Apple Hit With $2.8 Billion Patent Lawsuit Over VoIP Technology

[kdarling]

The bottom line... it's very tough not to infringe on a patent unintentionally and it's becoming a problem.

Truth. Everyone is being compelled to file software patents, more as a preemptive defense mechanism than anything else. The fact that some obvious things are getting patents, makes it imperative. It's like a Cold War, with weapon stockpiling, just in case.

Those were functions never conceived of before Apple introduced them, and did not exist in any other commercial products.

All of those basic functions mentioned existed before Apple.

Years before the iPhone, there was slide to unlock, tap zoom, pinch zoom, inertial scrolling, and so forth. Some in commercial products, some not.

Surprised that anyone would not know, at the least, about Jeff Han and his famous 2006 TED talk with pinch zoom (and he was not the first to do it, not by a long shot).

 

[smeagol]

If you have to mention you're not a patent troll, you're a patent troll.

 

[Arcus]

Sounds like an episode of Silicon Valley

 

[iSRS]

they say they're not, but they most definately sound like patent trolls

Agree. If they had a product, sure. But they are doing nothing with it. So they are guilty by association. Now, Apple could have infringed, but I doubt highly they did so, if they did at all, intentionally.

Patenting a way for a computer to detect whether a device is registered with a central server or not?

Well blow me down, what a billion dollar idea.

Or, $2.8 Billion

So Apple must be one too with all their car patents. No real car but Apple is already getting awards for most influential in the car industry.

Influence goes a long way. They are influencing the car industry now because of the mere threat of them entering the market. Many other companies are adjusting how they do business and future plans as a result. Apple is a disrupter in the auto industry, as well as several others that most people would not think to include Apple in, such as healthcare.

 

[Rogifan]

So Apple must be one too with all their car patents. No real car but Apple is already getting awards for most influential in the car industry.

What car patents are you talking about and who has Apple sued over them?

 

[Tech198]

they say they're not, but they most definately sound like patent trolls

I was wondering if they spent more than $17 million in development, how can u spend if u don't make any income ? SPend who's money exactly ?

 

[Low country]

A good practice litigation for Apple's Junior lawyers division

LOL....They'll give this one to an intern

 

[neuropsychguy]

Deleting my comment because others said the same thing.

 

[Tech198]

dam this internet .... everything has it's opposites....

 

[coolfactor]

Not much better than Apple patenting slide to unlock, page turning, and pinch to zoom...

Those are user interactions, not technologies. Not similar at all. It's like a company patenting a "a method to cover a structure in colour" and then suing every painter in the world. The patent system is a joke. Patents should be very, very specific, not general.

 

[ziggie216]

The entire patent system needs to be reviewed. The things some companies have been awarded patents for is ridiculous.

You mean like "A thing or method that does something"

BAM! Time to sue!

 

[DudeDad]

“I am the wisest man alive, for I know one thing, and that is that I am a patent troll.”

― Plato, The Republic

 

[Jakexb]

Maybe they weren't always patent trolls, but if they haven't built anything in 10 years and are still hanging around as a shell company waiting for someone to do something similar to their patents, then yes, they're patent trolls now.

 

[cuhulin]

VoIP-Pal announced today that it has filed a lawsuit against Apple in a U.S. District Court in Las Vegas, Nevada, seeking over $2.8 billion in damages for alleged infringement of its patented internet communication technologies.

The Bellevue-based company calculated its $2,836,710,031 figure using a 1.25-percent royalty rate based on an apportionment of Apple's estimated historical profit from iPhone (55-percent), iPad (35-percent), and Mac (10-percent).

VoIP-Pal (VPLM) has over a dozen issued or pending patents, primarily related to VoIP technologies, a few of which it accuses Apple of infringing upon with services like FaceTime and iMessage on iPhone, iPad, and Mac.The court filing cites multiple ways that Apple is allegedly infringing upon the patents, including the following iMessage claim:The lawsuit was originally initiated on February 9, but VoIP-Pal delayed pursuing legal action until Monday as the company says it remains engaged in discussions with Apple outside the courtroom regarding an amicable resolution. The company appears to be open to a sale or licensing of its patent portfolio.

"We are confident the current good will on both sides will result in a favorable outcome for all parties involved," said Emil Malak, CEO of VoIP-Pal.

VoIP-Pal, which acquired network operator Digifonica in 2013, describes itself as "a technical leader in the broadband VoIP market." The company does not currently generate income, but insists it is "absolutely not" a patent troll, noting that Digifonica began designing its system back in 2004.VoIP-Pal has filed similar lawsuits against AT&T and Verizon in Las Vegas court.

Article Link: Apple Hit With $2.8 Billion Patent Lawsuit Over VoIP Technology

[doublepost=1462901147][/doublepost]2004 seems awfully recent for claiming fairly fundamental patents for VOIP. I would think that Vonage was in business by then. AT&T was probably using VOIP for long-lines transmission by then as well - and the determination whether a callee was available by VOIP would have been a necessary part of running such a system.

Judging from the '815 patent, these guys were patent trolls from the outset.

 

[Breaking Good]

Mother****ing patent trolls waited for so many years for fat stacks of money.

The first thing they teach you in law school is to never sue someone with no money. So what if you win. You can't collect anything.

The term lawyers use for this is "judgement proof".

 

[ApfelKuchen]

Patent law should just add this clause "if the patent is not put into a working order before its infringed, then the usage of this patent to sue the infringement client is nullified"

One of the key underpinnings of patent law is that once the idea is registered, the inventor has the time to develop it and bring it to market (the more time that takes, the less time they have to benefit from their limited-time monopoly). If your clause was in effect, it would simply start a race between the inventor and all those who might want to use the invention, with the fleetest of foot winning. While the inventor was out searching for investors/funding a startup, an established manufacturer/R&D firm could be applying the concepts.

While in the early days of patent law an inventor might deliver a working model to the patent office, today it can take a huge investment of time and funds to turn a concept into a working prototype. The patent system recognizes that the idea requires protection while that prototype is being designed and built. Otherwise, industrial espionage would rule the day - if ideas can't be protected as property, then their theft can't be pursued as a crime.

Yes, the stereotypical notion of patent trolls is offensive - the stockpiling of ideas with no intent to develop or sell them, only to sue if that idea is infringed. But if we were to use your criteria.... many patents that fall into the hands of trolls have been developed into working products (or at the least, prototypes) - the patents may have been sold during a bankruptcy, to avert bankruptcy, or simply because the troll believes they can do a better job of licensing than the previous owner. Your clause might reduce the number of patent suits, but it's not at all likely to rein-in patent trolls.

A natural outgrowth of patents and copyrights is that the inventor/artist may not ultimately be the producer. Some people are good at creating, others excel at manufacturing and selling. A person with a great creation may lack the funds to bring it to market. Hence, the sale of licenses, or the outright sale of intellectual property rights. The problem is, how to rein-in counterproductive practices (stockpiling and predatory lawsuits) while still allowing people to profit from their ideas. Alas, there is no simplistic answer.

 

[eoblaed]

I guess it's become a legitimate business model to find a huge company with deep pockets and come up with a patent issue to sue them over.

 

[MacBergin]

Well if they state they are not a patent troll they must not be a patent troll...HA!

 

[emcampbe]

Ah, I see. So they bought a company with patents 3+ years ago, don't make any products or bring in income, and have sued Verizon, AT&T, and now Apple. Yeah, that sounds nothing like other patent trolls.

 

[NT1440]

And Patently Apple is now reporting that this lawsuit was filed months ago. The Press Release may be related to a shareholder meeting scheduled for the 25th:

http://www.patentlyapple.com/patent...shes-old-news-of-a-lawsuit-against-apple.html

 

[JackANSI]

The patent system is broken. But if people are going to maintain that Apple has the right to go after people with their patents and internet-scream at those that companies that violate them - then turnabout has to be fair play. It really doesn't matter if they make products or not right now. They did. They also spent time and resources on the patents when they were filed. Using logic that they just swiped up a company so aren't entitled would then open Apple to lose rights to things involved with Touch ID, Siri, and a slew of other things...

Hate on the system - not the companies who are using it to their advantage. Just like tax loopholes.

I'm going to have to ask you to step away from the keyboard, sir. Your point does not include the required amount of rage and purely emotional thought. It also includes far too much logic and you risk bringing the thread to a halt.

 

[JGRE]

This is pretty much the textbook definition of a patent troll - company acquires other company for patents, does not make a product, and then starts suing others for patent infringement.

Have a look at their intangible assets: book value of 1.2 million and they are claiming 2.8 billion........hahaha what a joke.

 

[VulchR]

I am surprised that reform of patent law isn't discussed more among politicians. At this rate, you won't be able to scratch your backside without infringing some sort of vague patent that was designed for trolling from the onset.

 

[MacBH928]

I learned from Apple and MacRumors that if you are going to do business, you will also need "legal budget". While Apple can afford it, many businesses just don't have the money to continuously battle in courts.

 

[John Mcgregor]

The first thing they teach you in law school is to never sue someone with no money. So what if you win. You can't collect anything.

The term lawyers use for this is "judgement proof".

That's the problem. If it was about patents at all it would be as soon as they found out about the alleged infringement and asked to stop using this. The fact that they wait and have no products to show - is a clear indication that they are slimy patent trolls. A reasonable judge should throw this on the spot.