X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2010 19:09:33 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from elasmtp-banded.atl.sa.earthlink.net ([209.86.89.70] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.11) with ESMTP id 4644663 for lml@lancaironline.net; Thu, 16 Dec 2010 23:38:33 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.86.89.70; envelope-from=colyncase@earthlink.net DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=WmNvHsaIX7zz0k90ZOdrmuLgM6kZM99wWS/CaXN3bknLfJ9Pj8i0ev9NXKDgIoh8; h=Received:From:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:To:References:Message-Id:X-Mailer:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Received: from [216.57.118.85] (helo=[192.168.1.103]) by elasmtp-banded.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1PTS4i-0006om-B1 for lml@lancaironline.net; Thu, 16 Dec 2010 23:37:49 -0500 From: Colyn Case Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-47-720828629 Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Runwayfinder X-Original-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 23:37:21 -0500 In-Reply-To: X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" References: X-Original-Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1082) X-ELNK-Trace: 63d5d3452847f8b1d6dd28457998182d7e972de0d01da9407af36f2bc02329d40cde300f5f662101350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 216.57.118.85 --Apple-Mail-47-720828629 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 I totally understand Jon's point. =20 I think the protection of technology investment argument is extremely = weak on this one. Everybody who ever created a pc flight planner made = a big investment. This is more about change of venue. If indoor plumbing had happened in 1980 I suppose you could get a patent = on toilet paper that worked indoors if you were the first one to do the = research. Even if the courts allowed it wouldn't you feel a little = conscience about charging other people for your "invention". If this ruling stand basically any program you've seen on a pc could be = patentable the first time it appears on the net. =20 On Dec 16, 2010, at 8:34 PM, paul miller wrote: > I'm not sure I understand your argument Jon. FlightPrep has a patent. = Stenbock & Everson probably spent a lot on the technology or at least = was first to file. Someone delivers a low cost equivalent without a = license. A dispute arises. It happens every day. Technology needs = to be protected just like all other inventions. If you disagree, you = have to go to court or get a license or do something else. I cannot = duplicate Jepp's plates nor AOPA's articles. I can't copy ASA's flight = training programs nor FlighPrep's data. Every one of those companies = no doubt has sent nastygrams claiming infringement to protect their = investment and source of revenue yet they flourish and continue to be = supported. I don't understand the retaliation issue you have with S&E = except perhaps the publicity over using brute force against an = individual. Copy some Jepp plates without permission and this story = pales in comparison. >=20 > Paul > Legacy N357V=20 > On 2010-12-16, at 12:01 PM, Jon Socolof wrote: >=20 >> Is anyone else disturbed by the activities of FlightPrep against = Runwayfinder.com, a little free online flight planner? They also went = after Jepp/AOPA and other flight planners. The Van=92s community is = following pretty closely. I for one, will never purchase from any = Stenbock and Everson company including Flightprep, ASA, etc. I hope the = Lancair community will support the Van=92s community in this one. >> =20 >> Jon >> Legacy N332E >> =20 >=20 --Apple-Mail-47-720828629 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 I = totally understand Jon's point.    
I think the protection = of technology investment argument is extremely weak on this one.   = Everybody who ever created a pc flight planner made a big investment. =  This is more about change of venue.

If = indoor plumbing had happened in 1980 I suppose you could get a patent on = toilet paper that worked indoors if you were the first one to do the = research.   Even if the courts allowed it wouldn't you feel a = little conscience about charging other people for your = "invention".

If this ruling stand basically any = program you've seen on a pc could be patentable the first time it = appears on the net.   

On Dec 16, = 2010, at 8:34 PM, paul miller wrote:

I'm not sure I understand your = argument Jon.  FlightPrep has a patent.   Stenbock & = Everson probably spent a lot on the technology or at least was first to = file.   Someone delivers a low cost equivalent without a license. =    A dispute arises.  It happens every day.   = Technology needs to be protected just like all other inventions.   = If you disagree, you have to go to court or get a license or do = something else.   I cannot duplicate Jepp's plates nor AOPA's = articles. I can't copy ASA's flight training programs nor FlighPrep's = data.   Every one of those companies no doubt has sent nastygrams = claiming infringement to protect their investment and source of revenue = yet they flourish and continue to be supported.   I don't = understand the retaliation issue you have with S&E except perhaps = the publicity over using brute force against an individual.   Copy = some Jepp plates without permission and this story pales in = comparison.

Paul
Legacy = N357V 
On 2010-12-16, at 12:01 PM, Jon Socolof = wrote:

Is anyone else disturbed by = the activities of FlightPrep against Runwayfinder.com, a little free online flight planner? = They also went after Jepp/AOPA and other flight planners. The Van=92s = community is following pretty closely.  I for one, will never = purchase from any Stenbock and Everson company including Flightprep, = ASA, etc.  I hope the Lancair community will support the Van=92s = community in this one.
 
Legacy N332E