Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Feb 5, 2014, 10:46 AM   #1
MacRumors
macrumors bot
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Apple Asks Supreme Court to Curb Patent Abuse Amid New $2 Billion Patent Lawsuit




Apple is joining Google and 13 other companies in a combined effort to curb frivolous lawsuits from patent holding companies, reports Bloomberg. Speaking to the Supreme Court justices, Apple said it has been sued 92 times by patent companies in the last two years. It currently has 228 unresolved patent claims and employs two lawyers who are dedicated to responding to royalty demands.
Quote:
Google, joined by 13 other companies, told the justices that patent-assertion entities have an unfair advantage because they don't make products of their own, leaving them effectively immune from countersuits.
Apple and the other technology companies are asking the Supreme Court to make it easier for companies to collect attorney's fees when patent holding companies lose infringement lawsuits. This allocation of fees, they argue, would cut down on the number of frivolous suits.

Just as Apple moves to seek judicial assistance in addressing patent abuse in the U.S., German patent holding firm IPCom has filed two patent infringement lawsuits in the German court system that accuse Apple of infringing on cellular technology it owns (via FOSS Patents). Both the European and German patents describe methods of managing priority emergency access when wireless networks are overloaded. Apple could pay more than $2 billion in damages if it loses these legal battles.

Quote:
The patent asserted in case no. 2 O 53/12, in which, inter alia, a partial claim of damages amounting to 1.57 billion euros ($2.12 billion), plus prejudgment interest, has been brought, is EP1841268. This patent has recently (on January 22, 2014) been the subject of a validity decision by the European Patent Office, in the first instance.

In case no. 2 O 95/13, in which no quantified damages claims but requests for an accounting and for declaratory judgment of liability for damages have been brought so far, the patent-in-suit is DE19910239, a German patent.
IPCom obtained both patents from German automotive parts company Robert Bosch GmbH. Apple, Nokia, HTC and others asked the European Patent Office to invalidate the European patent, but the EPO denied this request.

Article Link: Apple Asks Supreme Court to Curb Patent Abuse Amid New $2 Billion Patent Lawsuit
MacRumors is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2014, 10:48 AM   #2
musika
macrumors 65816
 
musika's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: New York
That's a nuts amount of money. Patent trolls are getting worse and worse.
__________________
I write about lots of things at turtlepie.net.
musika is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2014, 10:51 AM   #3
AngerDanger
macrumors 65816
 
AngerDanger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: doing the Dada Polka
In related news: Apple patents mitosis. All organisms to pay licensing fees.


Last edited by AngerDanger; Feb 5, 2014 at 12:31 PM. Reason: the miracle of life
AngerDanger is offline   31 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2014, 10:52 AM   #4
Tankmaze
macrumors 65816
 
Tankmaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Quote:
Google, joined by 13 other companies, told the justices that patent-assertion entities have an unfair advantage because they don't make products of their own, leaving them effectively immune from countersuits.
Finally all these companies suing each other has a common enemy : patent trolls.
They are the worse.
__________________
Check out our game Tank Maze
Tankmaze is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2014, 10:52 AM   #5
H2SO4
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Live by the sword...........
__________________
MP1,1 - 11GB - 5770.
30ĒACD.
OSX 10.10.1
H2SO4 is offline   15 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2014, 10:53 AM   #6
The Economist
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Mexico
Patents should be non-transferable.
The Economist is offline   6 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2014, 10:55 AM   #7
Parasprite
macrumors 68000
 
Parasprite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Okay, Apple and Google.

I wonder if I've ever heard of the other 11.
__________________
Has anyone, anywhere, ever actually used ~/Pictures/iPod Photo Cache/ for anything besides deleting or hiding it?
Parasprite is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2014, 11:01 AM   #8
Jsameds
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
They should make a wish. Double-yolkers bring you good luck!
Jsameds is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2014, 11:02 AM   #9
BootsWalking
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Any company that sues over a 'rounded corner' patent doesn't deserve the right to call any other company a patent troll.
BootsWalking is offline   15 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2014, 11:07 AM   #10
bedifferent
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: NY
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fresh Pie View Post
In related news: Apple patents mitosis. All organisms to pay licensing fees.

