The International Journal 
of Newspaper Technology

Home  | Newspapers & Technology | Prepress Technology | Online Technology | IFRA/International News
 | Free Subscription | Contact Us | Newspaper Links | Trade Show Listing |

        

May
 2003



 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 



 











 



 

 

Tangled Web: Lee unit fighting inventor’s claim
Calif. developer says papers violated his patents

By Hays Goodman
Associate Editor



A Lee Enterprises subsidiary is fighting a California inventor who earlier this year filed suits against newspapers he contends are violating his patents governing how Web sites are designed.

Lee unit TownNews.com, a Web hosting and design firm, is defending itself against infringement suits Los Altos inventor Paul C. Heckel filed against two newspapers it hosts: The Davis (Calif.) Enterprise and the Shawano (Wis.) Leader.

Heckel claims newspapers that display abstracts of full stories that comprise multiple print columns violate his patents (see sidebar, page 48). The technique is a popular method to tease Web site visitors to read further.

“The Shawano Leader does not infringe either of the patents asserted by Mr. Heckel, and intends to vigorously defend itself in this case,” said Jonathan Hangartner, an attorney with Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton.

The firm, with extensive patent litigation experience and offices throughout California and Washington, D.C., was retained by Lee Corporate Counsel Greg Schermer to fight Heckel’s claims.

The cases could have broad implications for Web site publishers, according to Hangartner, who said he believes other newspapers should be concerned.

“In my opinion, this plaintiff appears to be taking advantage of the high cost of patent litigation to obtain quick settlements from small newspapers without having his claims tested on the merits,” he said. “Mr. Heckel has obtained several settlements already and is clearly targeting the newspaper industry. These quick settlements provide him with additional resources, and may encourage him to sue more small newspapers across the country.”

Because litigation is pending, Hangartner said he couldn’t comment further.

 

Abstract violation

“It was only recently that I discovered a large number of newspapers appeared to infringe our patent,” Heckel said. “When we developed the invention, we considered it fairly general, and had not particularly seen newspapers as a market.”

One newspaper, The Kentucky New Era in Hopkinsville (Monday - Saturday, 11,925), has already altered how it displays text so it wouldn’t infringe on the patent. Heckel would not disclose what steps the newspaper took.

“As far as telling people how to not infringe our patents, I’m not in the business of telling our competitors how to get products that compete with us,” he said.

According to Heckel’s Web site, www.ipcreators.org, his company has notified more than 60 newspapers that they may have violated his patents.

Newspapers can purchase licenses allowing them to use the technology for a fee of $1 per subscriber, based on 2002 ABC figures, Heckel said. The fee covers both past and future uses of the technique, he said.

 

Setting the fee

“One of the problems (we) have in the licensing is how do you know how many infringers there are?” Heckel said.

“So for us to know how many people are using the infringing newspaper site, it becomes somewhat difficult. The advantage is that there are various publications … which list all of the newspapers, along with their Web sites and circulation. So it might in some sense be arbitrary but it seemed to be a reasonable basis to start charging people. As far as the $1, it was a number that seemed reasonable.”

To date, only one newspaper, the Gettysburg (Pa.) Times (daily, 9,775), has purchased a license.

Heckel has already enjoyed some legal successes concerning some of his other inventions. In 1989, he settled a case with Apple Computer Inc., which Heckel claimed developed its HyperCard application in violation of a Heckel patent. According to Heckel’s Web site, that settlement was “in the middle six figures.”

Patents at a glance

California inventor Paul C. Heckel claims newspapers are violating patents he was awarded that govern how pages are displayed on the Web. The patents:

The abstract from patent no. 4,486,857 states that: “A microprocessor having a limited display capability is programmed to display a series of data fields from a record in which certain characters are selectively suppressed to that the whole or a selected portion of a record is represented. Upon actuation a selected field will be restored to its full data length for temporary display on the display medium.”

The abstract from the other patent, no. 36,653, states that: “A computer program provides for the display of selected portions of two or more records on a display screen where the portions selected are from different records, and may be from different files. Provision is made for scrolling of the full text of the displayed records, which may be grouped by common subject matter. Alternatively one of the two or more records may be displayed on the full screen with the capability for selectively switching between the single record and two or more records or a display showing portions of more than record from more than one file.”

—Hays Goodman