Apple Faces New Patent Lawsuits from Openwave, Wi-LAN

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Apr 12, 2001
7,162
8,346
0
19
www.macrumors.com



While much of the focus of patent lawsuits involving Apple has revolved around Samsung and other major smartphone manufacturers in recent weeks, Apple this week faces two new lawsuits from smaller companies seeking to assert their intellectual property claims.




On Wednesday, mobile Internet communications technology firm Openwave Systems announced that it had filed a lawsuit and International Trade Commission (ITC) complaint against Apple and Research in Motion, alleging violation of five different patents across a broad spectrum of applications.
The complaint, filed at the International Trade Commission (ITC) in Washington, DC, requests that the ITC bar the import of smartphones and tablet computers that infringe Openwave patents, including, but not limited to, Apple's iPhone 3G, iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4, iPod Touch, iPad and iPad 2; and RIM's Blackberry Curve 9330 and Blackberry PlayBook. Openwave also filed a similar complaint in federal district court in Delaware.

"Openwave invented technologies that became foundational to the mobile Internet. We believe that these large companies should pay us for the use of our technologies, particularly in light of the substantial revenue these companies have earned from devices that use our intellectual property," said Ken Denman, Chief Executive Officer of Openwave. "Before filing these complaints, we approached both of these companies numerous times in an attempt to negotiate a license of our technology with them and did not receive a substantive response."
As noted by AllThingsD, Openwave appears to have a small yet fairly strong patent portfolio, suggesting that the company may have a decent chance of winning concessions from Apple and Research in Motion and forcing them into licensing discussions.




In other news, Canadian firm Wi-LAN today announced that it has filed suit against Apple and eight other major companies alleging infringement of two patents related to CDMA, HSPA, Wi-Fi, and LTE technologies.

Wi-LAN is generally regarded as a patent troll, having given up on product manufacturing and focused its business solely on attempts to license its intellectual property. The company has not been shy about filing lawsuits alleging infringement of its patents, and has in fact sued Apple several times in the past, most recently in a 2010 complaint targeting over two dozen companies for their implementations of Bluetooth communications technology.

Article Link: Apple Faces New Patent Lawsuits from Openwave, Wi-LAN
 

Jobsian

macrumors 6502a
Jul 30, 2009
828
13
0
Patent law is an absurd, misjudged relic of intangible occupancy and will eventually either implode upon itself or lead us into Fahrenheit 451.
 

cotak

macrumors regular
Feb 24, 2011
224
0
0
If intellectual property law existed when the first man discovered fire we'd be extinct.
 

mlp mlp

macrumors newbie
Dec 2, 2009
2
0
0
let's be honest, if wi-lan wants to be taken seriously, they need to get a better logo and that dude needs a stylist
 

sanford

macrumors 65816
Jan 5, 2003
1,265
0
0
Dallas, USA
PATENT:

A SYSTEM FOR SENDING AND RECEIVING DECODABLE SIGNALS OVER RADIO FREQUENCIES

FULL STOP

Last year they went after after "THE PEOPLE OF ANCIENT CIVILIZATIONS" for "A SYSTEM OF SYMBOLS INTENDED TO CONVEY MEANING, COMMONLY KNOWN AS 'AN ALPHABET.'" But the federal court for the northern district of Texas ruled that dead people could not be compelled to answer a lawsuit in corporeal form.
 

*LTD*

macrumors G4
Feb 5, 2009
10,703
1
0
Canada
One patent troll suing another patent troll. Good. I hope that both get what they deserve.
One of them might actually fit the definition of "patent troll", while the other most certainly does not.

And quite frankly, this is about as meaningful for Apple as the Kodak litigation. In other words, meaningless.

Further, Wi-lan is attempting to go after others besides Apple, notably RIM.

Even further, Wi-LAN is generally regarded as a patent troll, having given up on product manufacturing and focused its business solely on attempts to license its intellectual property. The company has not been shy about filing lawsuits alleging infringement of its patents, and has in fact sued Apple several times in the past, most recently in a 2010 complaint targeting over two dozen companies for their implementations of Bluetooth communications technology.

