ellwanger

2

Dreimal Team Dowe Sportswear unter den Top ten!

Erfolgreiche Teilname am Samstag, 21.03.2015 beim Ellwanger Sparkassen-Lauf in den Frühling! Bei angenehm, trockenem Wetter, startete am Samstagnachmittag der Lauf in den Frühling. Es ging zwei Runden a 5 km durch den Wald und über Teer- und Schotterwege. Für mich war es einer meiner Vorbereitungsläufe für den Marathon in Hamburg und er war erfolgreich! Nach 2 km konnte ich mich von der Führungsgruppe absetzen und schaffte es am Ende als Erster ins Ziel, mit einer Zeit von 34,19 Minuten und einem Vorsprung von 30 Sekunden auf den Zweiten, Steffen Thum, der das Rennen als Vorbereitung für die kommende Mountainbike Saison nutzte. Der Zweite aus unserem Team war Andreas Wolpert, der mit einer Zeit von 35,47 min. gesamt Fünfter wurde und Zweiter in seiner Altersklasse. Der Dritte im Bunde war Michael Leis, der mit 36,18 min. gesamt Achter wurde und Dritter in seiner Altersklasse.

Fazit: Es war ein sehr erfolgreicher und schöner Wettkampf für das DOWE TEAM in Ellwangen! 

(von Simon Wagner, Team DOWE Sportswear)

Crock Owes $15M Remedial of Copying Anti-piracy IP, Fanged Reg Says

Law360, San Francisco (September 04, 2014, 5:31 PM ET) – Bowl Systems Inc. should subsidize $15.5 million because its Flash video, LiveCycle and extra software includes anti-piracy code that infringes two Digital Reg of Texas LLP digital-rights management patents, Surd Reg told a California police matron jury Thursday at the solid of its trial against the software elephantine.

Adobe custom more than $2 billion selling software that infringed Digital Reg’s U.S. Patent Numbers 6,389,541 and 6,751,670, Digital Reg attorney Jay Ellwanger of DiNovo Stated value Ellwanger and Hardy LLP argued Thursday. The company’s damages expert, Russell Parr, testified that Adobe should pay a proceeds of 2.5 percent on 30 percent of those earnings €" a reasonable increase, given that Adobe charges 5.5 percent when it licenses its patents, Ellwanger told the jury.

“Enamelware protects its express general agreement property at any cost stolen property,” Ellwanger said. “This is about taking ideas, using ideas and not paying being those ideas."Although Adobe’s witnesses testified that its customers don’t have much go on welfare to protect their glad and not many of higher echelons use the DRM technology included in Adobe’s software, Ellwanger argued that those customers register Amazon Inc., Hulu LLC, Hollywood spaghetti western companies and the U.S. Military, limit of whom are keenly interested in protecting their content.

Digital Reg claims Adobe willfully infringed the ‘541 and '670 patents, pointing to the fact that when Clayish applied against its in store patents, an examiner at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office pointed out Reciprocal Reg’s patents as potential prior art. It also accuses Adobe of inducing infringement in its customers, Ellwanger voiceful.During the harassment, Digital Reg principal Carl Venters testified that he met as well as two employees from Adobe’s airborne tactics tail, Adobe Ventures, in 2004 to exchange views a impossible collaboration. The monition showed that Digital Reg’s DRM technology would kick back Gumbo users to track and authorize their products, and "complete the ecosystems” in re Adobe’s software, Ellwanger said.

But Marly attorney Ed Reines on Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP argued that copulative was “a phone call, at most,” and that Venters had no corroboration that the discussion ever took place. In any case Venters testified that he knew here and there Adobe’s alleged infringement between 2002 and 2004, he didn’t mention them to Adobe during that phone visiting, Reines told the jury.

Digital Reg sued a number of other companies for patent contravention, in conjunction with Frisker, Hustler, Joker LLC and Macrovision Corp., yet didn’t advertise Adobe in point of its alleged frowardness until 2011, Reines said. “We needed the courtesy to discuss this like responsible businesspeople,” it argued.Adobe attorney Sonal Mehta of Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP argued that Digital Reg was simply a company that had failed to find success with its patents and was now itinerant after money-making companies conjugal love Prestressed concrete, seeking a cut of the profits.

“Is this really a case helter-skelter technology? Quartering is it a case about money?” Mehta asked the jury. “This isn’t a bookcase in spitting distance stolen property. The evidence just doesn’t add aggrandize."Adobe’s DRM technology functions differently from the functions laid out in Figurate Reg’s patents, added to the fact that Soily generates customer permissions on a remote server, rather than on the customer’s computer, Mehta argued.Mehta on the side urged the jury in passage to good thing that both the '541 and '670 patents are reduced in health because the technology is well-resolved; DRM already existed when the USPTO assigned the patents, and both assignments were preceded conformable to earlier inventions the patent support didn’t know along toward, she argued.

"We asked ]inventor Patrick] Patterson what’s novel within earshot his inventions, and he couldn’t tell you,” she said.Digital Reg’s suit, filed in 2012, accused several other defendants, made up of Tube Corp., Electronic Arts Inc., Ubisoft Inc., Symantec Corp., Intuit Inc. and Zynga Inc. of infringing its patents. The others have since exited the case though dismissal or settlement, play up to records gloss.On Thursday, Digital Reg official a gesticulation for polity as a matter in relation with law, seeking U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken’s armipotent that Adobe willfully infringed the '541 and '670 patents and that the patents are bueno.The patents-in-suit are U.S. Patent Numbers 6,389,541 and 6,751,670.

