YOO PATENT STATUS

Press Release: Yangaroo's CEO Sets the Record Straight

October 6, 2008

Please read the full text of this release.

Investor Alert

September 19, 2008

It has come to our attention that a competitor of YANGAROO, Destiny Media Technologies Inc. (OTCBB:DSNY) "Destiny", has posted a document titled "Questions and Answers Regarding the Patent Dispute with Yangaroo" dated September 5, 2008 on their website at www.dsny.com/news/.

YANGAROO does not intend to argue the merits of the dispute publicly. However, Yangaroo disagrees with several representations made by Destiny in this document. By way of example:

Question and Answer #8 of Destiny's document contains the following statement:

"Yangaroo has never filed a statement of claim for infringement against Destiny and there is no outstanding $15 million damage claim out against Destiny, although they have the right to determine damages in a separate determination if Destiny were to lose."

YANGAROO did not file "a statement of claim for infringement against Destiny". However, YANGAROO did file a Statement of Counterclaim against Destiny for infringement of YANGAROO's patent which claims $15 million in damages.

Whether a claim for damages is made by way of Statement of Claim or Counterclaim makes no difference to the merits of the action.

This damage claim was not disclosed in the contingent liability note to Destiny's financial statements from 2006 on.

The key facts to remember regarding the patent action when reading Destiny's document are:

YANGAROO has an issued patent in Canada (#2,407,774 "Content Distribution System and Method") which, as with all patents, is presumed valid unless and until the Federal Court of Canada determines otherwise. The court has not yet considered, let alone made any decisions, regarding the merits of the action and/or counterclaim;
YANGAROO would not be continuing with expensive patent litigation if it did not strongly believe in the merits of its claim of infringement against Destiny;
Destiny has no patents.

YANGAROO disagrees with several statements in Destiny's "Questions and Answers Regarding the Patent Dispute with Yangaroo" document, some of which we have addressed below:

Q & A 1: YANGAROO has not received any funding from any radio broadcast chain.

Q & A 2 & 4: Destiny has no issued patents, after operating for 17 years as a technology" company, and has only patent applications.

Q & A 3: YANGAROO disagrees with Destiny's statement regarding the lack of need for patent protection in other jurisdictions to protect inventions. Patents are used throughout the world for protecting inventions.

Q & A 5/10/14: Patent examiners review prior art. Canadian and U.S. patent examiners that examined YANGAROO's patent applications have reviewed Destiny's previous patent application, and did not regard Destiny's application or MPE system as relevant prior art.

Q & A 6: YANGAROO filed a $25 million counterclaim against Destiny and its management claiming that Destiny has made misleading and inaccurate statements regarding YANGAROO's patent rights and Destiny's Play MPE system. The court has not considered or made any decisions regarding the merits of the action and/or counterclaim.

Q & A 7: There is a counterclaim by YANGAROO against Destiny for infringement of YANGAROO's patent (see item 1 above) as well as the one in the preceding paragraph. Whether a claim is made by way of Statement of Claim or Counterclaim makes no difference to the merits of the action.

Q & A 8: The bifurcation order separating the issue of damages was obtained on consent of both parties which is common in patent actions. This separates the court's consideration of validity and infringement issues from the consideration of damages. YANGAROO'S $15 million damage claim still exists and is pending consideration by the court.

Q & A 9: All patent infringement claims against the label remain. The claims that were struck by mutual consent were not patent infringement claims. This action was stayed by mutual consent pending the outcome of the action against Destiny because many of the issues to be considered are the same.

Q & A 11: YANGAROO wants this matter resolved as soon as possible and expects to be successful.

This document has been reviewed by our patent counsel. Please contact me if you have any questions on this matter.

USPTO Posts Interview Summary; Agreement Reached on Claims

July 30, 2008

I am pleased to report that the Interview Summary (referred to in our previous updates), showing that agreement with the Examiner was reached with respect to the patent claims in our pending U.S. patent application #10/431,854, has now been posted on the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office website. The Interview Summary is listed on the Public PAIR section of the USPTO website in date order by the May 28, 2008 date (05-28-2008). I have attached a copy of the Interview Summary for ease of reference.

In further progress towards the grant of the patent, the Examiner stated yesterday that our patent application is proceeding as expected toward a likely allowance.

This update has been reviewed and verified by our U.S. patent counsel. Your questions on this are welcome.

