Bose beats JBL in law suit (1 Viewer)

[Larry B]

To all:

I continue to be perplexed by the extent of emotional energy directed toward BOSE. Based on the vehemence of the attacks I've witnessed on this forum (and other forums, as well), one would think that BOSE had perpetrated some horrible evil on thousands of individuals. Many of you seem to have lost sight of the fact that BOSE is simply a manufacturer of audio equipment; they are not the devil. They have as much right to sell their products as does any company that meets with your collective approvals. To try and undermine this is antithetical to the American system.

Bottom line? If you don't like their products, or think they are overpriced, then don't buy them.

Larry

 

[ThomasW]

Bose went on a port patent spree a long time ago. Something similar to what Carver did with regard to the high excursion PR's/subs.

The Bose vs JBL is a result of Bose patenting almost everything that had to do with port design and implementation. The designs were in the public domain before Bose came along.

So the message is if you can't innovate, patent everything in the public domain. Then sue..........

 

[Larry B]

Thomas:

An invention must be novel to be patentable. For the position you have taken to be correct, the PTO (Patent and Trademark Office) would have had to miss all the available prior art. While they have certainly been known to make mistakes, I find it hard to believe that they failed this miserably.

I would appreciate it if you would read the claims in the relevant patent(s), and let us all know what prior art anticipates it or renders it obvious.

Larry

 

[Mark Austin]

That is correct Larry. What Thomas said shows a lack of understanding of the patent laws, and processes.

 

[Mark Austin]

I think the real message here is that even if Bose is right, they are wrong.

 

[Larry B]

Mark:
I was trying to be diplomatic, but that was certainly the underlying theme of my message. In any event, thanks for the support.
Larry

 

[Kerry Hackney]

I certainly agree that if BOSE or anyone else has a patent on their product they have every right to defend it. FWIW even products that don't look anything alike can be infringments if they work using the same process that was patented. If JBL lost in court, then there must be something that was questionable about what they did. Sure, Dr. Bose did a lot based on what others had already discoverd. But, so does everyone else. Everyone uses T/S now for enclosure design. How is that different?

My problems with BOSE are the very exagerated way they market their product. But then, many manufacturers do the same things. They have add copy that claims a new process that isn't new at all. They find some hyper-pompous way of describing what they have so that J6P will think he really is on the cutting edge. It is marketing pure and simple. The plain truth is Bose is very good at marketing and so-so at making good sounding audio devices. They seem not to care about making anything really great, but a lot about coming up with the next marketing campaigne. It is sad that for a lot of people BOSE is good enough and they belive everything BOSE claims. ie... "Can your radio do this??"

I wish they had something new to offer and some integrity about the claims as to it's value. I won't buy BOSE and if JBL was wrong, as the courts determined, shame on them too.

 

[Larry B]

Kerry:

While I agree with your statements regarding patentability and infringement, I am (once again) puzzled by the "difficulties" you have with BOSE. We all know that their real claim to fame is their marketing hype. So what. It's a free country, with a competetive marketplace, and if they have found an approach that works, then power to them.

As I have stated previously in other threads, most individuals are not enthusiasts, and the simple reality (hard as it may be to accept) is that most people who buy BOSE are happy with their purchase.

I should mention that my main love is high-end stereo, and I cringe each time I read about the gear that many people (including lots of folks on this forum) use for music. While I do try to educate individuals (when possible), I certainly don't hate the manufacturers who produce the gear.

I'll end by asking you to consider that if BOSE was not producing a product that people enjoyed, they would have gone out of business a long time ago.

Larry

 

[Brett DiMichele]

Chu,

I am not saying that it’s not right for accompany to sue over patent

Infringement. What I am saying is that it may not be right for a company

To sue over a design that existed for decades in use that may have been

Patented recently. What I mean is this, Could you patent the wheel? And

If you did, does that mean you can now sue Goodyear, BFG, Dunlop and

The hundreds of wheel manufacturers? If Klipsch decided to patent the

Acoustical Horn does that mean they could sue anyone else that uses a

Similar design?

I could see Bose having a valid lawsuit IF JBL used an exact copy of a

Bose design like the Acoustical Wave Guide used in their “wave” series

Of products but from what I read it doesn’t sound like this is the case at

All. The problem seems to me that the courts can make a decision based

On the case presented but not on decades worth of prior non patented

Designs that may be nearly identical.

As for the article I read where Bose sued some college chap, it could be

A case where the person was being malicious and slanderous and that they

May have had a legitimate case but at this time I cannot recall where I saw

The article so just dismiss what I said (I don’t have the proof at hand to back

It up)

As far as lawsuits are concerned, Bose likes to tout their systems as having

“Big Bold Precise” sound yet they provide absolutely no specifications for

Any of their products. So could a consumer buy their product and have an

Accredited test facility run a test that shows their products are incapable of

Producion of “precise” sound when they can not replicate all frequencies in the

Range of human hearing? With the right lawyer a consumer could win that case

as it sounds to me like False Advertisement.