Image
LOL awesome

Seriously though, Myriad Genetics, a company that had been awarded patents on the so-called BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes in the 1990s, tried to go further. Surprisingly the [rather conservative leaning] Supreme Court struck it down last year:

Quote:
But the court said DNA molecules engineered by man -- including so-called "cDNAs" -- are eligible for patents.

"Myriad did not create anything," Justice Clarence Thomas wrote for a unanimous court.

"To be sure, it found an important and useful gene, but separating that gene from its surrounding genetic material is not an act of invention."

Synthetic "cDNA" does not present the same obstacles to patentability as naturally occurring isolated DNA segments, Thomas wrote.
However, this blew my mind:

Quote:
But Myriad "has more than 500 valid and enforceable claims in 24 different patents conferring strong patent protection for its BRACAnalysis test," the Salt Lake City, Utah-based company said in a statement today.
So let's recap:

- A company can have whole or partial claim to DNA and cDNA

- Monsanto, a company that has GMO patented corn and other products, can sue farmlands in which the "patented" product may grow due to pollination. Many farms are folding due to barren crops and climate change, allowing Monsanto to sue, buy and move into the land. As corn is used in a lot of goods, soon Monsanto (and Dow) may be controlling much of the worlds necessary commodities.

Yup, no problems there.
bedifferent is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2014, 11:10 AM   #11
IJ Reilly
macrumors P6
 
IJ Reilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Palookaville
As used here, the term "frivolous lawsuits" means lawsuits that the defendants find annoying or irksome. The real meaning of the term is without value or merit. If a patent infringement suit is successful (and many are), this means (by definition) that it wasn't frivolous at all. These companies aren't worried about truly frivolous lawsuits. They are concerned about the ones that have merit under the laws.

Words matter.
__________________
*The season starts too early and finishes too late and there are too many games in between.
Bill Veeck
IJ Reilly is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2014, 11:20 AM   #12
akm3
macrumors 68020
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by IJ Reilly View Post
As used here, the term "frivolous lawsuits" means lawsuits that the defendants find annoying or irksome. The real meaning of the term is without value or merit. If a patent infringement suit is successful (and many are), this means (by definition) that it wasn't frivolous at all. These companies aren't worried about truly frivolous lawsuits. They are concerned about the ones that have merit under the laws.

Words matter.
This is the danger. If you are a little guy that legitimately invents and patents something, and big bad Apple or whoever comes in and steals it because they figure you are too small to fight, you are now a frivolous lawsuit. That is wrong. This is strengthening the bad patent system instead of fixing it.
__________________
akm3 is offline   9 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2014, 11:21 AM   #13
zorinlynx
macrumors 68030
 
zorinlynx's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Florida, USA
I think patents should be use 'em or lose 'em.

If you have a patent and don't want to manufacture the product, sell it to someone who will. If you hold onto patents and don't make anything using those patents, after some time you lose your ability to defend it.

That would solve 99% of the patent troll problem.
__________________
Old-school Apple ][ expert! Ask me if you have a ][ question!
Apple user 1983-1992, 2003-Present -- Linux user 1995-Present
Windows-free since 2003! Though I still have to deal with it at work.
zorinlynx is offline   10 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2014, 11:26 AM   #14
phillipduran
macrumors 6502a
 
phillipduran's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Iowa
Quote:
Google, joined by 13 other companies, told the justices that patent-assertion entities have an unfair advantage because they donít make products of their own, leaving them effectively immune from countersuits.
I dunno, if you're violating a patent that's that. What argument do you have that it's not fair that you don't have the opportunity to dig up some wrong doing on the other guys side to lessen the blow against you? Kinda silly argument if I understand this whole process correctly.
__________________
That's "Geniuses," not Genii, genius.
To err, is PC.
phillipduran is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2014, 11:28 AM   #15
starbird
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by BootsWalking View Post
Any company that sues over a 'rounded corner' patent doesn't deserve the right to call any other company a patent troll.
Great second post. Welcome. Look forward to more of your insight, nailing something on the head. That is EXACTLY what Apple did. I was riveted by their lawsuit against Dove Chocolate, for their use of rounded corners on those Promises chocolates, and then was so happy when they went after Sunbeam Bread for the rounded corners on their King White Sandwich bread. Next up, is the maker of DVD and Blu-ray cases, and I am really hoping they go after Microsoft for the rounded corners used on active apps in the Window 7 task bar...

