http://www.techdirt.com/articles/200...

PaulT"The only real "innovation" there is the inclusion of the words "flash memory" into a description of a handheld tape recorder - which existed well before 1994.

The others are just as dumb - portable dictation machine, ROM-based OS, EEPROM memory and sound editing package. All of which existed well before the patents were filed, but somehow the addition of "flash memory" means they think they can sue everyone for it."

Chronno S. Trigger "That argument would fit if the patent was about the innovative and previously unavailable way to connect the two devices together, but this is just about connecting the two, not about how."

I guess there's some kind of blog going that I missed....lol

For some of the commentary I'v read there, they have no idea.

Proprietary Format and discrete manipulation of data within the memory matrix for both eeprom and flash is what it's all about.

The API's that allow the manipulation can be orchestrated from a PC interface, or a control switch button interface that utilizes yet a patented process to deliver signals.

This system utilizes flash(NAND) or eerpom(NOR), yet two entirely different types of matrix ,..... to operate in similar fashion.

The process is serial and complements the Flash environment, however, it makes no difference.

All the patents culminate with the 1998 operating system patent, that is yet, an advanced use of prior claims.

With that, it's not totally about flash or eeprom use, but any memory matrix.

One of the hurdles is/was with the flash(NAND) or EEPROM(NOR) developers, and who wins the war of best use memory environment.

We on this board know what is happening on that front.

We need not worry about new comer comments...they have a long way to go.

doni