Maybe we all should devote our time to devising small details that vary from existing technology so we can sue for megabucks.
No, but you can learn how to manage your available energy reserves. It's not an all-you-can-eat situation. I'm still running an iPhone 4 that lasts me all day because of my careful management.
Can we sue Apple etc for their battery technology being utterly useless?
Cutting with a broad axe I see.
Somaltus, LLC has filed a complaint against Apple today in an Eastern Texas district court, accusing the iPhone maker of infringing upon its 2010 patent related to complex battery technologies. The small Frisco, Texas-based firm also filed lawsuits against Asus, Lenovo, Samsung, Sony, and Toshiba over the same patent.
The question then becomes did they actually develop this technology or not. If they did Apple would loose. However here is the thing, the last I knew battery charging techniques and recommendation have been developed by the battery manufactures. If Apple just followed manufactures recommendations then I suspect enforcement will be difficult for this company.The lawsuit claims that the iPhone 6s and any similar devices sold by Apple infringe upon U.S. Patent No. 7,657,386, titled "Integrated Battery Service System," and seeks unspecified monetary damages or, alternatively, a running royalty on sales of infringing devices from the time of judgment going forward.Specifically, it appears that the infringement claim at least partially relates to the iPhone's process of charging in fast-charge mode until the battery reaches 80% capacity, and then adjusting to trickle-charge mode above 80% capacity.Somaltus, LLC generally fits the description of a "patent troll," as it does not appear to provide any obvious products or services and lacks an easily identifiable online presence. Nevertheless, it has successfully reached out-of-court settlements with automakers like Ford and Nissan in the past in relation to the same particular patent.
As for patent trolls your definition is nonsense. A person or company can develop technology without using it themselves in a product. Happens all the time really, a guy comes up with an idea and then markets it to a manufacture capable of actually building and marketing the invention. At least one company markets more than a few tools designed by auto mechanics to simplify their job. So is an auto mechanic that develops a tool, patents it and then sells or licenses the patent a troll?The legal complaint's case number is 2:16-cv-00758 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas.
Article Link: Apple Faces Patent Lawsuit Over iPhone's Battery Technologies
Nonsense.
i honestly dont understand how one can still innovate something these days without falling into the trap of some patent troll.
Right, patent system was established 100 years ago, which isn't improved much since. No wonder that patent system is not pro-innovation anymore.
Apple faces new patent infringement charges every two days. This is getting ridiculous...
This is a gross misrepresentation. The juries, when juries are used, are generally supportive of the patent holder because the patent holder is the victim of theft. That is if the patent is valid. You are not a troll if you simply own a patent you want to benefit from.That Texas Eastern District of Texas is known for having jurors that side with the patent trolls.
Are you really that dense. If anything it would make things worst because ethical people don't want to have companies pulling stunts to bias their opinions. If you ever wondered why this suits don't happen in places like NYC it is because the lawyer seek out ethical people that know the difference between right and wrong.Tech company need to donate to civic causes to obtain their good graces. I wonder what would happen if Apple refused to have a presence there: no stores, no online presence based to IP addresses resolving there, no mail order and specified their licenses forbid their use in that district. Would that make a difference?
Most likely they would offend the people involved in those communities to no end and would end up victims of negative bias.What if all tech companies did that?
It isn't common sense. First off charging technology changes dramatically when you move form one batter tech to another. A charger designed for lead acid batteries shouldn't be used for Nickel Cadmium and a charge for Nickel Cadmium batters shouldn't be used of batteries for Iron Phosphate batteries. Of course these days you can buy chargers with microprocessors that implement all sorts of algorithms for a variety of batteries on one box, the fact remains the algorithm must fit the battery being charged."Specifically, it appears that the infringement claim at least partially relates to the iPhone's process of charging in fast-charge mode until the battery reaches 80% capacity, and then adjusting to trickle-charge mode above 80% capacity.
So you can patent common sense?
WTF. So if I fill by bathtub really fast and then when it gets close to the top I slow down the water I can patent that idea ?
I wish ISIS would target patent trolls.
Ah, yet another thread of people outraged at "trolls" and patents without having a single clue about how patents are obtained, how patent litigation works, how patents support our economy, or really any reasonable way to define what a "troll" is.
Nevertheless, want some fodder for that anger? Check this out:
Lipitor, under patent protection, earned Pfizer roughly $11 billion per year on average; and $13 billion in its last year under patent. The Patent expired in 2011. Pfizer’s strategy to maintain market share was to meet the new competitive price, which meant dropping its price 80%. A crude calculation puts the value of patent protection (that is, the cost willingly posed by society on itself to protect IP rights) on a product intended to prevent stroke and heart attacks at more than $8.8 billion per year.Legitimate patent, legitimate patent owner making a legitimate product. We as a society paid them $8.8billion per year for it. The questions are:
1. Would Pfizer have bothered to invent Lipitor without knowing it would have a period of exclusivity?
2. How many drugs does Pfizer invent that end up being not being marketable, or not working as well as initially thought, that should be subtracted from that $8.8billion per year?
3. How many drugs does Pfizer invent, that are not so profitable due to the market being too small, but which are subsidized by the blockbuster drugs like Lipitor?
there is nothing novel about fast charging to 80% and then trickle charging the rest. how did these guys even get a patent on this since pretty much all battery chargers ever designed use some variation on this same strategy.
Live by the sword, die by the sword. Apple contributes to the next patent troll problem as well. They outsource it. Cant taint the Apple name. One of the companies names is Rockstar Consortium.
Well that's pretty much the problem: They can't !i honestly dont understand how one can still innovate something these days without falling into the trap of some patent troll.
I really don't understand AI's hostility to patent holders. If the patent is valid then the owner should benefit from the patentor invention, that is the whole point of the patent system.
it is, in fact, *only* once you are successful. that is the m.o. point of fact, these companies setup and plan their trumped up suits and then lie in wait, allowing time for the tech to become enmeshed in a financially successful product, it is only at that point that the 'patent' is worth anything to them. it's a crappy game full of completely disingenuous, talent-less people doing their level best to ride the coattails of great people and companies. it's a waste of time and money and ruins innovation and true ownership benefits for those of us who actually earn and deserve it. patent law needs reform. desperately.You can still innovate. It's typically only once you're successful that the troll will come knocking.
I'm sure there are top notch lawyers who are not multi billion dollar people.They are taking on six multi-billion dollar legal teams. Good luck.
How to be a patent troll:
1. Find a technology everyone uses.
2. Create and patent the obvious next iteration of said technology.
3. Wait for everyone to upgrade their technology to the next obvious iteration.
4. Sue everyone.
i honestly dont understand how one can still innovate something these days without falling into the trap of some patent troll.