I updated the title of this blog post based on a tweet I saw by Todd Cochrane which stated:
Yes, Todd, I guess I’ll have to rewrite my book, Podcasting for Profit, as well due to this news.
So, you may be wondering what’s the big deal? First, let me say that I’m trying to formulate my thoughts as I come to grips with this news that a company that filed a patent back in 2003 for the “method of providing episodic media” has now been approved, according to the company’s website.
I got wind of the patent’s approval through Darla Sycamore on Twitter who said:
Now, I’ve been aware of this patent ever since a podcaster raised the alarm about it in 2005 (I can’t remember who it was Dave Slusher or maybe Rob Walch – my memory escapes me), but I do remember the discussions that many podcasters had about this. Then it was forgotten until news of the patent’s approval was announced this week by the company that filed it, VoloMedia.
According to VoloMedia, they are not laying claim that they invented podcasting. In other words, episodic media distributed via RSS feeds is not the issue. However, they are laying claim to “the method of providing episodic media” as stated in the patent.
According to VoloMedia, the patent “was filed in November 2003, almost a year before the start of podcasting.” On the one hand, they’re correct in that the word “podcasting” wasn’t a word until a journalist created the term in an article published in the Guardian in 2004.
However, most podcasters know that Dave Winer and Adam Curry are credited with formalizing the process of delivering enclosed media files via RSS feeds. They didn’t call it a podcast, however, they did write a paper on it in 2001. Dave has also provided links on his blog to the posts that outline their research that predates the filing of the patent.
My head is spinning and I’m still not sure how to process this, but here’s my early observations:
Renewed Lines Drawn
Lines will be drawn that will separate the podcasting community, yet again. It happened early in the industry when the hobbyists didn’t want to hear from those who made a business out of podcasting. This will be yet another issue that will fracture the podcasting community and sadly, will prevent it from uniting to challenge and/or oppose this patent.
Response from ADM
The Association for Downloadable Media (ADM), which got off to a rocky start because independent podcasters were unsure if ADM would represent their interests, has to be very careful not reignite those old wounds. So far, the person who published the press release on the VoloMedia copied and pasted it to the ADM blog. There has been no commentary from ADM aside from Murgesh Navar who authored both posts on the Volomedia and ADM websites. Based on the tweets I’m seeing on Twitter, this isn’t sitting right with some podcasters. ADM needs to make a statement, but be careful.
Lots of Talk, No Action
There will be alot of talk and no action. When ADM got off the ground, independent podcasters who were making quite a bit of money tried to start a competing association that, in theory, would represent the independent podcasters interests. Sadly, this band of brothers got as far as choosing a name and no one wanted to carry the fight on further. This situation will bring out those old alliances and they will rally podcasters behind them to challenge the patent, but it’ll be just talk.
Creators Need to Be More Business Minded
This is yet another clear example of why those who create need to take their creations much more seriously. Yes, there’s something to be said about “contributing to the community” and I’m all for that. However, while you sing kumbaya and have your tech lovefest, there’s someone with alot of money that will ruthlessly step in, lay claim to your work and have the legal stuff behind them to kill your joy. As 7 of 9 said in an episode of Star Trek Voyager “Not everyone wants to be part of your collective”. The reason? People have different motives.
How do you feel about this patent? Leave your comments below. Again, I’m trying to make my own thoughts about this make sense, so having your feedback will give me a different perspective.
Oh, and if you plan to tweet about this, use the hashtag #volomedia (thanks Todd Cochrane).
Update: ADM clarified that its members can post to the association blog and that it does not endorse what its members post. They have added a disclaimer at the top of the post made by the person from Volomedia. Michael Geoghegan talks about the go old days, focusing on when we (including Volomedia, formerly Podbridges) worked together to advance the field of podcasting. Eric Susch, who produces Let’s Knit 2gether with his wife CAT (whom I had breakfast with last year at the New Media Expo), posted a reaction as well. Adam Ostrow in his blog post says we’ll have to wait and see how this patent can be enforced. There are many tweets, too many to link to.
Peter, wouldn't that be funny. Apple suing Volomedia for using the term pod? What a twist of fate.
Peter, wouldn't that be funny. Apple suing Volomedia for using the term pod? What a twist of fate.
Will VoloMedia have to pay a royalty to Apple – for using the term 'Pod'?
Will VoloMedia have to pay a royalty to Apple – for using the term 'Pod'?
As a podcaster, I have been trying to grasp what all of this means. Thanks for being a voice for us, and for providing the information we need to know. I will stay tuned…
Leesa, what I love about you is your ability to pick up on issues worth discussing, and this new development is no different.
While ADM does not endorse Volomedia’s patent position, we certainly endorse thoughtful, substantive discussion on the matter. Whether it is on our blog or elsewhere, ADM will play a part in facilitating better understanding of the issues surrounding this new development. Have we formulated an association position? Absolutely not at this point in time. Good decisions are always informed by facts, intent of the parties, stakeholder interest, and level heads.
With regards to the Volomedia patent award, ADM has the rare opportunity to have Volomedia as a member, along with many other publishers and companies (including some you quoted here!) with a vested interest in the success of subscribed media. We have operated as a consensus based organization working on projects that create a net benefit for our members. Our engagement on this matter will always be informed by our charter.
Consider this an invite to work together to commune, comment and explore this new landscape.
Warm regards,
Chris MacDonald
Chairman, ADM
I read through Volomedia’s website announcement at http://www.volomedia.com/blog/2009/07/volomedias-podcasting-patent.php. I find it both amusing and despicable, yet so predictable, that they have not opened the post to comment while other posts on the page are open to comment. (Though no one’s commenting — LOL!)
I predict massive amounts of litigation, including more than one Petition to Cancel this patent.
Perhaps one day, Volomedia will consider this patent an enforcement nightmare, and not the lucrative money making venture they anticipated back in 2003 when they filed the application.
Donna, I like that word – bewildering. Yes, that’s how I feel about this matter, especially given Dean’s questions about what’s next. Josh, love what you said. It’s not a fail, it’s an “epic fail”. Hah!
I find this whole thing quite bewildering. Makes me wonder if the patent powers-that-be even understand podcasting.
Not sure what this patent means. Will we need to pay a royalty to VoloMedia for each podcast we create and publish? Will subscribers need to pay VoloMedia for each podcast they download? Will they be the only host for podcasts? Will they add a royalty/levy to all portable media players (MP3 or iPod)sold like the blank media levy that the RIAA had legislated into place years ago and still exists?
If not – then who cares?
Dean
Back in 2003, when this patent was first submitted. I have to say, I was “aware” of something called podcasting emerging on the web, but honestly I really don’t believe many would care who created the podcasting format. These guys have not only contributed little to no input to the discussion of podcasting over the last six years, not even the top technology people spoke of them as being the originators of the podcast.
Epic fail! Shame, but still should have been more “Savvy” about telling people about it.