AfterDawn: Tech news

Creative touts ownership of key MP3 player patent

Written by James Delahunty (Google+) @ 09 Dec 2005 6:35 User comments (3)

Creative touts ownership of key MP3 player patent Creative Technologies Inc. has once again touted ownership of a key MP3 player patent, which could force Creative's rivals to pay licensing fees. Of course, Apple is Creative's biggest rival, yet speaking at the launch of the Vision:M in London yesterday, the company's CEO Sim Wong Hoo, didn't mention any specific companies Creative would target. The User Interface described in the Creative patent is remarkably similar to that used by Apple's iPod players.
Creative was first to use the UI though, back in September 2000 whereas the iPod didn't show up until November 2001. Creative shipped 8 million MP3 players this year according to Hoo, whereas Apple shipped 18 million in the first three quarters of 2005 and looks set to reach 22 million this year. These are figures that Creative should be happy about if it can force Apple to license the patent.

The very fact that there has been no lawsuit filed by Creative against Apple indicates that the two companies are negotiating.

Source:
The Register

Previous Next  

3 user comments

19.12.2005 19:36

Don't get cocky Creative! Many fine companies have gotten bad or gone to the way side due to this very thing. It's important for a company to have some flaunting power, but it's another to slit the throats of other companies by denying a product that usually would be considered applicable to other companies (kind of like what Mac's done with iTunes). Damnit! I couldn't go through that whole thing without one Apple bashing! :)

29.12.2005 20:52

just a pin prick in the iron fist of apple, but its a start ;) i do wish creative would advertise more, so people would realize that creative has better, cheaper mp3 players and unbelievibly, WE HAVE A CHOICE

319.12.2005 8:12

I am not an apple fan, but I did cave-in and buy a mini after my MuVo Slim stopped working just after a few short months. I would agree with you that Creative is cheaper: cheaper quality that is. Regarding licensing, it is definitely smart business. Just because Apple improved on an original technology doesn't mean they should be exempt from paying respects.

Comments have been disabled for this article.

News archive