Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Again Hits Back at Nokia in Patent Dispute

LagunaSol said:
Or in this case, try to thwart a competitor with superior products who is putting the hammer down on your smartphone offerings (i.e. the most profitable products in your lineup) because you can't come up with any compelling products of your own.
Click to expand...

Huh? Last I looked Nokia sold 3 times as many smartphones as Apple. Plenty of people still find Nokia's smartphones a more compelling product than Apple's iPhone. They're selling more smartphones than they did last year despite new entrants into the smartphone market eating at their market share.

iPhones do not suit everybody's needs or pockets.
 
aegisdesign said:
Huh? Last I looked Nokia sold 3 times as many smartphones as Apple. Plenty of people still find Nokia's smartphones a more compelling product than Apple's iPhone. They're selling more smartphones than they did last year despite new entrants into the smartphone market eating at their market share.

iPhones do not suit everybody's needs or pockets.
Click to expand...

Do not bother with facts. "Apple does no wrong" is strong within this one.

The fact is, all this is is negotiations. At the end of the day, Apple will pay for a license to the GSM patents. How much is the question. You can't base your argument on one side's filings alone because you don't have the whole story.
 
macduke said:
OK, now does everyone finally agree that I'm not just blowing smoke out my ___? Time to get back to the real world. I just wanted to set the record straight. Apparently some people like to write off informed user's comments as unfounded even though they have absolutely no idea what they're talking about. I'm no lawyer or anything, but I keep up with the RSS feed, and after reading many of the comments on here, I feel like I have a pretty sound understanding of whats going on. It doesn't take a genius to understand that Apple thinks Nokia is being unfair by not agreeing to the F/RAND terms that they agreed to with every other company and that Nokia has been financially unsuccessful recently. Put two and two together. Apple has been eating into Nokia's share. That's the only reason there is a problem. That pretty much sums up my whole original argument, but apparently I have to spell it out for at least half of you. Perhaps I should write a thesis next time...I mean holy crap on a stick. I'm done with this thread now! Time to go back to finding a car...
Click to expand...

I think we got a good rapport going now and I think we can agree that it’s not quite as b/w as some people like to think. I’d also like to see some more of this sort of intelligent debating instead of throwing insults around.

Anyways.. I hope you find a good car :D.
 
Vulpinemac said:
Hmmm.... you seem to have overlooked one detail. The definition of extortion that was posted stated "... unlawful demand or receipt of monies or properties..." Based on that, the mere act of demanding higher fees could be considered extortion, could it not?
Click to expand...

Yeah, beause that's not the definition (at least not a legal definition).
 
Povilas said:
I don't care who is right and who is wrong I just hope Apple wins this case, because Apple delivers a lot of good products I can actually use and enjoy using. Call me fanboy makes no difference for me.
Click to expand...

So because you like Apple products it's okay for them to break the law? Would you mind if they used slave labor? How about if they just stole everyones patents? Your rationale makes no sense to me. The law doesn't work unless it applies equally to everyone, even those who deliver a lot of good products.
 
aristotle said:
Nokia is attacking Apple right now because:
1. They are losing marketshare to Apple now globally.
2. Their patents are about to expire.


If the patents in question were filed in 1990 or 1991, their window to collect licensing fees is about to close.
Click to expand...

It is safe to bet these patents in question are not going to expire and are among the ones that have gotten extended.
 
Rodimus Prime said:
It is safe to bet these patents in question are not going to expire and are among the ones that have gotten extended.
Click to expand...

All patents expire. There is no such thing as extending them. Patents expire 20 years from their effective filing date. Older patents expire 17 years from their issue date.
 
cmaier said:
All patents expire. There is no such thing as extending them. Patents expire 20 years from their effective filing date. Older patents expire 17 years from their issue date.
Click to expand...

but I am going off the phase I am bolding

What Is a Patent?

A patent for an invention is the grant of a property right to the inventor, issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office. Generally, the term of a new patent is 20 years from the date on which the application for the patent was filed in the United States or, in special cases, from the date an earlier related application was filed, subject to the payment of maintenance fees. U.S. patent grants are effective only within the United States, U.S. territories, and U.S. possessions. Under certain circumstances, patent term extensions or adjustments may be available.

to me that means that it allows some patents to be extended. It explain to me how a patent for like Kodak from 1975 is still able to collect royalties. today.
I have a feeling that the Nokia ones have the extensions put on them.
 
kevin j said:
That is not is a fact. Nokia claims it offered FRAND terms to Apple while Apple on the other hand felt that it was offered a price that was too high. (Apple should probably pay more money than most of the other companies as it is a new company in the phone business and the others would already have deals with nokia)
Click to expand...

