May 15th, 2009 at 9:28 AM

I have to wonder if tune hunter has any code, or do they just have a patent.

May 15th, 2009 at 10:51 AM

From my limited googling of Tune Hunter, it doesn’t even appear that they have a web site. Hard to believe that a legitimate digital company wouldn’t have a website that could be found with a rudimentary google search.

Also from my limited understading of Shazam, I thought it uses a different song recognition algorithm than what has been described in the news as part of Tune Hunter’s patent.

I am not a lawyer but this would seem to be, from my limited understanding of the system, a way to try to extort money by just coming up with an idea and getting a patent for it and waiting to see if anyone with deep pockets makes a product that comes close to the original patent.

It would seem that the patent system has not been able to adjust to the digital world fast enough. It will probably take some new laws/court rulings to try to weave your way through all of this. With the way things are working now, it would seem like a wonderful way to stifle innovation, not protect intellectual property.

Neal

May 15th, 2009 at 11:43 AM

I will apply for a patent for a method for the ability for a portable device such as a key holder, watch, cellular phone, beeper, laptop or the like which will allow the user to access any kind of information of any sort which they request or do not request.

I will be a billionaire soon! Haha!

May 15th, 2009 at 4:03 PM

The interesting legal kerfluffle here is that the supreme court decided that you cannot patent computer code—it falls into the same category of mathematical formulae. That logic probably made more sense in the early days of computing than it does now, but it is orthodoxy that is unlikely to be changed.  Since all shazam does is make software, it is inherently immune from a patent-infringement case.  Since the iPhone is like a computer in that the purpose of the hardware is to run general-purpose software, I don’t think that there is truly any leg for Tune Hunter to stand on.  Additionally, in a recent patent case, the Supreme Court voided a patent where the only additional modification to the device (a piece of industrial equipment) was the addition of a computer to control timing.  In the past where gadgets were intimately linked software and hardware, patents didn’t have to look deeply at whether functionality was due to hardware (patentable) or software (not), however with the iPhone, this is no longer true and the computer software paradigm will have to be applied.  In short, I don’t think that the iPhone can violate anyone’s patent where the relevant functionality is added by a third party app.