YANGAROO U.S. Patent Update

June 16, 2008

I am pleased to update you on recent developments in regard to our pending U.S. patent application #10/431,854.

Patent counsel for YANGAROO has filed a complaint with the Director of Enrolment and Discipline at the United States Patent and Trademark Office requesting an investigation into the conduct of Destiny Media Technologies' patent counsel Eugene Derenyi of Stikeman Elliot LLP. The complaint details Mr. Derenyi's pattern of unauthorized and inappropriate written and oral communications with the Examiner of YANGAROO's patent application serial no. 10/431, 854. The inappropriate communications appear to violate US patent law and policy as reflected in 35 U.S.C. 122(c) and in Third Party Attempts to Protest or Otherwise Oppose the Grant of a Published Application, 1269 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 179 (April 22, 2003).

It is important to note that despite this conduct, the U.S. Examiner has agreed that none of the inappropriately submitted prior art will prevent YANGAROO's patent from proceeding to allowance.

Also attached for your reference is a copy of the Interview Summary of May 28, 2008 referred to in my previous update, indicating that agreement with the Examiner was reached with respect to the patent claims.

Press Release: Yangaroo's Pending U.S. Patent To Proceed To Allowance

May 29, 2008

Please read the full text of this release.

YANGAROO US Patent Status - Update

May 15, 2008

I am pleased to report that we continue to make progress with our US Patent Application #10/431,854 titled "Content Distribution System and Method". The Examiner has replied promptly to our April filing and issued a non-final office action, which our patent counsel will review and respond to in due course, as they successfully have with all such previous office actions. This is another normal step in the application review process towards allowance of a patent application. Of note is that the Examiner again did not cite any of the alleged prior art references submitted by our competitor as being relevant.

We remain optimistic that a patent will be granted from our application.

YANGAROO US Patent Status - The Facts

January 16, 2008

Following our update on January 11, 2008 that the Examiner of our US Patent Application #10/431,854 titled "Content Distribution System and Method" has agreed to submit the application for allowance, Destiny Media Technologies Inc. (OTCBB:DSNY) apparently issued a letter implying that they have a US patent application (#09/980,582) that is a material prior art precedent to our granted Canadian patent and our pending US patent application.

Both the US and Canadian patent offices disagree with Destiny.

We disclosed Destiny's US and Canadian applications and all other art they cited in the Canadian litigation to the US patent office, as we are under a duty to do.� Reference can be made to page 2 of our Third Supplementary Information Disclosure Statement, which was filed August 17, 2006 (shown on the USPTO website under PAIR as of August 22, 2006).

If you look at the first pag e of the "List of References cited by applicant and considered by examiner" from January 5, 2007, you will see the Examiner has initialed the two "Vestergaard" references listed.� Indeed, the Examiner has initialed every reference we have submitted in all the disclosure statements we have filed.� The Examiner has before her every piece of prior art raised by Destiny in the Canadian litigation and our comments on the relevancy of each piece of prior art.� It appears the Examiner does not consider the Destiny applications to be material to the patentability of our claims.

Further, Destiny abandoned its corresponding Canadian application, likely due to the strong prior art references cited by the Examiner. The US application has been outstanding since 2000, nearly eight years, and has a 24 page Non-final rejection awaiting a response since July 2007. In summary, the application Destiny refers to describes a digital music play er and a method of packaging a player together with a song, a concept that appears to have been previously patented by others.� It does not describe a process or system for distributing music on behalf of content providers to a set of designated recipients, as our Canadian patent and pending US patent application does.

We will continue to work diligently expand and enforce our intellectual property rights. It is important to note that YANGAROO has been granted patents for its technology and Destiny has not.

US Patent Office Recommends Allowance of YANGAROO Patent Application

January 11, 2008

I am pleased to report that the Examiner of our US Patent Application #10/431,854 titled "Content Distribution System and Method" has agreed to submit the application for allowance. �We expect that a Notice of Allowance will be issued soon, after which the official patent grant is made. �Both the office action previously issued by the Examiner and our subsequent reply as an Interview Summary (labeled as ��Applicant Arguments/Remarks Made in an Amendmentt) are now publicly available on the USPTO (US Patent and Trademark Office) website.

The "Content Distribution System and Method" patent has been previously granted in Canada and is the basis for our $15 million infringement claim against our competitor Destiny Media Technologies Inc. (OTCBB:DSNY) that is presently before the Federal Court of Canada.

SITE MAP | CONTACT US