Surely that is Discriminatory?
 
kevin j said:
That is not is a fact. Nokia claims it offered FRAND terms to Apple while Apple on the other hand felt that it was offered a price that was too high. (Apple should probably pay more money than most of the other companies as it is a new company in the phone business and the others would already have deals with nokia)
Click to expand...

That last bit sounds a helluva lot like the opposite of FRAND.
 
You are incorrect. First, a 1975 filing date patent would get the issue date plus 17 years treatment.

The extensions thing refers to the fact that if you have a recent patent (20 years from filing date), and there is a long delay between the issue date and the filing date, and if that delay is caused by certain USPTO actions, you can time tacked on. This is seldom more than a year. If there is this sort of extension it will be printed on the face of the patent.

Rodimus Prime said:
but I am going off the phase I am bolding

What Is a Patent?

A patent for an invention is the grant of a property right to the inventor, issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office. Generally, the term of a new patent is 20 years from the date on which the application for the patent was filed in the United States or, in special cases, from the date an earlier related application was filed, subject to the payment of maintenance fees. U.S. patent grants are effective only within the United States, U.S. territories, and U.S. possessions. Under certain circumstances, patent term extensions or adjustments may be available.

to me that means that it allows some patents to be extended. It explain to me how a patent for like Kodak from 1975 is still able to collect royalties. today.
I have a feeling that the Nokia ones have the extensions put on them.
Click to expand...
 
Rodimus Prime said:
to me that means that it allows some patents to be extended. It explain to me how a patent for like Kodak from 1975 is still able to collect royalties. today.
I have a feeling that the Nokia ones have the extensions put on them.
Click to expand...

Some patents are modified by "new art" that do not actually extend the old patent but are new patents "related" to the old one that cover much of the same area, considering changes in the popular technology of the day.

In addition to that, a patent is nothing more than a license to sue, hence why there even are patent trolls, and the legal system has a statute of limitation of 4 years that adds to the patent validity period in terms of actions brought. Even after filing they can drag on for 4-10 years.

So as a practical matter a patent does not "shut up" for about 30 years.

Rocketman
 
Rocketman said:
Some patents are modified by "new art" that do not actually extend the old patent but are new patents "related" to the old one that cover much of the same area, considering changes in the popular technology of the day.
Click to expand...

I think you're trying to refer to "continuations." A continuation cannot add anything new. A continuation is entitled to the filing date of its parent. The idea is that I might write a 400 page patent (apple's multitouch, for example) but claim only some of what's in there. I am permitted to file a continuation application with new claims (as long as I do so before the other application issues). This does not extend the date of expiration of the patent.

A "continuation-in-part" can extend the date of expiration and can add new material, but it is not entitled to the original filing date, and hence it may be easily invalidated.

In addition to that, a patent is nothing more than a license to sue, hence why there even are patent trolls, and the legal system has a statute of limitation of 4 years that adds to the patent validity period in terms of actions brought. Even after filing they can drag on for 4-10 years.
Click to expand...

The statute of limitations in patent cases is 6 years.
 
Future news...

Steve Jobs to buy Nokia

Finland, Nov 15 -

In a stunning hostile takeover, Steve Jobs announced that he would write a personal check for Nokia. Shares of Apple, Disney, and Marvel Comics have all gone up on the news with MacRumors reporting that the entire board of Nokia will be flayed alive and it's lawyers to be eaten by sharks; afterwards, the sharks will be used for Hákarl at a private invitation-only celebration.

Nokia stock has plummeted on the news with Nokia Chairman, Olli-Pekka Kallasvuo, fleeing the country to an 'undisclosed location' in advance of Job's loyal minions. The remainder of the Group Executive Board of Nokia and it's Board of Directors remains trapped in the Nokia Headquarters in Keilaniemi with pleas to the World Court and the UN to stop Jobs' advance on the city.

Before Kallasvuo left on a last-minute private charter, he said "We had no idea what we were doing when we sued Apple! I mean, it usually resolves itself in court; we trade a few insults, pass some legal papers, and settle. Somehow, this got way out of hand and Jobs took it personally and now... now...it's all gone, just gone."

Kallasvuo also made an additional plea for Jobs to spare the engineering staff and thier families from any further persecution.
 
*LTD* said:
That last bit sounds a helluva lot like the opposite of FRAND.
Click to expand...

I was just guessing possible ways the discussion between the two companies went.

Apple can pay a full monetary sum or supplement a smaller fee with some patents ( I believe this is what most companies do so thats were my statement came from) Apple obvious didn't want to license their patents but also found nokia's monetary offer too expensive.( hence why nokia took them to court to let them decide on the price to be paid)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back