ITC Agrees to Investigate Apple's Patent Claims Against Motorola

[elppa]

But you can't have someone (say Apple) go, I propose the idea of a 3D hologram floating above the screens surface, and will patent that.

And then get the lawyers out when in 2 years time Blackberry launch a similar thing.

While your point is sound, as Blackberry barely been able to replicate 2008's iPhone 3G I think the examples are a little off.

 

[Piggie]

While your point is sound, as Blackberry barely been able to replicate 2008's iPhone 3G I think the examples are a little off.

Ok, then...

HTC, Microsoft, Samsung etc.

Any electronics company.

Otherwise Apple may as well patent the matter transporter and warp drive now.

 

[kdarling]

Highly unlike though, given that Apple is alleging that Nokia was not abiding by the RAND licensing terms it is required to apply for their patented tech being included in the GSM standard.

Other companies contributed IP as part of their payment, something Apple doesn't want to do. So of course their payments would be higher.

In any case, Apple's idea of fair doesn't matter. The jury's idea does.

Nokia asked for an American jury to figure out what's a fair royalty, and to add a fair penalty if they wished.

Apple, in their countersuit, asked for patent payments, lawyer fees, and triple damages. I think their comparative greed will work against them with a jury. Americans like fairness, and that's all Nokia asked for.

 

[JAT]

1: You should not be able to patent fundamental things, or thing that become the norm.

Eg. The Wheel, a Touch Screen, a Keyboard, pressing an icon to make something happen.

That's in no persons interest.

How do you know that a touch screen will become the "norm" before it does? Or anything else? The keyboard is a pretty poor example, the original was patented, too. Google "Sholes". And any serious change, say a totally software-based keyboard on a capacitive touchscreen device, could warrant new patents in the keyboard world. (hint: it did, and not just for Apple)

2: You should not be able to patent just an idea which you either cannot or don't actually make.

Agreed. That's already in the law, I believe. Of course, they could probably use better control/enforcement of it.

 

[skeep5]

moto-mac-a-rola-rumor!

 

[vvswarup]

Oh please!

Why? How does destroying another company improve your iPhone experience?

If it wasn't for Motorola we would not even have cell phones today. Patent claims go back and forth. I know around here most consider Apple 100% innocent in all patent claims and everyone else the infringing parties, but I have a feeling everyone in the business is guilty of using other companies patents.

To make a statement that you want to see a competitor crushed means you do not value competition. You want one phone available from one company. You want everyone forced to use iPhones only. I value choice and I personally think all of these lawsuits are getting completely out of hand.

Oh, get off your high horse!!!!!

Say you're a corporation. You plonk down billions of dollars to come out with a truly revolutionary product. How would you feel if somebody else could make money using your innovation?

Better question: If this was possible, would you have any incentive to plonk down even a penny on R&D?

And lastly, this is about more than just Apple or its iPhone, so you can stop spouting your conspiracy theories about how Apple is trying to choke every company to death and make the iPhone the only phone on the market.

This is about corporations trying to protect the fruits of their hard work and hard cash. If Apple has been inappropriately using other companies' inventions, then it should be made to pay.

 

[[DL]]

Well, now! I haven't read anything about this in a while.