Quote:
Originally Posted by IJ Reilly View Post
As used here, the term "frivolous lawsuits" means lawsuits that the defendants find annoying or irksome. The real meaning of the term is without value or merit. If a patent infringement suit is successful (and many are), this means (by definition) that it wasn't frivolous at all. These companies aren't worried about truly frivolous lawsuits. They are concerned about the ones that have merit under the laws.

Words matter.
Very good point. "Frivolous lawsuits" is lazy. More accurately, it is annoying lawsuits by Non Practicing Entities, who often don't even come up with the idea they buy. This should be better regulated. Here is a suggestion.

I develop a new way of doing something. I patent it, and am awarded such patent. I then have x number of years (2 to start, can be flexible depending on the complexity) to develop into a product. If I succeed? My patent is extended to 5-10 years. Then it is over. If, however, at some point in time I sell my patent to a NPE? That NPE gets exactly 2 years, then they are done unless they, in turn develop it into a product (not wait for someone else to do it, then buy/sue).

Also, all trials should be filed and forced to be tried where the offender is, not in a court that is preferential to NPEs. When I had to take a landlord to small claims court, I was told I should file in the county the landlord lived, not mine. So the case should be tried where the accused is, not some random spot.
__________________
 13" MacBook Pro with Retina display 
 Verizon iPhone 6 Space Grey (64GB)  iPad (32GB Black WiFi 3rd gen)  3rd gen TV 
starbird is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2014, 11:33 AM   #16
johnmacward
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
A small case of the "Pot calling the kettle black".
johnmacward is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2014, 11:34 AM   #17
kdarling
macrumors Demi-God
 
kdarling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Device engineer 30+ yrs, touchscreens 23+.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRumors View Post
Apple is joining Google and 13 other companies in a combined effort to curb frivolous lawsuits from patent holding companies, ...
Talk about hypocrites!

Apple and its pals just took the $4.5B of patents they bought from Nortel, and gave them to a patent holding company that they created explicitly to troll other companies.

That company does not use the patents themselves, and consists only of a small group of engineers who do nothing but comb through other companies' tech to see if they can sue them with some of the transferred patents.
kdarling is offline   12 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2014, 11:37 AM   #18
IJ Reilly
macrumors P6
 
IJ Reilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Palookaville
Quote:
Originally Posted by akm3 View Post
This is the danger. If you are a little guy that legitimately invents and patents something, and big bad Apple or whoever comes in and steals it because they figure you are too small to fight, you are now a frivolous lawsuit. That is wrong. This is strengthening the bad patent system instead of fixing it.
You got it. The courts can already award costs to a defendant if they find that a suit was without merit. The issue before the Supreme Court is whether the standard for awarding costs should be lower than it is today. My problem with this story is that it repeated the industry's spin language without reading the proper meaning into it.
__________________
*The season starts too early and finishes too late and there are too many games in between.
Bill Veeck
IJ Reilly is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2014, 11:39 AM   #19
Brian Y
macrumors 68020
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
The problem is easily solved: you can only claim patent infringement if you a) own the patent and b) actively use it yourself (not licensing).

If you own a patent which you just use, and just license it (i.e. are a holding company) - you should have no right to sue. You thought of the idea, but are not actively using it.
Brian Y is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2014, 11:44 AM   #20
IJ Reilly
macrumors P6
 
IJ Reilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Palookaville
Quote:
Originally Posted by starbird View Post
Very good point. "Frivolous lawsuits" is lazy. More accurately, it is annoying lawsuits by Non Practicing Entities, who often don't even come up with the idea they buy. This should be better regulated. Here is a suggestion.
As it happens, the unsuccessful plaintiff in one of the suits before the Court couldn't be called a "non-practicing entity" by any definition. They make actual products; they just happened to lose their suit.
__________________
*The season starts too early and finishes too late and there are too many games in between.
Bill Veeck
IJ Reilly is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2014, 11:45 AM   #21
scoobydoo99
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: so cal
Quote:
Originally Posted by H2SO4 View Post
Live by the sword...........
Exactly! This is a case of the big corporations (Apple, Google, etc) being indignant and outraged that someone else can use their tactics against them. TOO BAD! If the courts allow curbs to patent suits, it will only empower the big guys to operate with impunity in the marketplace without having to pay for their own transgressions.

