Jury Rules Apple's iPhone Infringes Three Patents in MobileMedia Trial

[SPUY767]

Originally Posted by Renzatic

That's a good idea in theory, a bad one in practice. While it'd curtail just about all patent trolling in one fell swoop, it'd also mean all the practicing companies would end up being about 10 times as rabid with the lawsuits than they are now.

How so? What would cause companies to be any more protective of their intellectual property than they are now? Companies who use things in practice now already dice it up legally, so nothing would change on that front, and FRAND would still be FRAND, so I don't think we'd see any change at all save the elimination of patent trolling.

----------

Originally Posted by MacinDoc

If all patents on electronics and software had a limit of three years, we would have a lot less trouble with patent trolling, while still giving inventors a bit of a leg up and some incentive to continue inventing.

After three years, most tech is outdated anyway.

You don't need to invalidate all patents after two years. Companies who invent something should be able to license it, if it's being used, for more than just two years. Putting a hard limit on things like that disincentivizes innovation.

[bearcatrp]

Apple gets popped again for stealing someone's patent. But yet cry when someone does it to them. And to read how the fanboys state this is unfair is just laughable. Take to blinders off. Apple is no different than the rest trying to sneak by without paying royalties.

[kdarling]

Originally Posted by BaldiMac

Which patent is Apple claiming that Samsung devices with S-pens violate? I can't find anything from your link.

It's an Apple patent about helping the user out filling onscreen forms, by presenting a list of previous data that they've entered into similar fields.

No one has paid attention to it for a while, because the patent specifically says it's for pen based operating systems.

Looking at the optional S-Pen support, Apple's lawyers suddenly decided that Samsung's phones belong in the category of "pen based systems", even if they don't require or even ship with one.

[MacinDoc]

Originally Posted by SPUY767

You don't need to invalidate all patents after two years. Companies who invent something should be able to license it, if it's being used, for more than just two years. Putting a hard limit on things like that disincentivizes innovation.

The current system disincentivizes innovation, because anyone inventing a device using a large number of electronic components and complex software is likely to be sued because it infringes on patents covering such basic functions as "Buy" buttons in apps or wireless transmission (not necessarily limited to a particular communications protocol or method) of digital camera images.

In terms of incentive, what does it matter if another company is now offering what someone else was previously offering three years ago? If you're still offering essentially the same software or hardware you were three years ago, then you've fallen well off the curve, and you are risking irrelevance. (Are you listening, Apple? Let's see some more creativity in your next OS iterations!).

Just to be clear, I don't necessarily think that all patents should be limited to three years. In some fields, necessary development and testing can take decades, and patents in those fields are important. But in electronics and software, rapid progress and relatively inexpensive development and short testing phases make long patent windows less necessary. As an example, why should an idea that took 10 seconds to draw on a napkin have the same patent rights as a medication that took 10 years to develop, another 10 to test, and another 2-3 years to get approved?

[Sue De Nimes]

I have said it before - the US patent system is just comical.

The amount of patents granted that wouldn't be granted anywhere else is just staggering.

This is equally valid in terms of Apple patents and in terms of patents issued to other firms.

[bwillwall]

So basically "MobileMediaIdeas" is a company that patents things as basic as camera phones and declining calls from a lock screen so they can sue companies like Apple and get money out of them 6 years after they actually used their patented "ideas"?

[Rocketman]

Originally Posted by shulerg

Nonsense garbage. Patent trolls are the new hedge funds: make nothing, do nothing leeches.

They make something. Money. They start with their own money, buy patents whether or not they are revenue producing, then maximize revenue from the few that do. It's like a lottery ticket, but it isn't nothing. Imagine you are one of the thousands of patent owners who get paid in advance for a patent right you invented and which NEVER produces money, now or ever. YOU are much better off. So a patent troll becomes a godsend. That what happens 98% of the time!

Rocketman

[Renzatic]

Originally Posted by kdarling

Sometimes I wonder if Jobs sold his soul to the devil and the deal went like this: "Satan, if you let me come back to Apple and get famous, I'll trade you my soul". "Steve, I don't want your soul. I just want lawyers to run Apple. Mwuuuahahaha!"

Everyone believes the first sign of the apocalypse will be fire, brimstone, locusts, and hellfire raining down upon us. I know differently, for I have dealt with lawyers.

