Apple LOSES Patent Fight Over Cover-Flow

Discussion in 'Apple, Inc and Tech Industry' started by pimentoLoaf, Oct 1, 2010.

  1. pimentoLoaf macrumors 68000

    pimentoLoaf

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2001
    Location:
    The SimCity Deli
    #1
    The patent fight also included the Time Machine interface, as well.
     
  2. Stella macrumors 604

    Stella

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2003
    Location:
    Canada
    #2
    deleted - referenced same apple insider article.
     
  3. usasalazar macrumors regular

    usasalazar

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2006
    #3
  4. *LTD* macrumors G4

    *LTD*

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Location:
    Canada
    #4
    The Prof no longer owns the patents. They were sold to a patent-trolling outfit. And here we are.

    Apple's biggest mistake was actually doing something meaningful with them. The obvious solution is to pay off the patent trolls and move on.
     
  5. usasalazar macrumors regular

    usasalazar

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2006
    #5
    The Prof still owns the patents.

    The Prof and his LLC still owns the patents.

    Gelernter said after the verdict he was “tremendously grateful” to his lawyers for “their overwhelmingly brilliant performance.” He declined to comment further.

    Gelernter wrote “Mirror Worlds: or the Day Software Puts the Universe in a Shoebox” and “Drawing Life: Surviving the Unabomber” about his recovery from a bomb sent by Theodore Kaczynski in 1993 that damaged his right hand and eye.

    Mirror Worlds LLC, the legal entity that filed the complaint, is incorporated in Tyler, Texas, according to the complaint.

    This is definitely not a third party trolling situation.
     
  6. *LTD* macrumors G4

    *LTD*

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Location:
    Canada
    #6
  7. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #7
    your first article LTD is counter to your point and supports the argument that it is not a patent troll.

    Your 2nd post is not considered a valid source hate to break it to you.

    The guy cheering for this victory seems to be the guy who made the orginal patent. so again not so much of a troll here.

    Sorry that your church got nailed for stealing ideas.
     
  8. *LTD* macrumors G4

    *LTD*

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Location:
    Canada
    #8
    They had nothing to sell since 2004.

    http://web.archive.org/web/20040607060111/http://www.scopeware.com/

    The year their Scopeware product was taken off the market. Seems to have failed. They couldn't sell their product and Mirror Worlds Technologies disbanded in 2003.

    Do your research on the company. There's barely any word of them, especially since 2004.

    Good for Apple. Pay out the patent trolls and continue actually making use of the tech.

    The original owner of the tech couldn't do anything meaningful with it. Dollars-to-donuts he was sitting on it until he could milk someone for it. His *new* company, Mirror Worlds LLC, resurfaced later and was incorporated in . . . surprise, surprise . . . Tyler, Texas. He was just waiting for the opportunity to cash in.
     
  9. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #9
    clearly you do not understand how patents work or what a patent troll even is. You are just pissed that Apple got hammered. So his company failed to begin with big deal.

    So you in your view if you can not use a patent because you do not have the money to make good use out of then anyone should be able to use that idea for free. Got your their. Or are you just talking that that rule applies to apple.
     
  10. *LTD* macrumors G4

    *LTD*

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Location:
    Canada
    #10
    Yes.

    I can patent an idea and then sit on it till kingdom come. Then when someone finally makes use of it and cashes in I go ahead and call my lawyers.

    I might even, with a fair bit of knowledge, test the waters with an idea, spend a few dollars to produce a few units, then withdraw it deliberately. By doing so I've essentially demo'd the idea and showed other, larger entities who DO have the resources to make something out of it.

    I wait.

    Years later Apple comes along. I call my lawyers. Profit.

    The fact that he made an attempt in 2002 to produce something with it and failed is perhaps cause for sympathy, nothing more.

    The good Professor and/or his affiliated company is enforcing their patent(s) without any manufacturing base.
     
  11. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #11
    And proof is in your post that you do not understand patents. They are also their to prevent big companies like Apple from abusing their market power by taking other people ideas and running with them. They can not compete with Apple due to Apple raw size and deep pockets.

    Some people make a living on nothing more than coming up with ideas and selling them to 3rd parties.
     
  12. *LTD* macrumors G4

    *LTD*

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Location:
    Canada
    #12
    Under US law, patent owners are not required to commercialize their "invention" in order to enforce their patents. Nor does the patent owner have to be the inventor. Patents can be bought, sold and licensed to anyone.

    Under the law Apple must pay. I'm not disputing that under US law as it stands, Apple acted wrongfully.

    However, I'm hardly shedding a tear that Gelernter and his little shell-company, who did absolutely nothing with the idea for at least seven years, have been hurt by Apple. In fact, just the opposite, they were waiting for payday in Texas.

    But we're all copasetic in the end. Gelertner and co. got their payout, and we'll continue to enjoy CoverFlow and Time Machine.
     
  13. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #13

    I believe patent laws are a lot like that world wide. The idea does not have to be commercialize and they can be sold to other companies.
     

Share This Page