What to use instead of RunwayFinder

Ted DuPuis said:
If RunwayFinder was a brand new site that FlightPrep then found out about and shut down, I think it would be one thing. However the fact that I've been using it for the past 3 years very happily to me is more than enough time to take any sort of legal action.

.
Click to expand...
Just thing to point out. The Flight Prep patent was not issued until Dec 2009.
 
ScottM said:
Just thing to point out. The Flight Prep patent was not issued until Dec 2009.
Click to expand...

And that makes it hard to believe that there's any basis to their claims.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
And that makes it hard to believe that there's any basis to their claims.
Click to expand...
I am not following that. How does a 2009 issue date negate their claims?

I was just pointing out to you that they could not have done anything three years ago about Runway Finder as they did not have the patent then. It was still pending in 2007.

http://www.inventionstatistics.com/Patent_Approval_Time.html states that it can take on average 8 years to get a patent issued. Bigger companies with lots more lawyers and money can get theirs issued faster. It can take the USPTO 3 years just to do their initial review. If they have any questions or want more info that will tag on more time.
 
Last edited:
ScottM said:
I am not following that. How does a 2009 issue date negate their claims?

I was just pointing out to you that they could not have done anything three years ago about Runway Finder as they did not have the patent then. It was still pending in 2007.

http://www.inventionstatistics.com/Patent_Approval_Time.html states that it can take on average 8 years to get a patent issued. Bigger companies with lots more lawyers and money can get theirs issued faster. It can take the USPTO 3 years just to do their initial review. If they have any questions or want more info that will tag on more time.
Click to expand...
Pretty broken system when you can develop software, release it, and do so happily for years. Then suddenly someone can come up to you and demand that you give them money simply because they patented some bogus idea that was in no way unique or innovative and any programmer would have made.
 
jesse said:
Pretty broken system when you can develop software, release it, and do so happily for years. Then suddenly someone can come up to you and demand that you give them money simply because they patented some bogus idea that was in no way unique or innovative and any programmer would have made.
Click to expand...
Are you implying that all patents are bogus or just this one?

As was pointed out in the post you quoted it takes time to get the patent, a lot of time in some cases. As long as you have documented the original invention that is a matter of public record while your invention was being reviewed. There is some suckiness in these matters and I am not going to try and defend FlightPrep, especially since you have already made up your mind as to who is right and wrong in this case, but I will mention that the system is what it is and has been this way since it was created in this country. Something even worse than these computer software patents are the genetic ones. A whole new effort to patent data in that field. Unheard of until about 20 years ago when the genomic patent gold rush began.

Not all software patents are bad. Lots of things these days are software patents. In Europe there has been some attempt to divide software patents into categories that make more sense and eliminate the types that are abused, like this Flight Plan one. But that has yet to catch on here so far. When we have software power houses in this country I doubt their lobbyists would allow that type of change to occur. Which means we are stuck with these types of abuses for the foreseeable future.

Flight Prep has chosen a route that I do no think serves their best interests. But they are within their rights to do so until someone challenges the patent. I see Dave at RF is now going to do that. He states that for now he is not going to use a patent attorney to draw up his arguments and I do not think that is a good idea. I know there are people who have offered to help in this area and many others offering financial aid. I hope he comes to his senses and takes them up on that.
 
> The NACOmatic announcement puzzles me too.

It is a matter of how broadly, or narrowly, that FlightPrep intends to interpret and
litigate their patent. I do not wish to risk my family's financial security on this matter
... unless you're are willing to indemnify me. <g>
 
> I wonder if Google would be interested in providing what Runway Finders et al did

FlightPrep has another patent pending that expands their existing aviation claims to
include both road & marine on-line nav planning. That will get the attention of some very
big players, with very rich patent portfoliios and a veritable army(s) of lawyers.

i.e. Google, Microsoft, NavTeQ, TeleAtlas, MapQuest, ESRI, etc. If anybody has
prior art, it's likely someone in this group.
 
Last edited:
Pa28-140 said:
I use NavMonster (www.navmonster.com). Type in your departure point and destination to get the basic info, then click on the TripKit button. Pretty much everything you need is there, including approach plates. The only thing missing (and what I used Runway Finder for) is the enroute charts. Oh, and to find the closest towns/airports I use AirNav. Usually, I know where I'm going, but when I don't I type the major airport into AirNav and it will also locate the surrounding ones. Let us know if you like it.
Click to expand...

