If you're an Apple customer, you're paying either way.Exactly this. Apple doesn’t pay for anything. People buying Apple products pay for it.
You’re not wrong. My point was that people will get satisfaction that big bad Apple gets punished not realizing they’re the one being punished when they buy Apple products. It’s not like Tim Apple has to pay out of his own money.If you're an Apple customer, you're paying either way.
Do you think that Apple is going to raise the price of their iPhones because they lost a lawsuit?You’re not wrong. My point was that people will get satisfaction that big bad Apple gets punished not realizing they’re the one being punished when they buy Apple products. It’s not like Tim Apple has to pay out of his own money.
Sure. But it wouldn't make much of a difference in this case if one of those duplicate patents wasn't held by Apple, now would it?The real question is how many duplicate patents for the same thing exist ? Then they can sue each other to see who has the "valid" one.
Apple could choose to join such a patent pool. But in doing so, they would have to share their own IP as well. Something tells me Apple would rather take the "let's steal what we can and pay them off if we get caught" approach than the one where they have to actually, you know, contribute to the industry.Also, there is supposed to be a patent pool for this stuff where everyone basically joins the group, puts their patents into the group and agrees not to sue each other because typically there is only one really good solution to a problem, and a bunch of less than optimum ones...
It’s not just about the price of the iPhone. There are all kinds of ways they could compensate for this. They could cut costs on Apple services or even the components in the iPhone. It’s just a fact that the money Apple has is from Apple customers.Do you think that Apple is going to raise the price of their iPhones because they lost a lawsuit?
could be basis to invalidate patent, especially if other patent is dated even one day before.Sure. But it wouldn't make much of a difference in this case if one of those duplicate patents wasn't held by Apple, now would it?
Apple could choose to join such a patent pool. But in doing so, they would have to share their own IP as well. Something tells me Apple would rather take the "let's steal what we can and pay them off if we get caught" approach than the one where they have to actually, you know, contribute to the industry.
People who pull the whole "us customers are going to pay for it" schtick assume one (or both) of two things:It’s not just about the price of the iPhone. There are all kinds of ways they could compensate for this. They could cut costs on Apple services or even the components in the iPhone. It’s just a fact that the money Apple has is from Apple customers.
As the article points out and other users have reminded us companies get sued over patent infringement all the time. Why have you singled out Apple as the only company that gets accused of patent infringement and is the only company that is guilty of such actions. Why do you hate the company so much?Apple's motto: "violate first, answer questions later" and their strategy is making a calculated guess on what it will cost them to violate the patent vs how much more they'll make with that technology incorporated in their products.
US patent law is even more screwed up. if you *knowingly* infringe a patent its triple damages. therefore the system reward is to create soemting, take your chances, don't do the research on prior patents because its simply cheaper even if you do get caught.As the article points out and other users have reminded us companies get sued over patent infringement all the time. Why have you singled out Apple as the only company that gets accused of patent infringement and is the only company that is guilty of such actions. Why do you hate the company so much?
That’s why the calculated royalties are ”only” for 443 million devices which is the device base (iPhones and iPads) back then that used 3G.maybe. just that the MR article as well as the Reuters article have basically no detail.
A Delaware federal jury
That's pretty much it.
And again - how long is LG out of the handset business? 3G was "created" well over a decade ago ...
Right. Because there is no litigation for a zillion of patents originated from US companies.Coming from the EU, figures
They also sued at least Vodafone and Huawei, in the UK.3G technology is like, what, 15 years + old?
And why sue US carriers?
And why sue LG and Samsung and not Motorola, Nokia, Huawei just to name a few.
These does have a smell of patent troll, at least with the little info provided here
Here in the UK (and in other countries) there are plans in place to switch off 3G networks in the next few years. Then it will be time for Apple to remove the 3G bits from their devices sold in those markets. Then this NPE can go sing for their money. As other posts say, this has been done for years. All this NPE did (AFAIK) was to take that idea and add 'on a 3G cellular network' and file the patent. (or something like that).3G technology is like, what, 15 years + old?
And why sue US carriers?
And why sue LG and Samsung and not Motorola, Nokia, Huawei just to name a few.
These does have a smell of patent troll, at least with the little info provided here
Here in the UK (and in other countries) there are plans in place to switch off 3G networks in the next few years. Then it will be time for Apple to remove the 3G bits from their devices sold in those markets. Then this NPE can go sing for their money. As other posts say, this has been done for years. All this NPE did (AFAIK) was to take that idea and add 'on a 3G cellular network' and file the patent. (or something like that).
Adding 'on a network' or phrases like it to a patent application has been going on since the late 1980's to my knowledge.
This can only happen when companies have a monopoly...If you're an Apple customer, you're paying either way.
And without these lawsuits, Apple will just increase prices because they can.with all these lawsuits Apple will just increase prices to cover up for lawyer costs.