C
Chaon
Audiophyte
Actually, there are some things that people could do to help. Start looking for printed publications that show products with the same designs as those in the Monster patents, where the publication date is at least one year prior to the patent application date. When those patents were examined at the PTO, the examiner searched for related patents, didn't find anything substantially the same, and let the patent issue. So look in old catalogs, magazines, company brochures, etc.; places that the PTO would not look. Don't limit the search to audio- where else might similar connectors be used?Let me know if there is anything that the Audioholic community can do to help, should MC decided to pursue this. I could start charging admission and donate all the proceeds from "Home Theater Night"!
your friend,
Brad
If the case goes to court, Blue Jeans would likely do this (search for prior art) anyway in conjunction with asserting that the patents are invalid. If it doesn't go to court, any third party could still file a reexamination of any or all of those patents, depending on how good the newly found prior art is. And how much they hate Monster (I had never heard of them until today, and they've already pissed me off)
I don't know this field, but I know a bad design patent when I see one. And I'm thinking that it should not be so hard to find prior art to invalidate D456363 at least. For the others, put your years of audio-addiction to work and find some prior art.