Creative Technology is "evaluating all alternatives" now it has won its patent for digital-music user interfaces.
The patent, issued by the US Patent & Trademark Office, covers the hierarchical display of music information on digital-music players that Creative claims can be found not only on its devices but also on Apple's iPod and iPod mini.
The hierarchical menu system employed by the Creative players is immediately familiar to anyone who has handled an iPod or an iPod mini. What's more, said Creative, the interface was first used in a shipping product more than a year before Apple's iPod hit the shelves, and the patent was filed long before Apple filed its own patent for the iPod.
Craig McHugh, president of Creative Technology, claimed his company to be in second place to Apple in the global market.
Creative took the patent in early August, but McHugh said that the recent press coverage regarding Apple and Microsoft's patent dispute spurred Creative to take action.
Last month, the US Patent and Trademark Office rejected a patent application filed by Apple for some elements of the iPod interface, citing a patent submission made by a Microsoft developer five months before.
McHugh explained that Microsoft developer John Platt's patent covered a different aspect of the interface than the hierarchical display of music. Creative's patent application, filed in January of 2001, predates both Apple and Platt's filings, he added.
Why wasn't Creative mentioned in the US Patent & Trademark Office's rejection? As Creative understands it, "the patent office only has to cite one piece of prior art for rejection," McHugh said. "Not all of them."
Like Apple, Creative had products out in the marketplace that used the interface before it filed for the patent. This isn't unusual, said McHugh, as US patent law doesn't require that a patent be filed prior to a product's release. Creative followed the appropriate regulations, he said.
Will they or won't they?
McHugh reiterated several times throughout the call that Creative's announcement today is "a celebration" of its accomplishment and recognition of its innovation, but he was repeatedly pressed by analysts and reporters after his opening statements on Creative's plans: Will the company sue Apple or demand a licensing fee?
"We continue to explore all the alternatives available to us," said McHugh. Later he added that Creative isn't focusing on those alternatives, however. "Our primary focus is on new products and continuing innovation."
Apple's dominant position in the MP3 player market made it a focus of Creative's press release and of the conference call, but it isn't the only company that makes a player that uses a hierarchical interface to organize its music. McHugh said that his company is "very diligent" about protecting its intellectual property rights, but hasn't yet done a comprehensive market survey to determine which companies may be infringing on its patent.
When he was pressed to disclose whether Creative and Apple were engaged in any private talks to discuss the issue, McHugh refused comment.
Representatives for Apple have not responded to requests for comment.