Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Ordered to Pay University of Wisconsin $234 Million in A7/A8 Patent Lawsuit
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The system exists as it is because of the Bayh-Dole Act. Before Bayh-Dole, inventions created at Universities usually sat dormant, because neither the university nor the government had the incentive or ability to make/use/sell the inventions. Since then, it has led to I would guess thousands of patents being licensed to companies and actually brought to the public, and billions of dollars in licensing revenue being used to support further research at universities and other non-profits. Making federally-funded inventions part of the public domain doesn't make sense because it would unfairly benefit a small number of entities who have the resources to exploit the patent. You and I pay a higher tax rate than Apple/Google/Microsoft/etc, and they would be the ones getting a free ride when they use this patent.
You can't honestly believe that the price of a typical phone is primarily due to license fees that Apple pays to universities.
It seems that you do not have a very clear (or correct) idea of how U.S. universities operate. First, many of the foremost universities are private institutions, who receive federal and other grants for performing specific research projects. However, these grants explicitly do not "fund much of their operations." Secondly, unlike what you write, these universities do not "take in state tax payer money." Thirdly, "you go to school for the education" completely overlooks what fraction of research is done by graduate students, who spend part of their time on education and part of their time on research.
Speaking of nonsensical... You do realize there will ALWAYS be a 1%. Your comments make it very very clear you are one that feels entitled. This is the problem!
Oh everyone is clear on how universities operate. They overcharge poor sap parents so their kid gets a sheet of paper that proves....umm...... That the kid could pass some tests and finish homework. They also milk the loan system, get massive tax breaks, enormous amounts of donations and free stuff. Their operating costs are extremely low yet they charge as if the operating costs are high. The tuition rates have climbed WAY faster than the rate of inflation. The explanation? Just another giant cash grab. It is what it is. I wish I could buy stock in colleges. I'd be a trillionaire.
Otherwise, yeah, great.
According to laws of supply and demand, if the demand was not there, prices would fall. But, they don't. Why is that? Because you are earning much more than a piece of paper. That "piece of paper" is the full backing of a major institution and tells all employers that you have a certifiable set of fundamental skills and methods. In institutions with high pedigree, that "piece of paper" carries a lot of weight, because it means you are associated with an institution with high honors, high standards, and high respect - it states they are willing to vouch for you and back you up. "Yes, this student studied under us and we feel confident enough in their abilities that we gave them a degree stating such confidence"
Would you knowingly go in for open heart surgery if you found out your surgeon was not a board certified MD? Probably not. That "piece of paper" is your credentials - it is not a statement that some kid could pass some tests and finish homework.
You understand that public Universities are an extension of the state government? They do not milk the loan system - they have nothing to do with it. They get tax breaks, because they are part of the education system. The donations and free stuff is really just advertising for the companies participating.
What is a better way to get your product known and out there than getting the up and coming new talent to use your equipment? It is the same reason why Adobe never prosecuted anyone for stealing Photoshop: it is the best form of advertising. Get 'em hooked when they're young, then when they are older and in the work force, guess whose products they buy?
Their operating costs are NOT low in any way, shape or form. Do you have any idea how much it costs to staff a department, buy laboratory equipment, maintain equipment, etc.? It is enormously expensive. Most universities have a much tighter budget than you realize. If you want to produce students with top tier intellects and education (further enhancing your credibility and pedigree, which is a positive feedback loop), you have to recruit from the best and make as big of investments in them as you can.
The tuition rates have climbed WAY faster than the rate of inflation. The explanation? Just another giant cash grab. It is what it is. I wish I could buy stock in colleges. I'd be a trillionaire.
Otherwise, yeah, great.
You mean the cash grab that goes into funding new education programs, laboratory equipment, scholarships, building maintenance, structures, paying for top talent and teachers, etc.? The resources at any University are impressive - that's what they're there for: to cultivate and grow knowledge, talent, and to educate the future leaders of society. There is nothing else like it on planet Earth.
Please stop mis-stating information. It might seem unfair from your perspective, but if you bothered to do due diligence and perform elementary research, you would quickly revise your thoughts.
obviously expanding on the thought and point is proving a bit harder than just speaking bumper sticker rhetoric.
i never said anything about there not being a 1% or any other %. i dont know where you get that idea. the gap between that 1% and the rest is not an absolute and follows no natural law.
ill give you another chance to actually answer the questions.
i didnt even mention myself or my situation (which you do not know about) so im perplexed how you formed an opinion about my entitlement.
Exactly I have been thinking the same! Patent trolls are slowing down the evolution of the technology especially when we are still around!
That still does not mean the amount of the judgment is correct. Reducing the judgment is often the goal of the appeal. Additionally, initiating an appeal is often the first step toward negotiating a settlement that is less than the award.
