Comments on: Packet 8 Patents http://www.saunderslog.com/2006/06/15/packet-8-patents/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=packet-8-patents An outcome-driven leader, proven technology product developer, and marketer with over 20 years of hands-on experience including start-up, small and large business environments, and the board room. This is my blog. Thu, 26 Jan 2012 17:15:58 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Mitch Brisebois http://www.saunderslog.com/2006/06/15/packet-8-patents/#comment-3013 Mitch Brisebois Thu, 15 Jun 2006 19:37:38 +0000 http://saunderslog.com/2006/06/15/packet-8-patents/#comment-3013 8x8 is an interesting company... They hold a ton of patents and design registrations (50+) and they also appear to offer product via their sister company packet8.net Are they patent trolls? don't know. From their past patents I would guess not. Consider patent #5,761,280 - which describes a method for using DTMF to navigate the internet... cutting edge, no? Maybe they just goofed up on that one. Have a look at another one of their patents also granted along with the PBX one (7,035,890) It seems tolay claim to the procedure commonly known as "multiplication"... here's the abstract - "An apparatus for multiplying and accumulating numeric quantities, including a multiplier for receiving the numeric quantities, with the multiplier having a sum output and a carry output. A first shift register has an input coupled to the sum output of the multiplier, and a second shift register has an input coupled to the carry output of the multiplier. An adder and third shift register are used to complete processing of the apparatus' arithmetic operations." OK - I'm a UI guy - not a tech geek... but isn't that just multiplication??? Bottom line - it's not what you have as patent holdings - it's what you do with them that counts. For more exciting 8x8 patents reading, look them up at <a href="http://www.uspto.gov" rel="nofollow">www.uspto.gov</a> (note: some of their patents are assigned to 8x8, Inc others are 8.times.8, Inc) cheers Mitch 8×8 is an interesting company… They hold a ton of patents and design registrations (50+) and they also appear to offer product via their sister company packet8.net Are they patent trolls? don't know.

From their past patents I would guess not. Consider patent #5,761,280 – which describes a method for using DTMF to navigate the internet… cutting edge, no? Maybe they just goofed up on that one.

Have a look at another one of their patents also granted along with the PBX one (7,035,890) It seems tolay claim to the procedure commonly known as "multiplication"… here's the abstract –

"An apparatus for multiplying and accumulating numeric quantities, including a multiplier for receiving the numeric quantities, with the multiplier having a sum output and a carry output. A first shift register has an input coupled to the sum output of the multiplier, and a second shift register has an input coupled to the carry output of the multiplier. An adder and third shift register are used to complete processing of the apparatus' arithmetic operations."

OK – I'm a UI guy – not a tech geek… but isn't that just multiplication???

Bottom line – it's not what you have as patent holdings – it's what you do with them that counts.

For more exciting 8×8 patents reading, look them up at http://www.uspto.gov (note: some of their patents are assigned to 8×8, Inc others are 8.times.8, Inc)

cheers
Mitch

]]> By: Randy Charles Morin http://www.saunderslog.com/2006/06/15/packet-8-patents/#comment-3012 Randy Charles Morin Thu, 15 Jun 2006 11:03:16 +0000 http://saunderslog.com/2006/06/15/packet-8-patents/#comment-3012 You know, it doesn't matter if they are upheld. They will threaten to sue and many will simply pay up, because it's too costly to fight. Look at RIM. The patent office said the patents were invalid and RIM still paid a $1/2 billion. You know, it doesn't matter if they are upheld. They will threaten to sue and many will simply pay up, because it's too costly to fight. Look at RIM. The patent office said the patents were invalid and RIM still paid a $1/2 billion.

]]>