Flight Prep Lawsuit, Part II

What's the old saying?

Something about a self defendant having a fool for a client?
 
kurtsnyder said:
That's like me saying I can perform my own operation. I've never done it before and it's easy to make a big, deadly mistake right from the get-go.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but if you have nothing to lose, you can't lose anything. Especially with a business.

I said the same thing when POA was being threatened by MAG - it was insane how quickly someone dropped to their knees to service Troy Martin also. These people are the reason frivolous lawsuits are successful.
 
SkyHog said:
I'm presuming you're a lawyer and I've offended you...
Click to expand...

I guess I should have posted my sig line.

I'm just trying to find out if you know what you're talking about, or if you're just an Internet tough guy.

My interest in this subject is that I like and use Skyvector, I think it's wrong to blame the victim, and I think talk is cheap when it comes to claiming how easy it would be for someone else to fight a battle that you think should be fought.
 
Last edited:
Palmpilot said:
I guess I should have posted my sig line.

I'm just trying to find out if you know what you're talking about, or if you're just an Intenet tough guy.

My interest in this subject is that I like and use Skyvector, I think it's wrong to blame the victim, and I think talk is cheap when it comes to claiming how easy it would be for someone else to fight a battle that you think should be fought.
Click to expand...

If the question is "Have I successfully defended myself from a patent infringement case" the answer is no. If the question is "Have I ever acted Pro Se in a court of law" the answer is yes.

The latter is enough, IMHO, to qualify me to say that for certain open and shut cases, a lawyer may not be needed. Claiming that one company owns the right to digitally draw a line on a moving map and anyone else that does the same is violating a patent, regardless of whether the code is original or not is open and shut, IMHO.

Especially when there is easily found prior art that predates the existence of FlightPrep (Google Directions being one of the earlier examples through the GDirections API).
 
SkyHog said:
If the question is "Have I successfully defended myself from a patent infringement case" the answer is no. If the question is "Have I ever acted Pro Se in a court of law" the answer is yes.

The latter is enough, IMHO, to qualify me to say that for certain open and shut cases, a lawyer may not be needed. Claiming that one company owns the right to digitally draw a line on a moving map and anyone else that does the same is violating a patent, regardless of whether the code is original or not is open and shut, IMHO.

Especially when there is easily found prior art that predates the existence of FlightPrep (Google Directions being one of the earlier examples through the GDirections API).
Click to expand...

Well, then I'm sure AOPA's lawyers will take about 10 minutes to resolve the situation, if it's that trivial. After all, the "precedent" set by Skyvector and RunwayFinder caving are irrelevant if you can show the patent should never have been issued.

But the bottom line is, until it gets decided in a court of law, your opinion is your opinion and doesn't matter. Only the court's opinion matters.

And it's not even the first court's opinion that matters. It's the opinion of the last court that hears an appeal that matters.

And I've seen enough seemingly slam-dunk court cases go the other way that I wouldn't bet money on any of 'em.
 
SkyHog said:
If the question is "Have I successfully defended myself from a patent infringement case" the answer is no. If the question is "Have I ever acted Pro Se in a court of law" the answer is yes.

The latter is enough, IMHO, to qualify me to say that for certain open and shut cases, a lawyer may not be needed. Claiming that one company owns the right to digitally draw a line on a moving map and anyone else that does the same is violating a patent, regardless of whether the code is original or not is open and shut, IMHO.

Especially when there is easily found prior art that predates the existence of FlightPrep (Google Directions being one of the earlier examples through the GDirections API).
Click to expand...

Thanks for explaining your position.
 
SkyHog said:
This is purely the fault of the scumbags at SkyVector and Runway Finder. The dried white matter on their lips hasn't even flaked off after they dropped to their knees and serviced FlightPrep on demand.

Had they fought, they would have won. Instead, they gave FlightPrep the fuel to try to get AOPA to do the same.
Click to expand...
No, it is the fault of AOPA and Jeppesen for not backing those two. RunwayFinder and SkyVector did not / do not have the cash to fight. Aopa and Jeppesen do.
 
SkyHog said:
Especially when there is easily found prior art that predates the existence of FlightPrep (Google Directions being one of the earlier examples through the GDirections API).
Click to expand...

According to googles history, the maps and directions feature came out in 2005.
The patent was filed on July 31st 2001.
 
FWIW, I personally told Mark Baker Saturday that I felt he should vigorously defend themselves in the lawsuit. Of course, that probably isn't worth a whole lot! :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top