Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [PanoToolsNG] Re: ivrpa patent fund

Expand Messages
  • Matthew Rogers - 360Precision
    Hi Aaron, Well clearly the IVRPA legal team should have told them to NOT publicly discuss ANY of the case, ask for refunding etc but that s too late now.
    Message 1 of 79 , May 1 1:59 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Aaron,

      Well clearly the IVRPA legal team should have told them to NOT publicly discuss ANY of the case, ask for refunding etc but that's too late now. Basically this has exposed every US panoramic photographer, tour provider, publisher etc to wilful patent infringement. This is a much more serious issue than accidentally infringing a patent.

      Wilful infringement occurs after a potential infringer has been made aware of the patent. I'd say everyone on this list and most related forums now know about the patent. Wilfully infringing a patent opens you up to MUCH larger damages and other consequences.

      Basically anyone on the list now has to carry out their own due diligence to determine the validity of the patent and any possible infringement. Legally I'm not sure how you'd back this up but I guess it will cost money.

      If the IVRPA take this to court and LOSE the consequences for those not prepared are far greater then having ones client sent a letter.

      You have to keep in mind that the burden of proof required to overturn a patent is massively greater than that needed to prove infringement. Personally I think there has to be a better way to resolve the issue.

      I think the IVRPA should create a no to patent '400 pack that members and non members a like can use to circumvent these spurious letters. The pack could content letter templates, website content etc. I think hitting this head on out of court and in a more intelligent way can only serve to strengthen the community. A court case will be a waste of money and very likely end in tears for all involved, except the lawyers of course.

      Matt

      On 30 Apr 2011, at 23:36, aaronmspence wrote:

      > Matt,
      >
      > Your interest and time spent on this is appreciated, but if I was still on the Ivrpa Bod I would defer to American Patent Lawyers advice over yours.
      >
      > The issue is NOT the patent, we know it's rubbish. The issue is the real damage being done with the patent.
      >
      > If I had $3000 worth of virtual tours on my site as a client, and a received a demand from a patent owner covering virtual tours what would I do? Drop the virtual tours or gear up for a big legal battle because my photographer says the patent is rubbish? Anyone who understands the cost in time and money of the legal process (even when you win) will drop the $3000 worth of tours, and that's what has happened.
      >
      > As we've mentioned many times now, this open forum is not the place to discuss the patent situation. To put our info and strategy online for the trolls to view is foolish. Please continue your questions on the google groups forum.
      >
      > Aaron Spence.
      > Http://panedia.com
      >
      > --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Matthew Rogers - 360Precision <matthew@...> wrote:
      > >
      > > So what was the reply to your rebuttal letter ?
      > >
      > > Matt
      > >
      > > On 30 Apr 2011, at 15:02, Henry Woodman wrote:
      > >
      > > > David,
      > > >
      > > > Your assessment is well done ... And, sadly, the situation we find ourselves in. Thanks for putting some perspective into the discussions.
      > > >
      > > > Henry Woodman
      > > > ICE Portal
      > > > Sent from my iPad
      > > >
      > > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      > >
      >
      >



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • djaurand
      Scott Henry mentioned he hasn t heard from Handal in a little while after just a token effort disputing his claims And I was thinking the letter from one of
      Message 79 of 79 , May 5 6:07 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        Scott
        Henry mentioned he hasn't heard from Handal in a little while after just a token effort disputing his claims

        And I was thinking the letter from one of IVRPA's attorneys working on this might provide a little comfort to our customers, the ones being being theatened, being from an....attorney with a different view

        You guys are playing for the long game, but there's a short game too

        Like keeping customers and getting more business

        Doug Aurand

        --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Scott Witte <scottw@...> wrote:
        >
        > That is what Henry tried. It makes no difference, certainly not to Handal.
        >
        > Scott
        >
        > On 5/5/2011 1:55 PM, djaurand wrote:
        > > My thinking was to have a trial attorney look at the infringement
        > > claims made in the Hotel Mella letter, consult with an IP attorney,
        > > and produce a response letter for any of Handals future cease & desist
        > > letters
        >
        > --
        > Scott Witte
        >
        > <http://www.scottwitte.com>
        > <http://www.tourdeforce360.com>
        > 414.345.9660
        > Member, IVRPA
        >
        >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.