BurstingSquidoo, thanks very much for your posting efforts. I've just been extremely busy, and haven't had the time to even begin to read these docs, so your comments are extremely helpful!

But from reading the '995 and '705 patents, it's not THAT hard to understand what they say. It isn't rocket science. The technology is straight forward, and can be understood by the average juror taken off the streets, as TeresaDactyl has pointed out. They will not be fooled by the word games Apple would be attempting.

Clearly, Burst is describing "data compression" of the signal, not a manipulating of the signal frequency to accomplish "temporal reduction" by means of increasing the frequency. Where is Apple coming from? What gives here? Burst's data compression is done to DIGITAL data, after it has been converted from analog to digital. Apple is talking about a definition of "temporal reduction" that is accomplished by increasing the signal frequency, which is an ANALOG representation of the audio-video data. I've searched, and there is no such description of "temporal reduction" in the Burst patents '995 and '705. Rather, both patents specify the signal compression to be accomplished by DIGITAL DATA compression:

<<Compression of the digital data defining a video frame and the reverse process (decompression) are accomplished by compressor/decompressor 26. Various algorithms may be employed in the compression process which enable the representation of a series of numbers by a reduced number of digits. As an example, compression algorithms like CCITT Group IV may be used.>>

So why these two completely different definitions? Burst patents clearly do not talk about signal frequency. So why is Apple attempting to make this point? Do you have any idea? Are they totally nuts, or is there a "reason to their madness?" Are we not trying to understand the words, the meaning of the words, in these patents? Isn't that what we are about to embark on in the Claims Construction Hearing?

If you or anyone else has an idea what Apple may be up to, I'd love to hear your thoughts. As it stands, I can
only surmise that this will go over with Judge Patel like a lead balloon!