DigiMedia Accuses Lawsuit Defendants of Delay Tactics
     
print  rss 

The company that holds the patents in the year-and-a-half old radio automation patent infringement suit against a handful of large radio broadcast groups says the defendants are stalling for time.

DigiMedia Holdings Group LLC, in court filings in earlier this month, asked the presiding federal judge to lift a stay in the infringement case and accused defendants CBS Radio, Cox, Entercom, Cumulus, Beasley Broadcasting and Greater Media of the delay strategy.

“The litigation and DigiMedia’s licensing program have been derailed through a combination of multiple reexamination requests, litigation stay, and a licensing blockade coordinated among the defendants, state and national broadcaster associations and automation vendors,” the company said in court documents.

Broadcast Electronics, a radio automation supplier and not a defendant in the case, filed a second ex-parte reexamination request with the United States Patent and Trademark Office in May. A USPTO examiner last year reexamined the two patents at the center of the pending dispute striking some claims while upholding others.

DigiMedia concludes in its most recent court filing, “If it was not clear before, the follow-up reexamination request filed by Broadcast Electronics makes clear the strategy of both the named defendants in this case, and the industry of which they are part, is to try to wait out the asserted patents until their expiration in less than two years.”

The company claims “no depositions have been taken and no discovery provided by the defendants” on their widespread infringement.

“After more than a year, it is time to move this case forward,” DigiMedia told the judge.

DigiMedia and its associated company, Mission Abstract Data, have sent packages to a large number of radio broadcasters asking them to sign licensing agreements to use the company’s technology.

Related:
Broadcast Electronics Active in Pending Patent Suit
MAD Pushes Patent Judge to Lift Stay

 

print  rss 

Rating People: 5   Average Rating:     
Comment List:

One of their claims is audio storage on a RAID array. The early automation systems such as Digilink (which I had back in the mid-90's) did not have a RAID arry and such old systems are being shown as prior art. However, most (many?) systems today do use RAID servers for storage and sometimes playout. My system for example, uses a RAID server for storage, sends the audio to the on air work stations (not a RAID) at midnight for the following day and plays out from there. It's not clear to me whether this counts or not. I'd sure like some clarity. I've spoken with the automation vendor and the NAB but still really don't know who's on first.
By Hal on 7/10/2012
According to MAD: "It was not until at least 1994 that audio compression and hard drive capacities developed sufficiently." I'm curious what their basis is for this statement. Oscar Bonello would most certainly disagree with it. Lossy psychoacoustic compression methods have been around since the late 80s and were demonstrated in automation systems as early as 1990 expressly for the purpose of allowing MOHD systems to exist within the limitations of the hard drive sizes commonly available. Google Solidyne, Audicom, etc.
By Marconi Rules on 7/10/2012

Post your comment

Your Name:  Required
Your Mail:       Your email will not be published.
Your Site:    

max. 400 characters

Posts are reviewed before publication, typically the next business morning. Radio World encourages multiple viewpoints, though a post will be blocked if it contains abusive language, or is repetitive or spam. Thank you for commenting!