This is wrong on so many levels. Patents are designed to reward innovation, not protect products, or prevent copying. The charter of a research university is to create ideas-- "innovation"-- without building products. Universities license the results of their research to all comers, which improves the capability of products from multiple manufacturers, which is a wider benefit to society than if just one company developed proprietary technology and kept it to themselves.
In your world, patent licensing makes no sense, other than cross-licensing between competitors
(horse trading). There's no room for someone to innovate and then license their technology. Basically, research universities would be forced to live 100% on grants and subsidies, or cease to exist. It also would reduce the entry of new small competitors into any market, as the only licensable technology available would be from companies already building products (new companies have few resources available to develop a wide range of patentable technologies, so they are dependent on licensing). In your world, patents would discourage new entrants, which would suck for consumers.
Your thoughts are spot on. Apple's appeal is likely to be the first step in negotiating a settlement.
So if I understand correctly, if a 3rd party patents something- a computing process I don't understand- and sues Apple, it's so obvious as to not deserve patent protection. If Apple designs a phone with rounded corners (and patents rounded corners), and another phone manufacturer has the temerity to also design a phone with rounded corners, then Apple has a valid claim for their very unique design that nobody could have ever come up with.
Right.
Right.
If it's anything like my university, it will be more like a new $100 Million fitness building. Then, top it all off, tuition at University of Wisconsin will increase by 10% to pay the yearly operational cost for the fancy new building.Free tuition for all!
Last edited:
Hardly. Ask any public agency how often it gets sued. For a city, all it takes is someone tripping on the sidewalk.
Not defending Apple, but when you're a large entity and the public thinks you have endless pits of money then expect to be sued all the time.
As I noted, the jury gave WARF about $1.60 per CPU (~50% of what they asked for), versus the $0.07 that Intel supposedly paid. (Granted, the Intel payment was for billions of devices, so think of it as a quantity discount. Moreover, from what I can tell, Intel apparently stopped using the patented method after the trial, and came up with their own.)
I think one of the reasons for the larger reward was because WARF's lawyers accused Apple of deliberately copying their method.
Another reason is that an expert claimed the patent gave up to a ~9% speed increase, which makes the patent pretty critical.
Perhaps the most important reason is because the judge refused the Apple lawyers' motion to ban WARF's lawyers from talking about how much Apple wanted (and got) from Samsung for their own patents.
It was pretty hard for Apple's lawyers to claim that such a CPU patent was not worth much, when Apple itself had claimed that each of their far less critical patents like slide-to-unlock were worth ~$4 a unit... and Apple was awarded 50% of what they asked.
I think one of the reasons for the larger reward was because WARF's lawyers accused Apple of deliberately copying their method.
Another reason is that an expert claimed the patent gave up to a ~9% speed increase, which makes the patent pretty critical.
Perhaps the most important reason is because the judge refused the Apple lawyers' motion to ban WARF's lawyers from talking about how much Apple wanted (and got) from Samsung for their own patents.
It was pretty hard for Apple's lawyers to claim that such a CPU patent was not worth much, when Apple itself had claimed that each of their far less critical patents like slide-to-unlock were worth ~$4 a unit... and Apple was awarded 50% of what they asked.
Last edited:
Same here for my graduate degree but I owed for my undergraduate degree. I have no problem with the university I went to using the results of my research as the core of a new class and and for some of my other research used as the basis of a patent but it did always peeve me that a professor claimed inventing a new math method I invented as an answer on a final exam especially as the professor marked me down on the exam for my answer. But that was 30 years ago and that professor is probably either dead or senile by now.
Yeah a lot of stuff like that happens. We had a class project where each individual needed to write computer code for some complicated heat transfer problem. I compiled mine and handed in the working binary. The professor demanded the source code because he was publishing a paper based on our work and taking all the credit.
I had another professor approach me to do a published work togther. The deal was that I'd do all the math and computer modeling, basically produce all of the results. The he'd write the paper and publish it. The ******* did this, but he also added his PhD student to the work. That guy didn't even proof read it to my knowledge. I was also listed third. Universities can suck in these ways.
To the credit of the professor in the patent example of mine, it was a joint effort among a small group consisting of the business funding the research, the professor, several graduate students conducting the experiments and when all that was done, me developing the theoretical equations on how it all worked. Without my knowledge, the professor wrote a research paper on it years later and included my name on it which I thought was great. He even corrected a boundary condition in my theory which in looking at it now I slap my forehead and go 'Duh!"
The other professor who ripped off my optimization method... well, I don't have anything good to say about him.
Here's one take on it:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/24/o...-left-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-left-region
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/24/o...-left-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-left-region