It appears the site is down due to the threat of litigation from another web site :(

*edit* late response
 
Last edited:
ScottM said:
Are you implying that all patents are bogus or just this one?

As was pointed out in the post you quoted it takes time to get the patent, a lot of time in some cases. As long as you have documented the original invention that is a matter of public record while your invention was being reviewed. There is some suckiness in these matters and I am not going to try and defend FlightPrep, especially since you have already made up your mind as to who is right and wrong in this case, but I will mention that the system is what it is and has been this way since it was created in this country. Something even worse than these computer software patents are the genetic ones. A whole new effort to patent data in that field. Unheard of until about 20 years ago when the genomic patent gold rush began.

Not all software patents are bad. Lots of things these days are software patents. In Europe there has been some attempt to divide software patents into categories that make more sense and eliminate the types that are abused, like this Flight Plan one. But that has yet to catch on here so far. When we have software power houses in this country I doubt their lobbyists would allow that type of change to occur. Which means we are stuck with these types of abuses for the foreseeable future.

Flight Prep has chosen a route that I do no think serves their best interests. But they are within their rights to do so until someone challenges the patent. I see Dave at RF is now going to do that. He states that for now he is not going to use a patent attorney to draw up his arguments and I do not think that is a good idea. I know there are people who have offered to help in this area and many others offering financial aid. I hope he comes to his senses and takes them up on that.
Click to expand...
I think all software patents need to be eliminated - copyrighting is plenty enough for software. I'm not the only software developer with that opinion. I have no interest in attempting to patent any software I've developed nor do I want to deal with people coming at me with bogus patents - especially when I've never even seen their technology.

It's pretty damn ridiculous when someone can patent something so generic that damn near anyone would develop whatever they patented without ever seeing their technology.

There are tons and tons of examples of absolutely bogus software patents. Usually they are owned by large companies that have them for the sole purpose of being able to return fire against anyone that tries to use a bogus patent on them. The little guy just can't afford to do that. It doesn't protect the little guy - it kills him.
 
Last edited:
There will be hundreds of guys in Europe who would host RunwayFinder and any other threatened site. If that gets around the FlightCrap patent then that would be an easy solution.
 
Ok, so as I said in the first place:

Ted DuPuis said:
Well, I asked this question in the other thread but it quickly got eaten up by discussions surrounding politics of RF/FlightPrep. So, all of that aside, I have to find a replacement for RunwayFinder.
Click to expand...

Can we get back on-topic? Please? I know I was guilty of helping things go off-topic, but I'd still like to find more solutions.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
Ok, so as I said in the first place:



Can we get back on-topic? Please? I know I was guilty of helping things go off-topic, but I'd still like to find more solutions.
Click to expand...

Well, since NavMonster bit the dust (man, wasn't that weather along the route part awesome!?), I'll try to pretty-up my airport locator. I've got the back-end working, just need to make the front-end more presentable.

Right now it works so that you enter an address or city,state (just like any other Google Maps search), and it returns airports within a selected radius from that point. Click on the airport, and it lists some data from the FAA database about the airport. Not a lot of info, but it's a quick-and-easy way to find airports around a certain point. Any other 'version 1' feature requests? (as long as there isn't any drawing of lines on a map, of course)
 
Can ya draw segments on a map for me? :D
 
CJones said:
(as long as there isn't any drawing of lines on a map, of course)
Click to expand...

Have the server render the line and transmit a map that doesn't have nav waypoints superimposed on it as a single sector rather than tiles and you are clear of the patent.

Or don't draw a line but rather a breadcrumb trail of little circular 'f___ S&E' symbols with clearly discrnible gaps in between.

Their threat letter nonwithstanding, they don't have a patent on all online flight-planning. They have a patent on a particular architecture using frames and a distribution of work between server and client. Stay clear of their (dated) design and you can tell them to go to hell if they ever come knocking.
 
Thank Heavens - I really missed it, see below:

http://beta.navmonster.com/

Good news!

You spoke (in volumes!) and we've listened. We got all the lawyers and programmers together from both sides, and after some good discussions, an agreement has been reached. No more patent infringement worries.
Since the site is already down, we're taking the opportunity to change a few things around. But NavMonster should be back, stronger than ever, on the first of the new year.
Thanks for all the well wishes and words of encouragement. Happy New Year, and safe flying.
Marc Alexander
marc@navmonster.com
Dec 31, 2010
 
Woohoo!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top