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

Re: ivrpa patent fund

Expand Messages
  • djaurand
    Matt Wouldn t it then be Handal s burden of proof the images one of us provided a customer used a method included in his patent. How can he prove that without
    Message 1 of 79 , May 1 6:41 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      Matt
      Wouldn't it then be Handal's burden of proof the images one of us provided a customer used a method included in his patent.

      How can he prove that without knowing the workflow and software each of us uses?

      Say Henry's images of the two hotels for instance? How does he know how ICEPortal made the images and with what software?

      His letters seem to take the position that any "virtual image" violates his patent

      Doug Aurand
      Albuquerque, NM

      --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Scott Witte <scottw@...> wrote:
      >
      > Matt,
      >
      > Thanks for putting so much time into this and thank your lawyer from us
      > as well. I will certainly pass on the comments to our lawyers.
      >
      > My take, echoing what Trausti lauded to, just because a dependent claim
      > or a method supporting that claim may be valid, does not automatically
      > make the parent valid. Independent Claim 1 is light years broader in
      > scope than how to remove radial distortion. David has already presented
      > an excellent explanation of how all this fits together. Feel free to
      > present that to your lawyer for comment. I would be interested in his
      > perspective.
      >
      > Scott
      >
      >
      > On 5/1/2011 1:52 PM, Matthew Rogers - 360Precision wrote:
      > > I chatted for 3-4 hours today with a patent lawyer who plays on the
      > > same cricket team. He agrees on the premise that it will be extremely
      > > difficult to invalidate the patent. Personally looking at the patent I
      > > can see how it's methods are different enough from all previous
      > > patents in the same area.
      >
      >
      > --
      > Scott Witte
      >
      > <http://www.scottwitte.com>
      > <http://www.tourdeforce360.com>
      > 414.345.9660
      > Member, IVRPA
      >
      >
      >
      > [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.