Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
How I understood Apple's statement:

"(Company X) makes no products, has no employees, creates no jobs, has no U.S. presence, and is exploiting our patent system to seek royalties for technology (company Y) invented,”

It's like saying Inventor Y thinks that he can use the USPTO-patent protected inventions of InventorX for free just because Inventor X doesn't have a manufacturing arm or isn't US-based.

Until this is the basis on which a patent is awarded, it can't and shouldn't be the basis on which a patent is disputed.

Apple's PR statement makes it look bad.

I think you're misunderstanding that message written. It looks to be that Apple is saying since this company has no employees, creates no jobs, etc. there's no reason for them to be creating a patent for a non-existing company. Sure, anyone can create a patent but if it's not used you do realize it can become null and void right? But then again, there's no proof as of yet that Smartflash invented anything.
 
The patent system needs a rework.

There's a simple solution - in order to hold a patent, you must be actively developing, producing, selling and/or marketing a product which uses your technology. The idea of "licensing" patents should be gone too. it's your idea, use it, or lose it.
 
What goes around, comes around for patent trolls and APPL has benefited from it in the past. Man up and pay the fine :apple:

They won't. All the others, even those for which Apple had actual cause, have dragged things through the court for 5 year plus and in the end the award has been much lower.
 
I think you're misunderstanding that message written. It looks to be that Apple is saying since this company has no employees, creates no jobs, etc. there's no reason for them to be creating a patent for a non-existing company. Sure, anyone can create a patent but if it's not used you do realize it can become null and void right? But then again, there's no proof as of yet that Smartflash invented anything.

I think what Apple was getting at is that Smartfish is like that scene in Blazing Saddles where they are heading across the sands to the town, and hit the 'toll booth', and Mongo has to go back and get change so they can get to the town.

Also I didn't know that patents were nullified if they weren't 'used'. If that be the case, most patent trolls wouldn't exist. Right?
 
Its a good time to be a lawyer for technology firms. They are the only ones that really win out of all this.
 
Lol

They are "exploiting" the patent system because the company successfully sued a major patent whore like Apple and won.

There is no reason today for Apple to be found in violation of any patent, Apple could have probably bought this company with money coming out of Apple's social committee's rainy day fund.
 
I think what Apple was getting at is that Smartfish is like that scene in Blazing Saddles where they are heading across the sands to the town, and hit the 'toll booth', and Mongo has to go back and get change so they can get to the town.

Also I didn't know that patents were nullified if they weren't 'used'. If that be the case, most patent trolls wouldn't exist. Right?

There is a statute of limitations on Patents.
 
They are "exploiting" the patent system because the company successfully sued a major patent whore like Apple and won.

There is no reason today for Apple to be found in violation of any patent, Apple could have probably bought this company with money coming out of Apple's social committee's rainy day fund.

If the company was suing Apple - what makes you think they would have sold to them for less than what they might make in the suit?
 
One of the ultimate truths is - there is often one (or similar) solution that makes sense and in this day and age - it's nearly impossible to NOT "violate" SOMEONE's patent. I would say this is done completely unknowingly. Not deliberately.

The problem is deeper - it's the patent system in general and how it currently works.

I read somewhere that the backlog in the US Patent Office alone is hundreds of thousands of patents. And that's just one nation (albeit, probably the nation with the most patents). I can't imagine there's a company in the world that is aware of every patent that could affect their business, and know their potential liability arising from them.

A huge company like Apple certainly can afford to have departments/firms devoted to managing their patent portfolio and their potential patent liabilities. But to be honest Apple probably don't worry too much about infringing, they build what they need and can afford to pay settlements like this if they - knowingly or unknowingly - infringe on others' patents.

For smaller companies, it's much scarier. They could be put out of business by a single lawsuit from a company they've never heard of because of a patent they never knew of, because they're not patent experts and don't have the resources to hire people who are.

It introduces massive uncertainty and unknowns into running virtually any business. I'm surprised investors aren't far more spooked by it, they tend to hate uncertainty.
 
Nah, it's fairly easy to comment.

If this were a company like Samsung, that actually produces a product and contributes to the economy, that would be one thing. The case might have some merit. But these patent trolls are not.

They produce nothing; all they do is acquire obscure patent portfolios from failing companies, then hire lawyers to look over them to try to find patents that might be violated by huge companies with lots of money, like Apple. Then they sue those companies and try to get damages or settlements.

These patent troll companies are a leech on this industry, and this practice needs to be shut down. Just because something is *legal* doesn't mean it should be allowed. Insider trading was once legal; do you think it should have continued to be permitted?



I agree that these, so eloquently put by poster Robert.Walter, Extortionary Trolls are a blight on society. When a company exists solely to extort money through licensing or litigation, they bring no value to the equation. That's why it's so hard for me to have sympathy for Apple in this particular situation. Because based on what I bolded from your quote, Apple was just as guilty of this behavior as Smartflash.

1. Acquire patents from a failing or failed company - Nortel
2. Form a company that produces nothing - Rockstar Consortium
3. Sue large company for settlement or damages - Google & Samsung
4. File suit in patent holder friendly jurisdiction - Filed in East Texas

They've since backed away and divested themselves from Rockstar, but not before taking choice patents as a door prize. That doesn't change the fact they joined a group that spent $4.5 billion to do exactly what Smartflash is accused of doing. It's sort of hard to complain about patent trolls when you were recently one as well.

FYI - insider trading is both legal and illegal. http://www.sec.gov/answers/insider.htm
 
Last edited:
This system is so funny, it actually wants patent trolls to exist and thrive.

