waves maxxbass patent

DSP, Plug-in and Host development discussion.
evosilica
KVRer
20 posts since 5 Feb, 2013

Post Mon Oct 06, 2014 3:44 am

Hi,

since there are a lot of devs here, i thought that maybe you could give me an answer to this stupid question:

waves holds a patent for its maxxbass and rbass processors. The patent is about a "Harmonics generator coupled to the frequency generator and being capable of generating, for each fundamental frequency within the low frequency range of interest"

I mean that's pretty comprehensive.
Does that mean you can't commercially sell any kind of processor that creates harmonics in the bass region, directly or indirectly making use of the old missing fundamental principle (1954) ?

Or does it only count for their specific implementation?

The patent in question:
http://www.google.com/patents/US5930373

User avatar
Richard_Synapse
KVRian
856 posts since 20 Dec, 2010

Re: waves maxxbass patent

Post Mon Oct 06, 2014 4:42 am

A new patent doesn't lock old, expired patents to my knowledge (that wouldn't make sense). Someone more familiar with US law can probably shed more light on the details though, as I'm not a lawyer.

Note that since this patent is old, you could just wait for expiry.

Richard
Synapse Audio Software - www.synapse-audio.com

logicalhippo
KVRer
25 posts since 12 Jan, 2008

Re: waves maxxbass patent

Post Mon Oct 06, 2014 2:06 pm

I'm not a lawyer, so please talk with one before doing anything that might violate the patent.

However, the title and abstract of a patent really has nothing to do with exactly what is claimed in the patent. In fact, if you read the whole patent, there's an entire section describing exactly what is claimed and what isn't (called the "claims" section). This is a common mistake a lot of people make when understanding patents. Please read the claims section to see what is covered.

highkoo
KVRAF
3764 posts since 26 Jun, 2004

Re: waves maxxbass patent

Post Mon Oct 06, 2014 2:09 pm

I think there was already a plugin that got canned because of polite enforcement of this patent...
ImageImage Image

evosilica
KVRer
20 posts since 5 Feb, 2013

Re: waves maxxbass patent

Post Tue Oct 07, 2014 2:49 am

Thank you all.
Yes, I should probably ask a lawyer. The algorithm I have here works and sounds very different than maxxbass, but of course it involves filtering and harmonic generation and it is based on the old missing fundamental principle, which has not been discovered by waves, afaik.
logicalhippo wrote:Please read the claims section to see what is covered.
Thanks. Of course I've read the claims section.
My understanding is that they have basically patented the process of splitting a signal into 2 bands and generating harmonics in the low band.
That is so broad, technically even a tube multiband compressor would voilate that patent.

I still can't believe you can patent something trivial like that.

kind regards

User avatar
antto
KVRAF
2499 posts since 4 Sep, 2006 from 127.0.0.1

Re: waves maxxbass patent

Post Tue Oct 07, 2014 3:24 am

O_O
that's so.. i have no words to describe..

okay, how about... split the signal into 3 bands, do whatever you want with the lowest band, avoid the patent? ;P~
It doesn't matter how it sounds..
..as long as it has BASS and it's LOUD!

irc.freenode.net >>> #kvr

JonHodgson
KVRian
770 posts since 2 Apr, 2003

Re: waves maxxbass patent

Post Tue Oct 07, 2014 9:51 am

evosilica wrote:My understanding is that they have basically patented the process of splitting a signal into 2 bands and generating harmonics in the low band.
That is so broad, technically even a tube multiband compressor would voilate that patent.

I still can't believe you can patent something trivial like that.

kind regards
You'd be amazed at what can be patented, Sensaura (3d sound guys I worked for years back) actually had a patent on sensing when headphones were plugged into the soundcard and switch HRTFs from speakers to headphones accordingly.

Whether it would have been enforcable is another question, but often the idea is just to patent everything possible and then use that as ammunition, companies will tend to settle out of court anyway.

But in this case, I don't think they've patented something as trivial as you believe, there's prior art mentioned which probably does that, and I know other companies have similar systems (Philips for example). Look at where it mentions prior art, and see how they differentiate themselves from it. Also look directly at the prior art that's mentioned, if your techniques are covered by a previous patent, and it has expired, you should be fine.

JCJR
KVRAF
2352 posts since 17 Apr, 2005 from S.E. TN

Re: waves maxxbass patent

Post Tue Oct 07, 2014 1:46 pm

Sometimes patents are taken in self defense, so that if you use a rather ovious wheel in your own product, some ignoramus can't patent the obvious technique and cost you lawyer fees in defending something you have already been using for years.