Not a big deal, in any event. Apple can either pay them off or delay. Patent trolls are many and they're not too much of a worry. Mirror Worlds, Lodsys, etc.
 
Last edited:

*LTD*

macrumors G4
Feb 5, 2009
10,703
1
0
Canada
Pandoras Box, what goes around comes around.
This is hardly a threatening or dangerous litigation for Apple. Wi-lan is just another patent troll in a sea of patent trolls that sues everyone they can. Wi-Lan is also going after others, such as RIM and (unsurprisingly) eight other major companies alleging infringement of two patents related to CDMA, HSPA, Wi-Fi, and LTE technologies.
 

kdarling

macrumors P6
Yet another license fee to add to the cost of our smartphones.

At this rate, in a few years the fees could be more than the hardware on a low end model.

Perhaps there should be a central smartphone patent repository with fees divided among contributors as a percentage of the total phone cost.
 

f00f

macrumors 65816
Feb 18, 2009
1,073
36
0
New Yawk
OK so a supposed patent violation isn't worthy of a court filing until the supposed patent violator has made a *****load of money off of whatever is protected by the patent?

Where were these WiLan squatters 3 years ago when the iPhone 3G was launched?
 

*LTD*

macrumors G4
Feb 5, 2009
10,703
1
0
Canada
OK so a supposed patent violation isn't worthy of a court filing until the supposed patent violator has made a *****load of money off of whatever is protected by the patent?

Where were these WiLan squatters 3 years ago when the iPhone 3G was launched?
Rubbing their hands gleefully, in wait. Now that the market is robust and most of the players flush with money, it's time to emerge from the shadows with an even chance of some sort of decent payout.

This is what entities like this do. It's their MO.
 

jcmeyer5

macrumors 6502
Sep 7, 2008
414
308
0
Okay... so assume that the patent is valid (they invented the tech). Apple buys its communication chips from a supplier... they dont build them themselves. Wouldnt the supplier be the one to question? Or does everyone who breaths on that tech need to pay a license fee?

If I build a PC for someone using a supplier-purchased 3G card, do I need to license the tech? I would not think so, and I would think that the supplier who made the card would have already paid for the license.
 

Žalgiris

macrumors 6502a
Aug 3, 2010
934
0
0
Lithuania
Wi-Troll

OK so a supposed patent violation isn't worthy of a court filing until the supposed patent violator has made a *****load of money off of whatever is protected by the patent?

Where were these WiLan squatters 3 years ago when the iPhone 3G was launched?
If judge wants to have some fun time in the future he should start showing middle finger and then doors out in such cases.
 

wigby

macrumors 68000
Jun 7, 2007
1,755
1,158
0
One patent troll suing another patent troll. Good. I hope that both get what they deserve.
i think i know what you're saying but can you clarify? do you want one of them to pay a settlement to the other or both to get "something" that they deserve? what could that something even be? record profits? more lawyers on retainer?

if you see both parties as patent trolls, then what isn't a patent troll? by your definition, companies shouldn't be allowed to sue if they feel their properties are being infringed upon lest they be labeled patent trolls.

i agree that the system is being gamed and very flawed but it is the only current patent system in place. should we throw out all patents or just some? who decides which patents are worth protecting?
 

*LTD*

macrumors G4
Feb 5, 2009
10,703
1
0
Canada
i think i know what you're saying but can you clarify? do you want one of them to pay a settlement to the other or both to get "something" that they deserve? what could that something even be? record profits? more lawyers on retainer?

if you see both parties as patent trolls, then what isn't a patent troll? by your definition, companies shouldn't be allowed to sue if they feel their properties are being infringed upon lest they be labeled patent trolls.

i agree that the system is being gamed and very flawed but it is the only current patent system in place. should we throw out all patents or just some? who decides which patents are worth protecting?
He doesn't actually know what a "patent troll" is. Yet it's right in the article.