The one I hired...wait. Excuse me. I mean the one I paid a crap ton of money for so I could apparently have someone snark off at me while I did all the work building my case, he once ate an orphan right in front of me. It wasn't a slow thing, either. His jaw actually unhinged, there was this wooshing, sucking sound, and the orphan was just...

...gone.

Plus I had to sign all my agreements with blood. It wasn't pretty.

[Tech198]

Originally Posted by camnchar

So one of mobilemediaidea's "ideas" was a "camera phone"? Good lord.

lol..

Its about time Apple got infringed by someone else than just Samsung for a change.

So, what else did Apple take ? is the iPhone as a whole completely copied by someone else, including all technologies ? Did they come up with anything original ?

[kdarling]

Originally Posted by bwillwall

So basically "MobileMediaIdeas" is a company that patents things as basic as camera phones and declining calls from a lock screen so they can sue companies like Apple and get money out of them 6 years after they actually used their patented "ideas"?

MobileMediaIdeas is a patent holding and licensing company set up by some of the major companies behind the cell phone.

For example, one of the infringed patents belongs to Sony, and the other two belonged to Nokia.

[kaielement]

A camera phone really that's funny.

[Eriden]

Originally Posted by Lark.Landon

Wow. And racist posts like yours belong nowhere on these forums. He made a single statement and you go popping off at the mouth calling people redneck hillbillies. You are trash.

The first defense of a weak mind is to accuse the opposing side of bigotry or racism while failing to address anything substantive. Congrats on succeeding at both fronts.

Truly, you have a dizzying intellect.

[kdarling]

Originally Posted by kaielement

A camera phone really that's funny.

The patent's not for a camera phone.

It's for a camera phone that sends the picture somewhere else by radio.

*Wow, what an amazing idea!*

Seriously, one day I'd like to cross reference such patents with the patent examiner names, and see if there's a pattern.

[faroZ06]

Originally Posted by bbeagle

It's clear that the only thing you enjoy is taking sides, not fairness.

This is simply a patent troll company. They don't make ANYTHING. Their entire website is about their so-called 'patents', and how to license them from them.

http://www.mobilemediaideas.com/patents.html

Look at all those laughable patents.

If Apple had those, you'd laugh at Apple, talking about how evil they are. But when another company uses these patents, it's ok? If 'Mobile Media Idea' made phones with these patents, okay, but they don't. They're just a patent troll.

Either say all the patents suck, or patents are good - but don't take sides just against Apple. It proves your signature is a joke. Your 'blind worship' is anti-Apple.

Yeah I know, this Wikius guy sits here all day and just hates Apple constantly. Honestly, a patent on camera phones? That's every phone out there I think.

----------

Originally Posted by Lark.Landon

Wow. And racist posts like yours belong nowhere on these forums. He made a single statement and you go popping off at the mouth calling people redneck hillbillies. You are trash.

"Redneck" is not a race, sorry.

[Rocketman]

Originally Posted by DJsteveSD

there should be a tab just for lawsuits!

I agree. Not just to allow you to parse them out, but to allow me to parse them in.

Apple's cash hoard is a honeypot to attract all comers with claims to resolve them. Even if that were the only reason to have cash it would be worth it, but to also use it to maximize the supply chain is inspired and genius.

For those who falsely clam the parties are abusing the patent or legal system, you are wrong. The systems are designed to maximize lawyer labor and fees. Change the legal system to be more socialist and the rest of the world to be more capitalist and the whole world improves instantly. Why does it cost me any money at all to persue a legal claim? Rule of law, or not?

[kdarling]

Originally Posted by bbeagle

This is simply a patent troll company. They don't make ANYTHING. Their entire website is about their so-called 'patents', and how to license them from them.

While I don't agree with some of the patents they have, that doesn't make them a "patent troll", as the inventors do still make phones and other devices.

MobileMediaIdeas' purpose is to provide a single place for companies to come to and license some basic patents.

Their patent portfolio comes from the inventors: Nokia, Sony, LA MPEG are patent contributors and part owners. The CEO is also LA MPEG's CEO.

People way overuse the word "troll". Holding companies like this serve a need.

If you invented something generally usable and wanted to make the most money, you'd very likely want to make use of the services of a patent license firm like this one... so you could sit back and collect royalties without worrying about drumming up business yourself.