Their assertion that the patent holding companies are immune to countersuits (since they don't produce products) is very telling. In other words, Apple/Google/et al would use a frivilous patent suit as a weapon if they could, so it's "not fair" that they can't!
__________________
scoob
scoobydoo99 is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2014, 11:48 AM   #22
dustinsc
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Congress needs to make patent rights usufructuary (big word, but it happens to be the most accurate). That is, if you don't use it within some period of time, you lose it.
dustinsc is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2014, 11:49 AM   #23
Nunyabinez
macrumors 6502a
 
Nunyabinez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Provo, UT
Quote:
Originally Posted by IJ Reilly View Post
As used here, the term "frivolous lawsuits" means lawsuits that the defendants find annoying or irksome. The real meaning of the term is without value or merit. If a patent infringement suit is successful (and many are), this means (by definition) that it wasn't frivolous at all. These companies aren't worried about truly frivolous lawsuits. They are concerned about the ones that have merit under the laws.

Words matter.
Actually, the determination of a lawsuit being frivolous has nothing to do with the outcome. The determination of a frivolous lawsuit has to be made before it proceeds to trial, or at least when initial evidence is presented.

Of course a lawsuit that wins couldn't be frivolous, but just because you lose doesn't mean it was frivolous.

A judge determines if a lawsuit is frivolous. What these companies are asking for, is that once a judge makes that ruling they should be able to collect more from the plaintiff. This is to discourage people from filing lawsuits that have no chance of succeeding in hopes of extorting money from deep pockets.

I don't believe this has anything to do at all with legitimate claims with the possibility of merit.
__________________
iMac w/Retina 4GHz; 27" iMac, 3.4 GHz i7; 15" MBP, 2.53 GHz Core 2 Duo; 13" MBA 1.7 GHz i5; iPad (3rd Gen); iPad Mini; iPhone 6+;
Nunyabinez is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2014, 11:49 AM   #24
ChrisCW11
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
LOL that is rich

Apple: "Supreme Court please curb patent abuse"
Supreme Court: "Sure, you first Apple."

Apple can't seriously think they are in the right here when they went after another company for billions in damages because the company used rounded rectangle icons. Also a vast majority of Apple's patents are never turned into products because they are trying to cripple their competition from being able to deliver disruptive products.

How about Apple set an example that the industry can follow.

For now, Apple clearly weaponized the patent to use against the competition and they are getting a little taste of that bitter, bitter medicine and obviously don't like what they started, tough.
ChrisCW11 is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2014, 11:52 AM   #25
jamezr
macrumors 68040
 
jamezr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: US
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdarling View Post
Talk about hypocrites!

Apple and its pals just took the $4.5B of patents they bought from Nortel, and gave them to a patent holding company that they created explicitly to troll other companies.

That company does not use the patents themselves, and consists only of a small group of engineers who do nothing but comb through other companies' tech to see if they can sue them with some of the transferred patents.
Yep! I remember that....they are playing both sides of the fence.....depending on who they are in court and suing at the moment.....
__________________
2013 MBP| iPad Air|iMac 21|Note 4| iPhone 6+
jamezr is offline   4 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
IPCom's $2 Billion Patent Lawsuit Against Apple Dismissed by German Court MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 16 Feb 28, 2014 08:43 PM
Apple and Samsung File List of Patent Claims and Accused Products Ahead of Second U.S. Patent Lawsuit MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 41 Feb 6, 2014 05:58 AM
Judge Invalidates Two Samsung Patent Claims Ahead of Second Patent Lawsuit with Apple MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 60 Jan 23, 2014 02:31 PM
South Korean Court Dismisses Samsung's Patent Lawsuit Against Apple MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 57 Dec 20, 2013 11:32 PM
Apple Wins Patent Dispute Against Mirror Worlds After U.S. Supreme Court Refuses to Hear Case MacRumors Mac Blog Discussion 30 Jul 1, 2013 06:21 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:24 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC