Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Lithium Ion battery chargers have been around for about as long as the batteries have. A google search turns up tons of similar patents. I would expect that Apple has a patent or has licensed it.
 
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.
 
That Texas Eastern District of Texas is known for having jurors that side with the patent trolls. 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? What if all tech companies did that?
 



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.
Cutting with a broad axe I see.
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.
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 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
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?

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.
 
What can be done to put that Texas District out of business? All they do there is grow mesquite and fleece companies for crooks.
 
i honestly dont understand how one can still innovate something these days without falling into the trap of some patent troll.

It is easy. You need to realize that simple minds can't imagine anything new under the sun. Frankly your statement is a common refrain with respect to the patent system. At one time there was a suggestion that the system be closed down because everything that could be invented had been invented. It is a feeble mind that believe humanity has ran out of things to invent.
[doublepost=1468358882][/doublepost]
Right, patent system was established 100 years ago, which isn't improved much since. No wonder that patent system is not pro-innovation anymore.

The patent system is very pro innovation, the existence of this patent proves that. The only real question is this: is the patent a valid new development or simply a patent based on existing technology. That will be decided in a court of law.
 
Apple faces new patent infringement charges every two days. This is getting ridiculous...

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.
 
That Texas Eastern District of Texas is known for having jurors that side with the patent trolls.
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.
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?
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.
What if all tech companies did that?
Most likely they would offend the people involved in those communities to no end and would end up victims of negative bias.

The problem here is that people don't have a clue what a patent is. Nor do they understand property rights. A patent is something a person can own and sell just like the car in his driveway. These patents are temporary rights granted by government for the exclusive use of the owner of the patent.

It might help people realize that Apple itself has purchased thousands of patent over the years. Nobody calls them a patent troll. Why did they by the patents, because they are properties that have value. If they didn't have value Apple wouldn't waste money on them.

The only really questions when it comes to patent lawsuits are: 1. Is the patent valid. 2. As a manufacturer did you infringe on the patent and the technology it describes.

Often I court you see a lot of focus on a patents validity. The simple reason here is that an invalid patent pretty much ends the argument. Proving / disproving infringement is often very difficult which is why validity is attacked first.
 
"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?
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.
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.

Patent holders are not trolls. The only really question here is this, is the patent valid. If not the suit will go away if so Apple will likely have to pay up.

Apple itself would do the world a lot of good if they avoided taking patent holders to court when they know the patent is valid. However what many don't seem to know is that Apple has a policy of not licensing technology developed by others. It isn't like they are bastion of ethical behavior here.
[doublepost=1468360704][/doublepost]
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?

The funny thing here is that Lipitor sucks as a drug. If you have ever tried to take it, you will find it is very hard to tolerate.
[doublepost=1468360970][/doublepost]
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.

Actually they don't but that is another discussion. The problem here is that most of the charging algorithms are developed by the battery manufactures. They do however at times work in conjunction with outside engineering firms. All Apple will have to do here is to show where the algorithm came from and that the technique existed bore this company patented it.
[doublepost=1468361129][/doublepost]
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.

Which demonstrates the value of patents, even when a company goes out of business the tech they developed and patented has value.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pratikindia
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.

FYI ... This is Macrumors, not AI (assuming you were referring to "AppleInsider".) Harmless slip, or copy-paste of a post you did on AI forums?
 
Here we go.. Again.

I could have sworn a I've used devices prior to 2010 that had connectors to the system so that the cou/system could help manage battery


These guys are nuts if they think they're going to beat the collective tech industry on this one.
 
This is the kind of technology that is missing from hoverboards. And we know how that has worked out. This patent will need to be invalidated.
 
You can still innovate. It's typically only once you're successful that the troll will come knocking.
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.
 
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.

May all of the named Defendants in this case grind this Patent Troll into the dust, then legally eviscerate their Limited Liability Corporation . . . . Then take the Patent Trolling friendly State of Texas to the United States Supreme Court and recover legal expenses from the Great State of Texas taxpayers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jax44
Trolls. The patent was originally done by Snap-On Technologies.
This patent is for an automated test and charging system.

They should have sued everyone associated with Lithium ION batteries since this s a common practice to keep the batery from heating up excessively.

Sheesh.....
 
i honestly dont understand how one can still innovate something these days without falling into the trap of some patent troll.

exactly...

However Apple itself is one of the biggest trolls worldwide.

We need a complete overhaul of the patent system.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tooltalk
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.