DVD Rental Kiosk Patented... Redbox Sued
from the sue-away dept
In 1998 I worked with a company that was trying to deliver CDs and (eventually) DVDs via rental kiosks. At the time, the idea was hardly new. In fact we've detailed the long list of failed companies who got into the kiosk business over the last few decades. But, apparently, they all had the wrong strategy. What they should have been doing is suing over patent infringement. We were just talking about Redbox, one of the few companies that's made a successful go of DVD kiosks, and its lawsuit against Universal Studios, but it appears that the company is now being sued for patent infringement as well, by a company called DVDplay. The patent itself seems to cover a disc-based kiosk that's connected to the internet. Reading through the claims, it's difficult to see how there wasn't any prior art on this stuff or that it wasn't an obvious iteration on what had come before. But, really, what does that matter once you've got a patent and you can just sue away?Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: dvd rentals, kiosks, patents
Companies: dvdplay, redbox
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
I take it that you are a person of ordinary skill in the art to which this invention relates, in which case you should be able to identify without difficulty specific prior art that would render the claims unpatentable.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You sir, are an IDIOT
Your snarky comment on patent law illustrates just how much of a short bus simpleton you really are.
I have read many terrible blogs. Yours is the worst.
Your distain for the Constitution, your anger toward inventors and their desire to protect their inventions via patent, copyright and trademark litigation is unmatched.
You sir, need a slap in the face with a leather glove.
You sir, are all that is wrong with the blogging world.
Have you ever considered killing yourself? If not, you really, really REALLY should.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: You sir, are an IDIOT
Remember, everyone... Don't feed the trolls.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: You sir, are an IDIOT
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"It’s hard to believe that the concept of Redbox started out 4 years ago, but what was initially a series of radical experiments by McDonald’s (MCD) has turned into an undeniable box office success for the company. McDonald’s may have first come up with the concept in 2002, but it wasn’t until 2003 that they tested their first unit. Initially, they had a very modest beta launch of only 6 DVD kiosks in their Las Vegas restaurants and another 11 in their Washington area stores. "
This is in a December, 2006 story found at:
http://seekingalpha.com/article/21558-a-virtual-happy-meal-mcdonald-s-redbox-a-smashing-succe ss
So it almost looks like these guys (at www.dvdplay.com) may NOT be the first. It also looks like they may be going up against Micky D's!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mike's a good guy; he's just dumb
He hates patents. He hates the IRS. He hates Negroes. He hates Gays. He hates women because they have breasts.
He's very opinionated. Stupid opinions, granted, but ones he is not afraid to express.
Keep up the so-so work Mike. Not everyone with a head injury is as productive as you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Mike's a good guy; he's just dumb
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Redbox Headquarters
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Patents are great for innovation!
I am pissed. I rent RedBox every time I go visit my family in OKC and I was eagerly awaiting it's arrival here in Lawton.
Now it may never happen.
Here's hoping RedBox has good cheap attorneys.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Patents are great for innovation!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Patents are great for innovation!
RedBox has come to Lawton, at Wal-Mart, McDonald's and Walgreens, making it even more awesome than it was before and we use it alot and love it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
DVDPlay?
Redbox used DVDplay's kiosks in its denver test market, determined the business model a success, and promptly had new, better suited kiosks made. The dvdplay kiosks were all phased out once redbox had the improved models, but still.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Communist Ideology + Masnick writing skills = Rose M. Welch
I just looked you up. You are a Maoist with bad skin and an eating disorder.
I dare you to say otherwise.
I double dare you.
Respectfully Yours:
John Q. Public
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Communist Ideology + Masnick writing skills = Rose M. Welch
However, I'm pretty stoked that you think I can write like Mike Masnick. I always do admire a logical argument sans mud-slinging plus construction and Masnick seems to have the corner on that. Thanks!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
RedBox hads been around awhile...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Seriously, get a grip or you are going to blow out an artery.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Does a Redbox Use...?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Does a Redbox Use...?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Does a Redbox Use...?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Does a Redbox Use...?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Does a Redbox Use...?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Does a Redbox Use...?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Does a Redbox Use...?
I would also tend to think that they would fail in their attempt if they are simply saying that the mere "concept" of a standalone DVD rental kiosk infringes on the patent. If a clear majority of the technology used in Redbox is a duplicate (or a derivative) of DVDPlay's work then, yes, it should be deemed as an infringement. However, judging by the history I've read, it's pretty clear that the concept of the standalone DVD rental device goes back to 2002 when McDonald's tried it in, if I remember the story correctly, Washington state.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Does a Redbox Use...?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Does a Redbox Use...?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Does a Redbox Use...?
I admit that I focused on that one feature, but the claims are actually kind of complicated. I suspect there are probably other options for avoiding infringement. An astute engineer's advice along with a little attorney time would surely help.
Perhaps there is another way around the limitation (legal disclaimer - I am not an attorney and I am not providing legal advice). I wonder whether having the receipt stored on Redbox's web site would avoid infringement? Without reading the patent's specification in detail, it seems like it would have a good change at avoiding infringement. You could download the receipt at your convenience (if you want it) rather than having it sent to your e-mail.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Does a Redbox Use...?
