im pretty sure this means they have to kill all HEOS's
Or pay license fees and raise the price.
Sonos made some claims about Denon monitoring the patents while they developed HEOS- does it not make sense to do that? Why go through the trouble to develop something and find that it has already been done?
Didn't one company in this issue hire some of the competition's lawyers, who were found to have stolen proprietary info? Maybe someone can clarify that.
My mechanic told me, "I couldn't repair your brakes, so I made your horn louder."
According to Sonos: D&M said in court many times that they have other methods for achieving similar functionality, without infringing Sonos patents. Apparently, that was part of the "egregiousness" claim by Sonos.
“[T]he infringing HEOS features are software-based and … D&M allegedly could have easily and readily implemented alternative synchronization and volume control features that would apparently avoid infringing Sonos’s patents.”
Sonos forcing Sound United to "brick" Heos products would be in the courts for years before anything actually happens... Plus Sonos has made the claim that D&M could have worked around the patent issues, meaning that Sound United still potentially can work around them with a SW update.
Worrying about what those potential changes will do the functionality of Heos units would be like worrying about what Sonos will do to do their products in the next remote update... oh wait, we already do that.
I'm Not an engineer, but I play one on TV. My handle is Tweety but I have nothing to do with the organization of similar name. I just had a really big head as a child so folks called me tweety bird.
A kill off would be awfully drastic, the damage is done. Sonos want's their money per unit, they get that regardless of what HEOS does. Now Sonos wants fees and wilful damages too, rather than $40 a unit, that could add up to serious money and losses. And of course the bean counters look at when and where to right off losses.
HEOS has a lot invested and needs a streaming component. So they will most likely address changing the software, perhaps loosing features if they can't do it another way. Worst case, they'd walk away from the line, which would affect users future for software support and upgrades, but it will be cheaper to leave a couple engineers to support the line for a number of years rather than face a class action lawsuit.
VERY unlikely that they will brick units already deployed. The settlement would likely be to cease and desist from future sales and compensation for units already sold.
I doubt Sonos will agree to future licensing deal or make an offer that is too expensive for D&M making their product uncompetitive. Sonos will want to keep every competitor out of their area of the market for as long as possible.
"[P]rior to developing HEOS, D&M spent ‘a considerable amount of time, money, and energy’ studying Sonos’s technology, which included numerous detailed “teardowns” of Sonos’s products embodying the patented technology …."
When a user on a forum I frequented reported on his visit to the Sonos HQ, he noted that Sonos also had many, many products from competitors pulled apart in their labs. This is 100% standard practice and I honestly fail to see the issue with it... they can claim to be looking for patent issues / copying / avoiding copying... who cares, but I don't see it as an issue personally.
Not that I think Heos have a leg to stand on.
This industry is not getting cheaper and cheaper, we're simply convincing ourselves they we have to push the cheapest option to customers.
Please read the following: Unsolicited commercial advertisements are absolutely not permitted on this forum. Other private buy & sell messages should be posted to our Marketplace. For information on how to advertise your service or product click here. Remote Central reserves the right to remove or modify any post that is deemed inappropriate.