Apple Challenges Four Qualcomm Patents in Ongoing Legal Battle

[kdarling]

That little town in Texas that lives off patent trolls? I hope not. I'd rather see it in California, where both of the companies are, and where juries understand patents and Silicon Valley.

LOL at "where juries understand patents".

Just look at the misinformed, misled, and lets-get-home before-the-weekend jury in that first Apple-Samsung trial.

If anything, a smaller town with courts dedicated to patent deliberation, with a small pool of jurors who do patents all the time, would make more sense than using relatively clueless juries.

The reason why defendants dislike that Texas district, is because its judges don't allow extensive discovery delays. This is seen as favoring the plaintiff.

 

[apolloa]

Ahhhh another episode of how the patent system is broken and needs reform when it works against Apple but how important it is for the protection of intellectual property when Apple is the one with a patent. Is there any other kind of thread topic where the bulk of us talk more like politicians than this one?

<any company not named Apple> is so wrong for seeking a patent fee/claim against Apple.
Apple deserves every penny when <any company not named Apple> infringes on Apple patents.

Patent troll when anyone else holds a patent that conflicts with anything Apple wants. But Apple patents are (the one and only) valid patents.

Some would argue Apple is a perfect example of a patent troll due to the way it sues it’s suppliers and competitors.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Xerox it.

I see what you did there.

 

[hans1972]

That’s it Apple, play the patent game to suit yourself only... bunch of hypocrites. I’m so glad that courts in other countries take little notice of Apple US patents in ridiculous cases like a black electronic device face with round corners....

Non US courts has to ignore US patents as they are only valid in the US.

 

[chris1958]

Also, it’s rare that a company knows about the patent. Engineers don’t go checking to see if everything they are doing is patented.

It is not the job of engineers to know about patents. Companies have specialists to do exactly this. Those are usually the same people, who file patents for the company. In both cases you have to check for existing patents. And Apple files for a lot of patents.

 

[apolloa]

Non US courts has to ignore US patents as they are only valid in the US.

Well Apple seems content with trying to use those same patents globally against its competition.

 

[tooltalk]

What are you even talking about?

1) Apple won in multiple countries, not just here, against Samsung
2) Apple isn’t entitled to defend itself, just like Samsung did?

No, Apple didn't win in multiple countries, especially in regards to their design patents. As I explained in other threads while back, all of Apple's claims in Germany got destroyed despite interim injunction it received (not on design patent violation, but on Germany's esoteric unfair competition law). In the UK, which was already handling the EU wide design claims, Apple was admonished for taking the case to Dusseldorf, ED Texas of EU for favored outcome, and lost; it then appealed and lost again. Finally, Apple got spanked by the High Court in UK for defying the court order and misleading the public about Samsung's infringement. That pretty sums up Apple's misadventure on their absurd design claims.

To be fair, Apple had better luck with utility patents there. In Netherland, Apple attempted to ban Samsung devices on a couple of utilities patents infringement (eg, IIRC, photo gallery scrolling feature), but Samsung quickly removed the infringed feature and continued their business as usual without disruption. Apple failed to gain ban there too.

Apple's legal attack in EU, or non-US for that matter, is regarded as a complete failure. Apple focused in getting sales/import ban, but Apple couldn't get the kind of lopsided win that it did with hometown advantage (ie, Obama's reversal of Samsung's ITC win, or Apple's hometown jury) in the US and that's why the company agreed to drop all non-US cases years back.

 

[one1]

Every time Apple sues someone over patents and trademarks the first thing defense counsel should do is ask them where the word iPhone came from........ Which to this day Cisco still denies them the rights to own, merely use.....after they were told not to, repeatedly.

Assuming Apple has picked up a few new Mac Zealots since I watched it unfold in 2008, here's what you missed. https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-cisco-settle-iphone-trademark-lawsuit/

I find it interesting that ten years later nobody knows what it's costing Apple to use the iPhone name.

At least when they took iOS from Cisco (AGAIN!) they asked this time.

 

[cmaier]

LOL at "where juries understand patents".

Just look at the misinformed, misled, and lets-get-home before-the-weekend jury in that first Apple-Samsung trial.

If anything, a smaller town with courts dedicated to patent deliberation, with a small pool of jurors who do patents all the time, would make more sense than using relatively clueless juries.

The reason why defendants dislike that Texas district, is because its judges don't allow extensive discovery delays. This is seen as favoring the plaintiff.

No, that’s not the reason defendants dislike ED Texas. Lots of places are much faster (eg ed Virginia) or reequire stricter discovery (eg cd cal).

The local patent rules in Ed Texas are plaintiff friendly, the juries award high damages, and the judges are often overruled by the fed circuit, etc. Discovery is actually fairly easy there, or at least not significantly more burdensome than most other districts, because requests for production are generally not permitted.
[doublepost=1529816185][/doublepost]

Every time Apple sues someone over patents and trademarks the first thing defense counsel should do is ask them where the word iPhone came from........ Which to this day Cisco still denies them the rights to own, merely use.....after they were told not to, repeatedly.

Assuming Apple has picked up a few new Mac Zealots since I watched it unfold in 2008, here's what you missed. https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-cisco-settle-iphone-trademark-lawsuit/

I find it interesting that ten years later nobody knows what it's costing Apple to use the iPhone name.

At least when they took iOS from Cisco (AGAIN!) they asked this time.

Nice story, but false. Apple is the registered owner of the iPhone trademark.

http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4808:xgana9.2.1

 

[one1]

Do you just not know??? LOL....... Do your homework, then come back here.

 

[cmaier]

Do you just not know??? LOL....... Do your homework, then come back here.

You said Cisco denies Apple the rights to own the iPhone trademark “to this day.”

I gave you a link to the trademark database at the United States Patent and Trademark Office that proves that Apple owns the trademark “iPhone.”

Why don’t you just admit you are wrong instead of blankly accusing me of “not knowing.” My proof is irrefutable and plain as day.

 

[rjohnstone]

No, that’s not the reason defendants dislike ED Texas. Lots of places are much faster (eg ed Virginia) or reequire stricter discovery (eg cd cal).

The local patent rules in Ed Texas are plaintiff friendly, the juries award high damages, and the judges are often overruled by the fed circuit, etc. Discovery is actually fairly easy there, or at least not significantly more burdensome than most other districts, because requests for production are generally not permitted.
[doublepost=1529816185][/doublepost]

Nice story, but false. Apple is the registered owner of the iPhone trademark.

http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4808:xgana9.2.1

Apple and Cisco both maintain rights to the iphone name. Apple was never granted exclusive use of the name.
Apple holds 17 trademarks for the iphone name, logo and combined branding under several categories.
Cisco still owns 75076573, which is still a live, and valid trademark registration. (It's up for renewal in 2019)