User avatar
avasopht
KVRist
159 posts since 19 Apr, 2014 from London

Re: waves maxxbass patent

Post Wed Oct 08, 2014 7:56 am

JCJR wrote:Sometimes patents are taken in self defense, so that if you use a rather ovious wheel in your own product, some ignoramus can't patent the obvious technique and cost you lawyer fees in defending something you have already been using for years.
But that can be done with a simple upload to github ;)

AnalogGuy1
KVRian
547 posts since 6 Mar, 2005 from USA

Re: waves maxxbass patent

Post Wed Oct 08, 2014 7:15 pm

In the U.S. if a patent is issued by the USPTO that reads on any publicly-available knowledge at the date of the patent filing, whether the knowledge was commercialized or not, then the patent is invalid and cannot be enforced. It happens all the time that an art department of the USPTO makes a mistake. To prove the patent is invalid however, takes a patent litigation team of lawyers, and they don't come cheap; in biomedical patent enforcement, for instance, they burn through several tens of thousands of dollars per court day, and a substantial amount of money in the weeks leading up to the trial date.

So the way it works is: the questionable patent holder issues a cease and desist order to the developer they feel is infringing. If the alleged infringer has no money, he complies. If he has deep pockets, he contests. The patent holder either gives up, or files suit. Then the alleged infringer either gives up, or issues a counter-suit to invalidate the patent holder's patent, and requests summary judgement. This goes back and forth for either several months (in many European courts) to several years (US courts) until finally the case is heard by arbitration or by jury, or until one of the sides decides to stop hemorrhaging money or becomes bankrupt. At the end, regardless of the outcome, each legal team celebrates (separately!) in two of the most expensive restaurants in the city of the deciding court/arbitration panel.

JonHodgson
KVRian
770 posts since 2 Apr, 2003

Re: waves maxxbass patent

Post Thu Oct 09, 2014 4:18 am

I remember Creative Labs sued Aureal (one of the other 3d sound innovators) for patent infringement. Aureal won, but the process of winning cost them so much cash that they were weakened enough for Creative to buy them out, so in effect Creative came out on top, with a major competitor removed from the field and a chunk more IP.

User avatar
avasopht
KVRist
159 posts since 19 Apr, 2014 from London

Re: waves maxxbass patent

Post Thu Oct 09, 2014 4:36 am

JonHodgson wrote:I remember Creative Labs sued Aureal (one of the other 3d sound innovators) for patent infringement. Aureal won, but the process of winning cost them so much cash that they were weakened enough for Creative to buy them out, so in effect Creative came out on top, with a major competitor removed from the field and a chunk more IP.
Assholes. I abhor this extortion game that the legal profession plays.

Ross21
KVRist
54 posts since 25 Jun, 2011

Re: waves maxxbass patent

Post Sun Jun 25, 2017 6:20 am

Hi,

Reading about saturation, harmonics and exciters and came across this post.

Seems to me that the discussed patent is over (a few months ago).

Is this a good time for a KVR challenge ??

Ross

Winstontaneous
KVRian
1408 posts since 15 Feb, 2006 from Berkeley, CA

Re: waves maxxbass patent

Post Sun Jun 25, 2017 11:33 am

On the subject of expired bass-processing patents, I'm surprised that no one has taken Bag End's ELF/INFRA concept (for running subwoofers below a driver/sealed cab's resonant frequency) further. A brilliant idea with the tightest, deepest bass I've ever experienced.
OLOKUN - Survival Kit - now on iTunes, CDBaby, and Spotify

Videos: The Beat | Crossing to Safety

User avatar
Music Engineer
KVRAF
3768 posts since 8 Mar, 2004 from Berlin, Germany

Re: waves maxxbass patent

Post Sun Jun 25, 2017 11:50 am

AnalogGuy1 wrote:So the way it works is: the questionable patent holder issues a cease and desist order to the developer they feel is infringing. If the alleged infringer has no money, he complies.
what, if he simply doesn't comply? how can the questionable patent holder force the alleged infringer to even show up in court at all (especially if that court is supposed to be in an entirely different country - which it presumably often is)? will i have to expect a raid from the local police, if i simply ignore an obvious patent troll who is harassing me?
Image

Return to “DSP and Plug-in Development”