Likewise, if you were a manufacturer and wanted to build a recording device, you'd appreciate having a single place to go to, for a license for all or most of the patents you needed to use... at a price that's likely much better than licensing from multiple individual companies.

[jmpnop]

Originally Posted by slffl

So according to the right wing trolls and Google, Apple is bad for suing to protect its patents, but when other companies sue Apple, it's ok. What a bunch of hypocrites.

Did Apple invent rectangle with rounded corners?



Apple started all this nonsense, they're the biggest patent troll in the industry.

[Rocketman]

Originally Posted by kdarling

While I don't agree with some of the patents they have, that doesn't make them a "patent troll", as the inventors do still make phones and other devices.

Once you declare "patent troll" to be a "term of art" and not necessarily "derogatory", the whole problem goes away.

Rocketman

[MacinDoc]

Originally Posted by jmpnop

Did Apple invent rectangle with rounded corners?



Apple started all this nonsense, they're the biggest patent troll in the industry.

If you think Apple started all this nonsense, then you haven't been following it very long. Over the last several decades, Apple has been on the receiving end of infringement cases more often than it has been on the serving end, and it has been more legally aggressive in the last few years than it had been in the past. Jobs sort of signaled that Apple was about to become more legally aggressive when he stated that Apple had "patented the heck" out of the original iPhone in his keynote speech introducing the phone. I think he was growing tired of being primarily on the receiving side of infringement suits prior to that.

[nia820]

Originally Posted by slffl

So according to the right wing trolls and Google, Apple is bad for suing to protect its patents, but when other companies sue Apple, it's ok. What a bunch of hypocrites.

You know I think some of apples claims are legit. But their patent on round edges is ridiculous. And there are a list of other ridiculous claims. And apple only sues the companies that are a threat ( like samsung). If samsung and htc phones werent selling well they wouldnt give a rats behind.

[Bantz]

Good stuff

[DrStern]

Originally Posted by Jeaz

I wish I could get a patent trial free version of MacRumors, because they couldn't interest me less. So bored of all this suing back and forth that's only really a profit the law firms.

I actually wouldn't mind it if they maintained some coverage, but just didn't allow commentary under their patent trial stories. Weeding through the rantings of regulars on both sides of the issue just to find a few nuggets of actual information is a nauseating exercise in futility.

[adamtore]

Originally Posted by bwillwall

So basically "MobileMediaIdeas" is a company that patents things as basic as camera phones and declining calls from a lock screen so they can sue companies like Apple and get money out of them 6 years after they actually used their patented "ideas"?

Yeah uhm no.

First the companies try to agree on royalties, guess what? Apple didnt pay.
Then they sued 2010, my guess is since Apple stalled on agreement for royalties. So now the court found them infringe.

Also, MMI is a collaboration between Sony and Nokia. Heard of Nokia?
www.nokia.com - one of worlds first makers of cellphones.

I am pretty sure their "idea" is legit.

[Ciclismo]

Originally Posted by Doc750

Time to pony up consumers.

There, fixed that for you, because in the end the cost of all the legal battles is added to the cost of the products. And before someone comes with the "in-house legal counsel" counter, even that has to be paid for by the end customer.

[KnightWRX]

I think Obama's patent reform will do a lot of good. Patents were found valid ? A camera enabled device that can transmit images over radio to a different location is not a classic case of waaaaaaaaay too obvious once Wifi/3G technology becomes massively available ?

Juries just aren't trained well enough in the art to actually judge whether a patent is valid or not, based on prior art/obviousness rules of the USPTO. It was plain as day in the Apple v. Samsung trial when Hogan made up his own rules for patent validity, only for the USPTO to claim otherwise 2 months later, and it's clear as day here too.

With the new patent reform, at least the players have the option of asking a panel of actual knowledgeable folks to review patents during patent litigations rather than leave this up to Joe six-pack who knows next to nothing about the art in question (a patent litigation over mobile software ? Let's grab a guy who think the cellphone appeared out of nowhere in the last 12 months to be on the Jury!).

Too bad it only came into effect on the 15th or so of September of this year.

All this patent non-sense is making it harder and harder for people to actually "build on the shoulders of giants" and is really hampering the growth and innovation of our technological industries.