In the end if the consumer wants to make a statement against Bose this can simply

Be done by boycotting their products and business practices.

As far as patents are concerned, I do not think for 5 minutes that the patent officers

Are incompetent but I do believe that once in a while someone could slip one by and

Be granted a patent on a technology that has been in existence and in use by a plethora

Of other companies. And in which case I don’t feel that patent should be allowed to stay.

That’s just my opinion and this is my last post in this thread.

 

[Gail M]

Some of this patent stuff sure is getting silly. Didn't Sunfire just get a patent on putting a driver on a small box or something like that? Whatever it was, other manufacturers and DIYers have been doing it for tens of years... Next, they'll sue to stop DIYers from making their own subs.

 

[Larry B]

I have the utmost respect for all the individuals on this forum, and I realize that it's a "free country." However, if you know absolutely nothing about patent law in general, nor about the specifics of this particular lawsuit, you might want to consider refraining from commenting about patent issues.

 

[Brett DiMichele]

Larry,

Yep it's a free country...

(oops I said my last post was my last post.. This one is

my last post!)

 

[Gail M]

Here is a link to the thread which mentions the Bob Carver Sunfire Patent . Read and enjoy!

 

[Gail M]

However, if you know absolutely nothing about patent law in general, nor about the specifics of this particular lawsuit, you might want to consider refraining from commenting about patent issues.

LarryB: I understand your frustration with us Patent Law rookies, but if folks only commented on things that they were experts on, this forum would have very few, and mostly uninteresting posts. Don't you agree? Sometimes, to me, some of the most interesting threads deal with the banter which occurs as the "expert" bit by bit educates and reinforms, and eventually changes the opinions of the uneducated.

 

[Justin Lane]

Why must every thread pertaining to Bose turn into a bashing of their value, marketing, or sound quality?

This is clearly an issue of patent law. Perhaps Bose did patent existing designs (I have no idea if this is true) but why attack them for patenting an idea/design when the originators of the design did not do so themselves. As a matter of fact, if any of these so called originators kept good dated documentation of what they created they would have a great chance of earning the rights to the patent themselves.

The ignorance and prejudice towards Bose never ceases to amaze me.

J

 

[Larry B]

Gail:
I appreciate your comments, but please note that I am not, and did not, say that one must be an expert. (Speaking for myself, I am not an expert on anything.) What I was talking about was individuals making pronouncements about patent issues when they obviously are unfamiliar with even the most basic issues.
I must add that I have spent my entire life in the pursuit of knowledge, and I have taught (part-time, to medical students) for the simple reason that I enjoy sharing with others whatever knowledge I have accumulated (and because I enjoy people ) If asked a question, I would never, and I do mean never, turn away (neither figuratively, nor literally). However, one of the most important lessons I have tried to impart is that it is more important to know what you don't know, than what you do know. The other lesson I've learned is that you learn a lot more when you ask, than when you speak (especially if it's a topic you are unfamiliar with).
Respectfully,
Larry

 

[ThomasW]

What Thomas said shows a lack of understanding of the patent laws, and processes.

Well maybe, but he's old enough to have some class, and a historical understanding of what happened and when.

Bose did patent many things with regard to ports/port design that were 'considered' public domain. The internet didn't exist then, but there was a flurry of magazine articles, newspaper articles, etc., about what Bose was doing. Many of the things Bose patented were designs/ideas that were published to DIY audio magazines years PRIOR to Bose obtaining the patents. So there was great speculation as to whether or not Bose was going to sue individuals that were building speakers that had ports based on what Bose patented.

Ciao

Thomas

 

[Larry B]

Thomas:

If BOSE's patent claims were, as you say, "published to DIY audio magazines years PRIOR to Bose obtaining the patents," then their patents would almost certainly be found invalid in a litigation.

If I can find some time, I will look into what transpired in the trial.

Larry

 

[ThomasW]

Larry

This happened decades ago. But there was a big explosion of anger and activity about the Bose patents. Several of the DIY audio rags had articles about this. I don't keep magazines around for 20-30yrs so I can't access them.

 

[Sean Conklin]

Most speakers rely on ports to properly function.

Why should Bose or any other company be able to patent a design that is a basic requirement for most speakers?

Why? Because it's flared? Because it's a certain diameter, shape or length?

If Bose could make a product capable of competing with JBL or any maker, they would have no need to sue anyone.

It's like Ford suing Chevy for having a similar piston design. namely, it's: Round and Cylindrical.