Glen would have made a lot more money selling than suing.
I think he’s going to lose because the information he presented is NOT proprietary. Nor is the presentation format. The tracks I run at Homosassa weren’t on the first FMT chips I bought. They were added later by a local. I gave Glen Bazo Rock, and another he named Mike’s Rock for safety purposes.
He’s also going to lose because his format only worked on limited Navico units. NOT Garmin. NOT Hummingbird. NOT Raymarine until recently, And NOT even the new Simrad NSS4. So there’s nothing unfair abut Hummingbird making their own version of the info because the processors and software is different. Think Word vs Pages. Excel vs Numbers. PowerPole vs Raptor. Ford vs Chevy.
As much as I like to support sole proprietors, and non-franchise businesses, there is an economy of scale required for going BIG!
Good points @MariettaMike If some of the map detail they sell is crowd-sourced, it would seem hard to patent that data. Additionally, the satellite imagery used by FMT is likely from public data sources, further weakening the claim. I want to see the little guy win, but they will have to do intensive discovery to prove Hummingbird didn’t run those tracks themselves. And if they do, Hummingbird still has the defense that their MT product is only offered on their platforms, and not competitive with FMT. In tech, the tide has turned against patent claims where the patent scope is a small part of the overall software product. Maybe that applies here too.
As much as I would love for the little guy to stick it to a big $$ corp, I don’t see it happening. I’m sure 'Bird (Johnson Outdoors) lawyers looked into this beforehand and saw a potential for profit even if it means paying off FMT.
Most terms of use specifically prohibit the use of data, including mapping, for commercial use. For example, Google Maps is free for consumer use, but not for commercial use.
This means that FMT is paying for the satellite imagery since they are making a profit from using it.
Now for the user data, crowd sourcing has its own terms of use that states how the data is used. It could be an agreement that is “work for hire” which makes FMT the owner of the data. FMT could compensate these captains buy providing them with charting software as their payment.
Then there is the license of the mapping software itself which states unauthorized use and copying is prohibited. If the data that Hummingbird used is in fact straight from FMT, this means they purchased an FMT card and cracked the data files, which against the terms of use. They are in violation.
I’d be very surprised if the owner of FMT spent time and money without vetting the possibility of this risk to their business.
No, I am not a lawyer, and I am sure Hummingbird thought this through themselves in taking the risk. But I have worked in technology and product my entire career, including intellectual property protection of products. The legal aspect is the least enjoyable part of creating a product.
Also, if FMT added proprietary code to the files, it is very difficult to remove, however not hard to verify, all they need is a chip from Hummingbird unit, and compare. This is tedious but AI can find it. When and if they do it is irrefutable evidence. So if Hummingbird is/was guilty, they will settle before that happens.
I am not a lawyer, but I do think hummingbird did a cost benefit analysis before they copies fmt. I think they decided it made sense for them. I don’t understand why when they don’t really have a device that can compare to the leading salt water companies. I do wish fmt was compatible with the sinrad evo4
