Aphex patents

[StephenGiles]

May I refer the learned gentlemen to my shortlived post over at The Lab:
http://www.prodigy-pro.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2501.
Stephen

[stm]

Stephen, nice info!

Thanks,

STM

[StephenGiles]

These seem to be the only Aphex circuits on their site - plenty of interesting stuff though, in particularlamente - the Sticky Leveller!
http://www.aphex.com/2020mkIII_downloads.htm
Stephen

[Chico]

Stephen:

If that stuff interests you, you may also be interested in checking out
http://www.aphex.com/pdf/papers/APHEX_AES_reprint_Chalupper.pdf

which is also on the Aphex web page.  

It interesting how lately, there has been a lot of discussion here about all-pass filtering.  All pass filters pop up more than once in the Aphex patents.

Best regards

Tom

[puretube]

haven`t read all that material yet, (will do later)

but I do know, that that first "Exc*ter" patent was not granted correctly,
in my opinion: the main claims where absolutely not "new".
(concerning side-chain, and creating harmonix).

more on this later - got to celebrate/party!

[Paul Perry (Frostwave)]

There was a time when Patent Offices actually looked to see whether an invention qualified to be patented. And there was a time when Einstein was a patent officer (TRUE!).
Now, governments think it is cheaper & easier for anyone to patent anything & let the courts fight it out. You can imagine who thinks this is a good idea... BIG corporations, and LAWYERS! no wonder the whole scene is so *&^%ed now :x  :x  :x

[puretube]

IMHO, in the (aph*x) "Exc*ter" patent :
http://l2.espacenet.com/espacenet/bnsviewer?CY=gb&LG=en&DB=EPD&PN=US4150253&ID=US+++4150253A1+I+,
the basic claims had already been disclosed here:
http://l2.espacenet.com/espacenet/bnsviewer?CY=gb&LG=en&DB=EPD&PN=US2315249&ID=US+++2315249A1+I+

:idea:

[StephenGiles]

I'm sure that some of that Aphex compressor stuff can be utilised to produce a ripple free auto wah control voltage.
Stephen

[mlabbee]

There's no question that a number of unfortunate patents have issued lately (particularly in the software world, although the laser pointer/cat play device, method of swinging a swing, and stick for throwing with dogs are especially amusing), it is often the case that seemingly broad patents are not quite what they seem.  

I certainly can't opine on the Aphex patents, since I'm not very well versed in their contents, the prior art, or the prosecution history of the patents, but it would not surprise me to find that the claims they got, properly interpreted, are perfectly valid.  What you need to bear in mind is that claims are interpreted not only on the basis of the language of the claim and the specification, but also on the arguments presented to the patent office during the prosecution process (the so-called "prosecution history" or "file-wrapper").  Often, seemingly broad claims use specific words that have very narrow definitions estalished during the prosecution process that limit the breadth of the claim pretty significantly.  So without looking at the entire history, it is impossible to say what the claims really cover.  For example, the 2,315,249 patent referenced in the earlier post was considered in the prosecution of the Aphex patent (the face of the patent lists art considered during the prosecution).  Thus, it is possible that the disclosure of the '249 patent was specifically addressed and the Aphex claims amended (or terms in the claims defined) to avoid the '249 patent.  In any event, you could do anything disclosed in the '249 patent and, by definition, not infringe the Aphex patent.

[puretube]

I'm sure that some of that Aphex compressor stuff can be utilised to produce a ripple free auto wah control voltage.
Stephen

good evening:
still haven`t read all those interesting links,
but had an idea this afternoon, which might be a workout on the subject of ripplefree env.-following:
http://www.diystompboxes.com/sboxforum/viewtopic.php?t=25637

I hope to draw some extended thoughts on this early next week,
(and hope, not to be on aphex`s trail...)

[StephenGiles]

Ah, that sounds interesting, I look forward to that.
Stephen

[StephenGiles]

mlabbee - we in England can do anything we like in the Aphex patents can we not? The most important thing is - will it do the job? If it does, we post the circuit, redrawn to look good, for the benefit of all, and it becomes public domain.
Stephen

[mlabbee]

Stephen:

Patents are only enforceable in their country of issue. So you are free to use an invention covered by as US patent anywhere outside of the US without fear of litigation.  That said, there are a number of things to look out for - first, you need to be sure the patentee does not have an application pending in your country. In many countries, a patentee can recover damages for infringements that occur after the application has been published, but before it has issued.

As for public domain, it's not really applicable in patent law - at least in the sense you are suggesting.  If you were to produce an infringing product outside the US and bring it in to the US, you would still be liable for infringement.  A patent gives the patent holder the right to control the sale, offer for sale, use and making of the invention wherever the patent has jurisdiction.  

Inventions only enter the public domain after the patent has expired, if it is dedicated to the public (intentionally or unintentionally), of if the patent applicaiton is not filed within certain time periods after the invention becomes known to the public (e.g., a college paper indexed in a public library is sufficient to create public knowledge).

Also, keep in mind that companies like Aphex would never (at least I can't conceive of a situation in which they would) really come after a DIYer building circuits at home.  When I was in private practice, a client needed to put down a deposit against fees of $1 MILLION before we would initiate a patent infringement suit.  While my firm was probably on the upper end as far as this practice was concerned, the reality is that patent lawsuits are incredibly expensive and only worth it if the potential upside is literally in the millions of dollars.  That's why there are a lot more lawsuits over the composition of carpet backing (a case I worked on) than over the design of effects circuits.  There's just not enough money in these products (for the most part) to justify the expense of litigation (in contrast, industrial/commercial carpeteing is a multi-billion dollar industry - who knew?    :-) )

I'm actually a little surprised no litigation has popped up over a lot of these simulation products - they seem to be pretty pervasive in the market.  I have no idea what the patent positions are, but it seems like Line 6 could be kicking some but right now.

Bottom line - I can't imagine Aphex spending the time or money to come after one of us for building one or two of their patented circuits.  We would need to be putting a dent in their market before they would even care.  But that's not legal advice!!!!  Don't come after me if it turns out Aphex is full of litigation psychos  :-)

[StephenGiles]

Thanks for your opinion here for which I am very gratefull. I suppose we don't have so much of a "compensation" society here in England, other than the odd Mum & Dad sueing little Johnny's school when he fell off the monkey bars at school, when it was really his own fault. I dare say it will come!
Stephen