Re: [ARSCLIST] Do these tapes need to be baked or not?

[James Lindner <jim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

One of the categories for patents are processes and using a process does not
require a specific piece of equipment unless that were to be specified in
the claims of the patent (which no one does for that specific reason) so
using the process without a license is a clear infringement no matter what
equipment is used. Making money from this patent would be VERY easy. I can
see the attorneys rubbing their hands together and getting the calculators
out. In this particular case the claims are very clear - and anyone baking
or dehumidifying tape will use this technique since it is so general. Read
the claims - that is the really important part. There are several companies
(some which are public) that buy patent portfolios and proceed to enforce
them and collect a great deal of money. In this particular case it is
probable that the violations would be considered willful - which mean treble
damages if it were to get to court. As a practical matter it will mean a
nasty letter - something like this perhaps

http://www.chillingeffects.org/patent/notice.cgi?NoticeID=464

and it wont get to court because it is much cheaper to just pay the license
fee - but this is not trivial or cheap.

I am not an attorney - and I don't claim to be - I am just pointing out that
this is something that can be serious.

*
        Jim Lindner
*
        Media Matters, LLC
*
        Email: jim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*
        Address: 500 West 37th Street, 1st FL
        New York, N.Y. 10018
*
        eFax (646) 349-4475
*
        Mobile: (917) 945-2662
*
        www.media-matters.net



-----Original Message-----
From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
[mailto:ARSCLIST@xxxxxxx] On Behalf Of David Seubert
Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2004 2:05 AM
To: ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Do these tapes need to be baked or not?

Jim, Thanks for pointing this out. Pretty interesting. I think Ampex
knew better than to enforce the patent to fix the problem they created
in the first place, but hopefully nobody will license the patent before
it expires and try to enforce it.

Now for the patent attorneys on the list--since they've patented a
process, not a device, I don't see how anybody could ever make money
from it, unless you sell a device expressly for this purpose. Say I buy
a food dehydrator, a lab oven, a convection oven (or even a hair dryer
like some people have used), since these devices are not intended for
or manufactured for heating tapes, the manufacturer doesn't license the
Ampex's technology. So can they sue an end user for using a device for
other than its intended purpose if that purpose infringes a patent?

The patent also answers some of the questions that are often raised
about how long the Ampex engineers thought tapes should be baked for.

David Seubert

On Monday, December 13, 2004, at 10:00 PM, James Lindner wrote:

> It is also interesting that no one ever mentions that tape baking is
> patented. Funny how every one seems to ignore that little tiny issue -
> like
> it never happened. Fortunately for everyone Ampex never decided to do
> anything - but if someone ever either wakes up or buys the patent -
> watch
> out - it could get very ugly.
>
> Don't believe me?
> http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-
> Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=/net
> ahtml/search-
> bool.html&r=2&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=ptxt&s1=ampex.ASNM.&s2=heating
> &OS=AN/ampex+AND+heating&RS=AN/ampex+AND+heating
>
> Patent #5,236,790
>
> jim
>
> *
>         Jim Lindner
> *
>         Media Matters, LLC
> *
>         Email: jim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> *
>         Address: 500 West 37th Street, 1st FL
>         New York, N.Y. 10018
> *
>         eFax (646) 349-4475
> *
>         Mobile: (917) 945-2662
> *
>         www.media-matters.net
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
> [mailto:ARSCLIST@xxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Peter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 5:48 PM
> To: ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Do these tapes need to be baked or not?
>
> I've always found this article rather encouraging concerning people's
> ingenuity.  Here I am with multi-thousand dollar scientific ovens to
> "bake"
> tapes and someone is out there with a food processing unit that costs
> under
> $100.  When reading the article I have, however, always wondered why he
> flips the tapes periodically.  Does this serve some purpose no one
> else has
> discovered or has the author simply gotten carried away with the "food
> processor" theme?
>
> There is one piece of erroneous information in the article but the
> author
> still comes up with the right way of handling the tape, even if for the
> wrong reason: tape does expand when it is heated but, contrary to the
> article, this does not make it loose on the reel.  The primary
> expansion
> vector when you heat tape is thickness, not length.  This is the
> reason you
> need a smooth pack before baking (if possible).  When heated, the tape
> thickens, tightens the pack and can cause wound-in wrinkles and
> deformation
> to get worse.
>
> Peter Brothers
> President
> SPECS BROS., LLC
> (201) 440-6589
> www.specsbros.com
>
> Restoration and Disaster Recovery Service Since 1983
>
>>> On 2004.12.12 16:25 Dick Spottswood wrote:
>>>> If I'd knowed you was comin', I'd have baked a tape, baked a
>> tape, baked
>> a
>>>> tape...
>>>> Dick
>>>
>>> http://www.tangible-technology.com/tape/baking1.html
>>>
>>> Probably the definitive article on the subject.  Plus, it's title
>>> goes well with the previous post.
>>
>> Eddie Ciletti's piece covers all the issues I'm aware of. I only
>> wish he had
>> put the warning
>>
>> DO *NOT* BAKE ACETATE TAPES!
>>
>> at the beginning of his piece.
>>
>> Salutations, David Lewiston
>> The Lewiston Archive, Recordings and Documentation of the World's
>> Traditional Music
>>
>>