It will be interesting to see how this case proceeds, as well as Redbox's suit against Universal Studios Home Entertainment. Funny how this all seems to have coalesced at one time, as if it's the "perfect storm"... all of a sudden, Redbox is bullied by Universal into signing a revenue sharing agreement, DVDPlay sues Redbox... it seems almost contrived! But, like Oliver Stone, I am a dyed in the wool conspiracy theorest!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Does a Redbox Use...?
They would cut their own mother's throats for a dollar no doubt. This is in no way above them to try to pull something like this.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Does a Redbox Use...?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Does a Redbox Use...?
It depends on how the patent is written. In this case, since they included the receipt in the primary claim, it might be possible to to circumvent an infringement claim by not emailing a receipt.
However, if they split up the claim:
Claim 1: DVD Rental Kiosk
Claim 2: System of claim 1 where receipt is emailed to the customer
Then bypassing the second claim by not sending a receipt wouldn't be enough to avoid infringement. But since this patent is basically nothing more than adding the internet to a pre-existing product, they pretty much had to word the patent that way in order to present something "novel".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Does a Redbox Use...?
The length of the first claim, coupled with its recitation of numerous limitations, strongly suggests that the prior art was quite extensive, and that allowance of the claims required the inclusion of its numerous limitations.
Each term in a claim being important in defining what is actually protected under a patent, except in rare instances the elimination of even just one recited limitation means that a somewhat similar device is non-infringing, as Mr. Holden properly notes.
Of course, during the first two years after a patent issues a patentee is afforded the opportunity to file for what is known as a broadened reissue in which limitations recited in a claim that are not needed to describe patentable subject matter can be removed. Given, however, the length and detail of the claims, together with its long pendency (the original application(s) were filed in 1999 as provisional applications), it seems quite doubtful that a broadened reissue is even a realistic possibility.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hey, Mikey is honest dude on payroll
Keep up good work, Mikey...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hey, Mikey is honest dude on payroll
If so, then everyone is wrong... or somebody is stealing my checks. We have never received a check from that group, and, as we have pointed out to you numerous times are quite critical of their view on patents as well.
But it's not like facts have ever gotten in the way of you expressing an opinion.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Hey, Mikey is honest dude on payroll
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Them der trolls be out
Like somebody posted troll paper (fly paper equivalent) on this article.
I can almost say that I am surprised you even respond to angry dude anymore Mike. It is like feeding a troll.
@Techdirt Fan
You are quite obviously not a fan. Mike seems to be quite an economist to me. Just from reading many a post over the past couple years, here and there you will see him mention the places he has been. You can even look up at the universities around the world to verify that he was a guest speaker there to speak of one topic or another. If all of his opinions sucked, I do not think he would be getting all of those invites to speak at those places. And I do not think Mike hates patents really, if you read all posts concerning patents, he dislikes bad patents, which there are a great deal many of. Patents do not have to be bad, but most of them are these days.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Them der trolls be out
Right, dude
I am a patent troll
you, on the other hand, are just a little techdirt lemming punk taking Mikey's patent-bashing BS for serious...
But unlike Mikey you are not geting any paychecks
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Them der trolls be out
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Them der trolls be out
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Them der trolls be out
I came upon this site quite by accident, reading about this DVDplay/Redbox suit, which I believe is bogus anyway - those kiosks are like ATMs, only giving disks instead of money. However, the patent goes to the person who files it first. If, indeed, McD's came up with the idea (which I don't think they did - I think they were approached because they have so many stores that it would be a ready made market), they still didn't patent it - DVDplay did. It took the government 8 years to grant the patent, which is about par for the course, and what? 2 days to file a suit? (I think they had one ready on the computer just waiting for a patent number and date.)
Anyway, this thread has possibly the highest amount of trolls I've seen in a long time, with the exception, of course of discussions involving Windows/Linux preferences.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Them der trolls be out
I came upon this site quite by accident...
Anyway, this thread has possibly the highest amount of trolls I've seen in a long time, with the exception, of course of discussions involving Windows/Linux preferences.
Let me see. You came upon this site by accident, and yet this thread has the highest amount of trolls you have seen in a long time. Now, in order for this comment to have relevancy to the others on this site, you need to be comparing with other threads on this site - cross site comparisons have little value. Ergo, you must be familiar with this site. Either that, or you are just plain confused - or wrong.
However, the patent goes to the person who files it first.
If you are a U.S. citizen, please tell me you are NOT a registered practitioner. If you are, please tell me your number so I may report you to the USPTO for incompetence. If two patent applications are filed within a certain period of time by two different inventors, in the U.S. the patent goes to the person who invented first. The U.S. is the only country (I believe) with a first-to-invent system. In all other countries the first-to-file wins the day.
It took the government 8 years to grant the patent, which is about par for the course, and what? 2 days to file a suit?
What in your vast experience makes it "par for the course"? Eight years is well over the average pendency time for a patent application in the U.S.
Anyway, this thread has possibly the highest amount of trolls I've seen in a long time, with the exception, of course of discussions involving Windows/Linux preferences.
According to Wikipedia, the definition of an internet troll is "someone who posts controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community...with the intention of provoking other users into an emotional response or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion.
You came in, insulted people who had posted on this topic, made inaccurate and irrelevant statements, and at least one inflammatory statement. If you are looking for trolls, look in the mirror first.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Patents
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
VendoNet's patents
[ link to this | view in chronology ]