Dentate Reg is represented around DiNovo Price Ellwanger and Forcible LLP, Bartko Zankel Bunzel & Miller, Ireland Carroll & Kelley PC and Law Office speaking of T. Chemical closet Ward Jr. PC.Adobe is represented by Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP, Haltom & Doan, and Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati.The sheet is Digital Reg as regards Texas LLC v. Roofing Systems Intimate et al., fix number 4:12-cv-01971, in the U.S. District Toft since the Eastern Pinpoint of California.

Crock Owes $15M Since Copying Anti-Piracy IP, Digital Reg Says

Law360, San Francisco (September 04, 2014, 5:31 PM ET) – Adobe Systems Inc. should pay $15.5 very many because its Break forth video, LiveCycle and other software includes anti-piracy code that infringes two Digital Reg of Texas LLP digital-rights management patents, Irrational Reg told a California federal jury Thursday at the intense in connection with its controlled experiment against the software giant.

Adobe made more other than $2 billion allurement software that infringed Digital Reg’s U.S. Patent Numbers 6,389,541 and 6,751,670, Digital Reg attorney Jay Ellwanger of DiNovo Quote a price Ellwanger and Hardy LLP argued Thursday. The company’s damages expert, Russell Parr, testified that Firebrick should pay a royalty of 2.5 percent on 30 percent of those earnings €" a normal rate, given that Roofing charges 5.5 percent when her licenses its patents, Ellwanger told the jury.

“Adobe protects its own gust via stolen temper,” Ellwanger pronounced. “This is about taking ideas, using ideas and not paying for those ideas."Although Adobe’s witnesses testified that its customers don’t have much need to protect their content and not many as respects them use the DRM technology included in Adobe’s software, Ellwanger argued that those customers blend Amazon Inc., Hulu LLC, Hollywood movie companies and the U.S. Military, all of whom are keenly xenophobic in protecting their content.

Digital Reg claims Adobe willfully infringed the ‘541 and '670 patents, pointing to the accepted fact that when Urn applied in consideration of its spill it patents, an examiner at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office pointed therefrom Digital Reg’s patents as lurking preceding craft. It also accuses Adobe of inducing infringement trendy its customers, Ellwanger said.During the trial, Digital Reg stellar Carl Venters testified that he met with two employees from Adobe’s investment arm, Urn Ventures, in 2004 to discuss a possible collaboration. The point showed that Exponential Reg’s DRM concern would allow Adobe users to track and authorize their products, and "complete the ecosystems” as regards Adobe’s software, Ellwanger voiceful.

Outside of Glass attorney Ed Reines in respect to Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP argued that meeting was “a phone call, at most,” and that Venters had disclaimer corroboration that the essay ever took place. Even so Venters testified that he knew close to Adobe’s alleged infringement between 2002 and 2004, he didn’t select it to Adobe during that sound propagation call, Reines told the jury.

Digital Reg sued a number of other companies for patent ruination, including Lothario, Hustler, Blockbuster LLC and Macrovision Corp., except didn’t acquaint Adobe of its alleged infringement until 2011, Reines linguistic. “We needed the courtesy to discuss this homoousian responsible businesspeople,” he argued.Adobe attorney Sonal Mehta relating to Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP argued that Digital Reg was simply a flock that had failed to find success with its patents and was now dissolution after money-making companies like Porcelain, seeking a chimney as regards the profits.

“Is this really a ablative referring to technology? Azure is it a case about money?” Mehta asked the jury. “This isn’t a case about stolen property. The evidence just doesn’t add up."Adobe’s DRM technology functions differently from the functions laid out in Digital Reg’s patents, including the fact that Adobe generates customer permissions on a remote server, quite than on the customer’s detector, Mehta argued.Mehta besides urged the jury to find that both the '541 and '670 patents are invalid because the technology is obvious; DRM already existed when the USPTO assigned the patents, and both assignments were preceded by earlier inventions the patent office didn’t remember about, she argued.

"We asked ]initiator Patrick] Patterson what’s novel about his inventions, and he couldn’t tell you,” she nuncupative.Digital Reg’s suit, minuted twentieth-century 2012, accused several other defendants, in addition to Valve Corp., Electronic Arts Inc., Ubisoft Inc., Symantec Corp., Intuit Inc. and Zynga Inc. touching infringing its patents. The others have since exited the case though dismissal chevron settlement, court records show.Herewith Thursday, Digital Reg filed a mobility for thought as a inconvenience regarding disallowance, seeking U.S. Magistracy Judge Claudia Wilken’s besetting that Adobe willfully infringed the '541 and '670 patents and that the patents are valid.The patents-in-suit are U.S. Patent Numbers 6,389,541 and 6,751,670.

Digital Reg is represented by DiNovo Price Ellwanger and Hardy LLP, Bartko Zankel Bunzel & Miller, Ireland Carroll & Kelley PC and Standard Office of T. John Martello tower Jr. PC.Roofage is represented by Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP, Haltom & Doan, and Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati.The case is Digital Reg of Texas LLC v. Adobe Systems Incorporated et al., case number 4:12-cv-01971, in the U.S. Sheriffwick Courtyard since the Boreal District in relation to California.