Lodsys Responds to Apple, Files Lawsuits Against App Developers

benthewraith said:

Lodsys is forming a triumvirate by bringing Microsoft, Apple and Google against it. My guess is they're hoping to be paid off. I don't think Apple, Microsoft and Google should settle. I say Apple/MSFT/GOOGLE should drain them dry until Lodsys can no longer pay their lawyers.

Click to expand...

yep. MS Apple, and Google should go threw that huge block of patents that license from the company that Lodsys bought up and go after every patent they believe is unenforable or not really a patent and then say NOPE do not need to pay it and reduce the fee by X amount per patent and keep doing that.

Cut of Lodsys from the fees it already is collecting and remove lodsys from pointing back at MS Apple and Google saying LOOK LOOK they licensed them.

I encourage all developers to find the most pain in the ass way to pay Lodsys if they eventually win this BS case (let’s face it these ridiculous patents seem to win more often than they lose).

1) Write one check in the amount of .517¢ for each app you sell
2) Send them a penny for each app you sell, claim you’re doing them a favor by rounding up
3) Send them the money in Congolese Francs, or some equally volatile currency
4) Gift them your app and create a infinite loop that may or may not end the universe

It is in Apple's best interest to fight this all the way, with every resource they can bring to bear. If they don't pay now and crush Lodsys decisively -- hopefully with a very clear legal precedent set to dissuade future patent trolls -- they'll be paying a lot more to a lot more patent holders in the future.

WiiDSmoker said:

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)

Apple (Lodsys) are suing Samsung (developers) over patent infringement.

You cheer for Apple yet want Lodsys dead.

Fanboy much?

Click to expand...

Or, maybe he's just capable of evaluating the merits of the individual actions based on the available information, rather than just having a knee-jerk response.

The Lodsys patent (having read it) appears to cover things that were both obvious and common (non-novel) at the time of original filing. The Apple vs. Samsung action is based on design patents, which (despite the name) have more in common with trademark and copyright than 'normal' patents.

Way to ensure no one ever wants to license any of your ip ever.
Oh well, that's what you're stuck doing when your whole business is based on buying bad patents.

I wish patent law worked like this in my industry. In our case, we can spend tens of thousands patenting a mechanism we're developing, but if we don't actually build it and bring it to market within about two years, anyone & their brother can look at our patent, build it, sell it, and get away with it.

1000$ - What, do they think lawyers drive Yugo's ?


This is a fraction of the amount it would take to mount a defense. To suggest such a small amount would be beneficial is insulting. I hope Apple engages them in long, expensive and protracted legal battles...and wears them down finically.

WiiDSmoker said:

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)

Apple (Lodsys) are suing Samsung (developers) over patent infringement.

You cheer for Apple yet want Lodsys dead.

Fanboy much?

Click to expand...

There is a massive difference between a company that actively engages in R&D that results in patents and eventually products to the consumer market and a a lawyer with some cash to buy up some patents whose sole intent is to wait for a mark to get big enough and sue them.

If you cannot see the difference between these two scenarios then you’re a bigger fanboy than those you cast aspersions on.

Smart of them to sue before WWDC so all those developers can talk to Apple off the record.

WiiDSmoker said:

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)

Apple (Lodsys) are suing Samsung (developers) over patent infringement.

You cheer for Apple yet want Lodsys dead.

Fanboy much?

Click to expand...

Those two are not even comparable.

Lodsys -> Suing small, independent development shops who would be put into the ground by legal fees to guard patents from 20 years ago that it doesn't use and never intends on using other than for trolling.

Apple -> Suing a large corporation (Samsung) to defend its intellectual property. And samsung has a countersuit anyways because it can afford one.

It is like saying that a heavyweight boxer fighting another heavyweight is the same as a schoolyard bully beating up a random kid for his lunch money.

jayducharme said:

Why bother? It'd be cheaper for Apple to just buy Lodsys outright.

Click to expand...

Is Lodsys for sale?

I figured it wasn't the last we heard of these guys. They went through the trouble to claim they weren't patent trolls after the initial outrage, they won't be stopped by an initial Apple statement (they had to have predicted Apple would respond). Hopefully Apple can protect the developers without giving in to this hostage taking.

ThunderSkunk said:

I wish patent law worked like this in my industry. In our case, we can spend tens of thousands patenting a mechanism we're developing, but if we don't actually build it and bring it to market within about two years, anyone & their brother can look at our patent, build it, sell it, and get away with it.

Click to expand...

I'm glad it isn't like you hope in certain industries! That would just slow down innovation. If you can't build it, then you failed. If someone else sees your patent, and manages to build it, they succeeded.

In the end, the consumer wins, because they get a product or service that was actually able to be built in the first place.

let the fighting begin ....


I hope the $1000 are in addition to taking care of the cost of the lawyers ....

