Music for Cable and Music for IPTV ara part of the sites being relaunched for lead generation for “Cloud to Cable TV” and Music as a Service offerings for operators. Music for MVPD and Operators is available for licensing
Sites Relaunched: cloudtocable.com, cloudforcable.com, musicforcable.com and ubiquicast.com
Cloud to Cable enables a music or video streaming service to be delivered to CABSAT systems. Our platform can cover 10, 50, 100+ music or radio channels that are directly obtained using your HTML5 web interface and sent directly to a Cable TV System and to subscriber’s set top boxes.
A “MediaPlug” server appliance is provisioned with our cloud-based VM with our proprietary software, connecting to a streaming service. As an example we have created “MEVIA & Mediamplify Music” a Cable TV offering also available for Cable/Satellite systems. Read more
Music for Cable TV is then as quickly as signing a partnership agreement with EGLA COMMUNICATIONS and creating a selection of stations for CABSAT. Licensing should be fast an easy to obtain directly from SoundExchange, BMI, ASCAP and other providers.
We will power your music streaming service and protect all your content with appropriate Digital Rights Management (DRM) as suggested by the industry using encrypted and authenticated secured lines to our cloud or yours directly. Read more
[spiderpowa-pdf src=”http://edwinhernandez.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Music-for-Cable.pdf”]Music for Cable
Cloud to Cable
Music for Cable TV, Music for IPTV sites being generated :
Music Choice vs Stingray Digital – Case 2:16-cv-586-JRG-RSP
Music Choice vs Stingray is a case taking place in the E.D. of Texas. We will discuss in the article, the judge’s order (Judge Roy Payne) and memorandum regarding all the claims terms and its construction. As expected, the judge went for:
“[C]laims ‘must be read in view of the specification, of which they are a part.’” Id. (quoting Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc., 52 F.3d 967, 979 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (en banc)). “[T]he specification ‘is always highly relevant to the claim construction analysis.
As in many cases, this was also the case as well, here the order/memorandum available online:
As shown, in all cases where Music Choice made a simple term definition, Judge Payne went for the simplest and more appropriate meaning to the words. Music Choice won pretty much all terms in their favor and in all “indefinite” arguments did not move an inch in favor of Stingray. Hence the judge also sided with Music Choice’s arguments and claim construction. For instance:
What was the goal on trying to interpret a Cable TV system as it if was not a digital system? I don’t really understand why Greenberg did not agree to this simple term? And the judge sided with Music Choice: “Accordingly, the Court rejects Defendants’ proposed “not a digital network” and “signal” limitations and determines the transmission-system terms have their plain and ordinary meaning without the need for further construction.” The claim recites a first transmission and a second transmission system,
The same thing with “multicast,” this is a well-known term in all Cable TV systems, where multicasting is used to transmit all Linear TV signals. “Accordingly, the Court rejects Defendants’ proposed “not a digital network” and “signal” limitations and determines the transmission-system terms have their plain and ordinary meaning without the need for further construction.”
A very similar analysis is found with the term “trigger message” where the judge sided with the same simple meaning as follows:” Accordingly, the Court construes “trigger message” as follows: “trigger message” means “message configured to initiate an action”
And you can find a very similar argument for most of the terms in dispute.
All the evidence is sealed and there is no way to see exactly how these terms match the device in dispute, however, Music Choice’s attorneys should be prepared and if those terms were favorable to them, now one can asume that their evidence to match these terms is solid.
We will keep track on this case and how this develops, on a different note, Music Choice also got hit by Stingray with several IPRs:
Music Choice then has to defend the following IPR cases filed by Stingray Digital regarding this particular case:
Trial Number – IPR2017-01450 Filing Date – 5/18/2017 Patent # – 9,414,121 Title – SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PROVIDING AN ON-DEMAND ENTERTAINMENT SERVICE Patent Owner – MUSIC CHOICE Petitioner – Stingray Digital Group Inc. Tech Center – 2400
Trial Number – IPR2017-01192 Filing Date – 3/31/2017 Patent # – 8,769,602 Title – SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PROVIDING AN INTERACTIVE, VISUAL COMPLEMENT TO AN AUDIO PROGRAM Patent Owner – MUSIC CHOICE Petitioner – Stingray Digital Group Inc. Tech Center – 2400
Trial Number – IPR2017-01191 Filing Date – 3/30/2017 Patent # – 9,351,045 Title – SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PROVIDING A BROADCAST ENTERTAINMENT SERVICE AND AN ON-DEMAND ENTERTAINMENT SERVICE Patent Owner – MUSIC CHOICE Petitioner – Stingray Digital Group Inc. Tech Center – 2400
And maybe others http://www.gbpatent.com/content/uploads/IPR.pdf
Disclosure: EGLA, which I own, provided a platform for DMX for digital music distribution. Stingray acquired DMX Music but not our technology and kept its own music delivery system, the infringing system now. However, EGLA owns a patented technology that is called “CLOUD to CABLE TV“ that enables delivery of linear music channels to Cable TV subscribers in a more clever, fault-tolerant, and efficient way than these patents disputed here. Source: http://edwinhernandez.com/2016/08/01/platform-nternet-tv-music/
EGLA CORP has a patented technology, superior to all the patented technologies out there, that brings the Cloud -based systems and generated images for music and TV channels that can be overlapped. The Cloud to Cable TV system provides:
A system to convert HTML5 to Video, MPEG-4 or MPEG2Video, or H.265
A fault-tolerant system for MVPD and MSO’s – Cable TV Systems
Streaming for M3U8, HTTP Streaming, and compatible with other technologies
Virtualized TV in a box system with Cloud
The device is called MediaPlug and also contains other Management APIs, as well as a good implementation tested with:
and Many other multi-plexers
Advantages over all other systems
There is no dependency into any Set Top Box or DOCSIS 2.0, DOCSIS 3.0, or other MPEG frames or dependencies in changes to STB.
All the systems, are fault-tolerant and enable great reliability and remote management system for all distribution devices
Uses standard DSL/Cable Modem technologies with the system to deliver 50, 100, 200 music channels, and 10-20 HD/SD/4K TV Channels.
Many more advantages that are benefit DRM security, provisioning, and tracking for media playback.
[spiderpowa-pdf src=”http://edwinhernandez.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/WO2016106360.pdf”]WO2016106360, however the right set of sighted is attached and is corrected in the US/Europe and other applications.
Cloud to Cable TV White paper [spiderpowa-pdf src=”http://edwinhernandez.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/cloudtocable_whitepaperl.pdf”]cloudtocable_whitepaperl