kill an open source project?
| TrueDuality wrote:
| In general yes, companies have no qualms about killing open
| source projects when they get a whiff of patent
| infringement. AFAIK Sonos hasn't done that to any projects
| as of today but that doesn't mean they wouldn't.
| praptak wrote:
| > Nobody is gonna send you a c&d for personal use
|
| Practically, no. Theoretically they could. I believe there's
| no "personal use" exemption on patents under most law systems
| (there was one in UK maybe?).
| jrockway wrote:
| I think the "personal use" exemption is twofold: nobody
| will know you're doing it, and if they find out, you don't
| have any money. Companies sue Google because they are
| LOADED with cash, which they want. Your lifetime value
| rounds down to zero at that scale.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-08-15 23:01 UTC)