ART+COM should look at the comparison photos in this article. Google Earth blows ART+COM out of the water. And that's besides the fact that they're both trying to represent real things, so of course they'll look similar if both do a relatively good job of representing real things.
I think the issue here isn't the content of the images, but the fact that the positions align, zooming in on the sphere.
FTA: " Instead, the patent covers the basic technology that, for example, allows Google Earth users to fly over the earth to a particular destination"
So if Google's system uses the same techniques/algorithms to move around the sphere (and these images are pretty convincing) it would indicate some copying of IP. Where to position a view of the Earth in 3D is pretty open ended, that's why the similarities may be less than coincidental.
Exactly what I was thinking! Neither the methods nor the devices are being duplicated for displaying the data. It is also very different satellite imagery than what was available in 1994. Users submit a lot of Google models. The number of things that are frivolous about this lawsuit make my head spin!