If an entity does zero application of a patent, has not even filed the patent in the first place, probably bought the patent from another entity, which bought from another... and is then given 'damages' because some other entity fleshed out & practically applied the patent (which was a piece of paper idea all this time), then boy, every possible future invention is in patent violation of any comic which may predict it!

Why not, the comic practically outlined the idea! Oh, but it has to be 'patented' (a ridiculous admission of legality by governments which barely understand the depth at which patents should even be awarded) to be used in courts for sue-ability.

I like startups nowadays which are so quickly innovating new ideas that they are too busy to be filing patents for every damn possibility of their ideas.
 
How I understood Apple's statement:

"(Company X) makes no products, has no employees, creates no jobs, has no U.S. presence, and is exploiting our patent system to seek royalties for technology (company Y) invented,”

It's like saying Inventor Y thinks that he can use the USPTO-patent protected inventions of InventorX for free just because Inventor X doesn't have a manufacturing arm or isn't US-based.

Until this is the basis on which a patent is awarded, it can't and shouldn't be the basis on which a patent is disputed.

Apple's PR statement makes it look bad.


Several companies make software products. Trolls like this patent different possible ways to accomplish features that exist in those products with the idea that eventually one of the products will use one of their patented methods. If you understand anything about software development, you would understand why it is so outrageous that this is allowed. You have to understand, there is virtually no software programming solution to problems like the ones patented that haven't already been figured out and used many times over. The idea that you could patent such a thing is beyond absurd. To continually allow this would make it virtually impossible to even create software in the future. The fact that Apple, Samsung and Google are on the same side of this should tell you something. This has nothing to do with Apple hate or fandom. It is a potentially crippling issue that is being decided by people who don't know enough to realize how wrong it is.
 
The patent system needs a rework.

There's a simple solution - in order to hold a patent, you must be actively developing, producing, selling and/or marketing a product which uses your technology. The idea of "licensing" patents should be gone too. it's your idea, use it, or lose it.

So little guys deserve no protection?
You have the best idea but lack the resources to make it happen so you simply lose out?
That is a horrible solution.
 
Funny, Apple whining about someone suing it for using technology it invented.... Yea right.

Apparently Apple didnt invent the technology...This other firm was issued the patent for it. Seems they were first, or the company that they obtained the patent from was first. Apple's just mad that they got caught and their army of millionaire lawyers couldnt find a way to get them off the hook. Pay up.

Maybe they can do what samsung did, pay in nickels.

The company that was awarded has no product, makes no products, sells no products. Why do you stand so firmly on your belief that Apple had stolen this technology when all you have available to you for your research is superficial hear say?
 
Wow, what a spunky little company….. going after ALL the big boys including Apple, Samsung, Google and Amazon. :D

The way the court system works, it's not a true David vs Goliath.... so it's not 'spunky' at all.

The Davids of the world can sue a Goliath for millions for no cause at all. Since it's so costly to defend a lawsuit, the Goliaths usually settle instead of paying lawyers for years. It's CHEAPER to settle.

Well, the lawyers LOOK for the Davids of the world to get easy money because they know how things work. More settlements = more money.

Something has to change with the court system for this to be fixed. But it's not 'spunky' at all - it's harmful to everyone BUT the lawyers involved. Every product you buy is more expensive now because it has some part of it going to cheats like these Davids.

Some Davids might be legit, and maybe that was the reasoning at first. But it's really gotten out of hand. Wait until you invent something successful, totally by yourself, then some stranger who has no part of your success tries to take a huge portion of what YOU earned. Then you'll sing a different tune.
 
So little guys deserve no protection?
You have the best idea but lack the resources to make it happen so you simply lose out?
That is a horrible solution.

If this "little guy" company had actually made the technology and used the technology, then sure. In this case, the two companies that did, were dismissed and all that was left was the patent troll.
 
So little guys deserve no protection?
You have the best idea but lack the resources to make it happen so you simply lose out?
That is a horrible solution.

Yes, the true little guys deserve protection.

But it's gotten way out of hand now where people are taking ADVANTAGE of this.
 
Frankly, I don't understand the meme of patent troll, and why anybody who invents, patents, and defends their patents is automatically labeled troll for doing this if they are not a big name company.

Likewise, companies that buy and exploit patents for their economic potential, why are these labelled trolls? It's like those accused of infringement wave the troll card in an attempt to create a different class of patent holder, one not entitled to gain economic benefit from their IP nor be allowed to defend it.

If the idea of Intellectual Property is to have any value, and the process of protecting it, i.e. by patenting and defending it, and the process of it being portable through sale, assignment, or licensing, just like any other property is to have any meaning, we have to stop waving the troll flag any time the owner of a patent wants to assert the right to defend said patent when it feels that patent is being infringed.

To continue to say troll this and troll that and "it's a troll just because they are a foreigner, or don't manufacture, or don't create US jobs"*, is just stupid and undermines the whole idea of what a patented invention is.

* none of which are the basis of a patent award or the holder's right to defend.


If you have read people's explanations of why they are called trolls, how could you possibly not understand. Where did they say it was because they are a foreigner or don't create US jobs? That's absurd. They are trolls because they patent or purchase the patent something that they don't use with the sole purpose of catching someone else using it to extort money from it. In the case of these software patents, they are so generic and give them patent protection over "inventions" that have been used by programmers all over the world before there even was a patent on it. The system is beyond absurd and you will notice that anyone with a software development background is completely outraged by it because of this. If you understood what was actually going on you would be outraged too and completely understand why they are called trolls. It's not an Apple thing, it's a consumer thing.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.