A troll like Lodsys is certain to have a certain bankroll available for pursuing legal action; that, after all, is a (the?) fundamental aspect of their business. So I wouldn't them to go quietly for fear of legal action by Apple. However, whatever resources Lodsys may have, Apple certainly has a lot more.

The big question is how (if?) Apple will protect its developers. A legal conflict between Apple and Lodsys doesn't protect the developer. I imagine this will be a lively topic of conversation at WWDC.

gcoghill said:

This seems like something so basic that Apple's lawyers should have asked when they were negotiating the deal: "This covers usage by our 3rd party developers, right?".

If Apple screwed up, they they did so big time. However Lodsys waiting until that service was used thousands of times by thousands of developers is total BS — they knew the first week that version of iOS was released whether or not they felt they had a claim to make.

Instead they wait for it to get fully adopted and entrenched and then go after everyone? There should be some sort of statute of limitations on that kind of sleazy activity. Again, assuming Lodsys is in the right.

Click to expand...

Apple never licensed this patent specifically. It was part of a whole pool of patents they licensed, there was no negotiation for this individual patent. In fact, if challenged in court, the patent would likely be invalidated. Apple saying their license covers third parties is just the easiest approach to dealing with this troll (easier than saying the patent is invalid). I hope Apple goes to bat for these developers and puts the patent troll in its place.

jayducharme said:

Why bother? It'd be cheaper for Apple to just buy Lodsys outright.

Click to expand...

This sends the wrong message. The right message should be - if you harass our developers we will DESTROY you.

Apple has so much cash that I think they would rather send a forceful message at the risk of spending a few million.

Kilamite said:

I'm glad it isn't like you hope in certain industries! That would just slow down innovation. If you can't build it, then you failed. If someone else sees your patent, and manages to build it, they succeeded. In the end, the consumer wins.

Click to expand...

Yep, that's one way it can go. I can think of dozens of great systems that died on the vine because they were big enough they could afford to knob-twiddle forever.

But the other way it can go is that cheap bastards and imitators rush your product to market while you're refining & doing it right. They do it poorly, ruin the perception of the product, and by the time yours is ready, the market for it is non-existent, and investment capital for a proper launch & production is gone. The end result to the "consumer" is, new systems are seen as unreliable fads, and you're stuck with the same old tech, your innovators are driven out of the biz for greener pastures, and your industry stagnates for years on end.

Both seem to happen in our industry with appalling regularity. The patent system sucks.

Full of Win said:

This sends the wrong message. The right message should be - if you harass our developers we will DESTROY you.

Apple has so much cash that I think they would rather send a forceful message at the risk of spending a few million.

Click to expand...

Agreed, Lodsys is approaching this in an extremely scummy way that Apple cannot afford to let pass because it would encourage copy cats (i.e. want a pay out, sue iOS developers and Apple will buy you).

jayducharme said:

Why bother? It'd be cheaper for Apple to just buy Lodsys outright.

Click to expand...

Which gives a fantastic message to everyone else with the same idea.

Thanks for posting this arn. Engadget and thisismynext, are both lagging behind you on this story.

NAG said:

Agreed, Lodsys is approaching this in an extremely scummy way that Apple cannot afford to let pass because it would encourage copy cats (i.e. want a pay out, sue iOS developers and Apple will buy you).

Click to expand...

Apple needs to do something more than a stern letter or else the progress made on the platform is dead.

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)

WiiDSmoker said:

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)

Apple (Lodsys) are suing Samsung (developers) over patent infringement.

You cheer for Apple yet want Lodsys dead.

Fanboy much?

Click to expand...

Outside of the fact that Lodsys and Apple are each plaintiffs in patent infringement suits, I fail to see how the two cases are even remotely similar.

Lodsys must not be too confident it has an airtight case since $1000 will get you very little in terms of legal representation. Especially if you hire an attorney well-versed in patent law. It's fairly obvious Lodsys is gambling on renegotiating the terms of licensing agreement. It's very likely they underestimated either popularity of the App Store as a whole or that customers would actually upgrade from free apps to paid ones.

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

I hope these arrogant ****s get beat down.

neilw said:

The big question is how (if?) Apple will protect its developers. A legal conflict between Apple and Lodsys doesn't protect the developer. I imagine this will be a lively topic of conversation at WWDC.

Click to expand...

I guess the most straight forward thing would be that they give the developers full access to the lawyers of Apple. I don't know if that is possible, but can Apple lawyers file some sort of motion to put the cases filed by Lodsys on hold until a (court) decision is made what the license agreement between Apple and Lodsys covers?

MacRumors said:

Finally, Lodsys has announced that will reimburse any developer improperly targeted by an infringement notice $1,000 for their troubles, suggesting that firm is confident in its standing and convinced that it will prevail.

Click to expand...

Some confidence. $1,000 would cover, what, an hour or two of attorney's fees? Give me a frickin' break. This is pure PR and doesn't merit serious consideration.