Again, FlightPrep Tactics Are Called Into Question
RunwayFinder's Dave Parsons has
popped up again, though the site is still shut down, to address a
few issues that seem to have gotten lost in the backscatter of an
increasingly convoluted story. We were particularly intrigued at
Parson's recall of the initial contact from FlightPrep... which
corroborates other reports of similar contacts... whereby
FlightPrep attempted to cloak their dealings with a confidentiality
clause and keep the proceedings from seeing the light of day. If
the patent is as clear as they claim and the matter a simple one of
a protected Patent/Intellectual Property requiring licensing, one
wonders why FlightPrep was so intent in keeping the matter out of
the public view (and will be among the questions we direct at their
reps shortly) and acting in what appears to be an overtly
predatory manner. Yes, the story continues to be somewhat bizarre
and FlightPrep seems to be waging a poorly conceived and directed
battle to cover their buns...
Herewith, the latest statement from RunwayFinder (in
exile)...
It was not my intention to have a blog war over this issue.
However, I am only one person who has a more than full-time job
outside of RunwayFinder. I can’t keep up with 3 different
press organizations, the hundreds of messages, and the FlightPrep
spin machine of at least 7 people including a marketing person and
3 attorneys. Responding here is my best way to reach everybody.
First off, thanks again for all of the messages of support. I
will try to respond to specific requests, but it will take me a
while. Also unexpected was the generous offers of help with legal
expenses and patent research from individuals and even some
companies. I’be not yet decided how to handle that. My first
priority is to get the lawsuit resolved, whereas I think most
people would like to see a full-fledged fight against the
FlightPrep patent. The patent fight would be very expensive and
could take years, probably well beyond what donations would cover.
I will leave that for one of the big guys that FlightPrep has
already contacted, AOPA, Jeppesen, etc.
To respond to some of the stories in the press, my stance is and
has always been that the lawsuit needs to be dropped and not
return. I had a verbal agreement from FlightPrep that would have
accomplished that, but FlightPrep has not dropped the lawsuit and
their follow-up email added additional conditions to the license. I
have worked on license agreements in the past between two parties
that want to work together, and they can still end up taking months
and thousands of dollars in legal fees. The license does not need
to be complicated. I have already invited FlightPrep to drop the
lawsuit and send me a proposed license.
There is also some mis-information
about how FlightPrep initially contacted me. In August, I received
a letter from FlightPrep. I can post the letter online when I get
my scanner unpacked, but it in no way indicated that RunwayFinder
was infringing on their patent. It also made no mention of any
lawsuit. The only thing the letter asked for was to enter into a
confidentiality agreement. I was advised that this was a tactic
used by unfriendly companies to conduct a fishing expedition under
a cloak of confidentiality and that I should not respond. Despite
that, I wrote an email to Roger Stenbock, one of the owners of
FlightPrep and a named plaintiff in the lawsuit. I responded to an
email he wrote earlier in the summer fishing for information about
RunwayFinder’s revenues. I received no response. I received
another letter a few weeks later in September that was almost
exactly the same, no mention of infringement or lawsuit and
inviting me to enter into a confidentiality agreement. Between
September 2010 and the time the lawsuit was filed, I heard nothing.
No phone calls. No emails. No letters. My email address is right on
the RunwayFinder website. My phone number is listed. I’m not
hard to find.
There have also been some comments about the non-profit status
of RunwayFinder. I have never claimed that RF is registered as a
non-profit. At one point, I had intended to make RunwayFinder my
full-time profession, so I registered it as a for-profit company.
That does not mean it makes a profit. As anybody knows that owns an
ad-supported website, there is very little money in advertising. I
was at one time working on adding a premium subscription to
RunwayFinder, but abandoned those plans to work on a different,
non-aviation start-up instead.
Legal disclaimer: This post does not admit any infringement by
RunwayFinder on FlightPrep’s patent.
ANN's Daily Aero-Linx (04.17.24)
See All