Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Pays $25 Million in Settlement Over Cover Flow, Time Machine Patents

grahamperrin said:
It has not completely disappeared but (comparing Yosemite to Mavericks) the flattening was so severe, for applications such as Finder, that some customers will treat the essence of Cover Flow as gone.
Click to expand...

The button for it is in exactly the same place in El Capitan as it was in Mavericks...
 
MalcolmTucker said:
So people in education shouldnt be allowed to invent ideas to make money. I see your perspective.
Click to expand...

Clearly you didn't bother reading the article or any of my previous posts before making this absurd comment.

Network-1 is NOT "in education." They acquired patents from some really smart guys who WERE academics.

And, I clearly said that they're entitled to sue for damages if Apple or anybody else infringed on the patents which they legally own. I just don't respect companies (including Apple, if they do or were to start doing it) who hoard patents for the sole purpose of suing for infringement.

Is it legal? Absolutely. Is it ethical, IMO, no, it isn't.
[doublepost=1468274383][/doublepost]
Undivided1 said:
So, if i have a great idea that I protect with a patent, (because you know, thats what a patent is supposed to do), but I dont have the capital to put my idea into production, anyone who can see my patent can just steal my idea, because my idea is not in production? Is that your stance......really?
Click to expand...

For the love...

I wish reading and comprehension were requirements before being able to post.

Where did I say that people with patents don't have rights? My gripe has absolutely nothing to do with the guys who created the patent.

What I have a problem with is companies like Network-1 who acquire other companies for the sole purpose of suing for infringement, whether actual or perceived.

I respect their right to enforce the patent they own. I don't respect their business model. Is that plain enough for you to understand?
[doublepost=1468275011][/doublepost]
akash.nu said:
It's not a business model. It's protecting copyrights.
Click to expand...

Directly from their website:

"Network-1 is focused on the acquisition, development, licensing and general enforcement of its intellectual property portfolio. We identify and acquire intellectual property from companies and inventors and implement industry-wide licensing programs on reasonable terms to enable widespread adoption. In this manner, Network-1 is able to maximize the value of the technologies and generate returns for the inventor's research and development investments.."

Now do you understand what their business model is?
 
I just read a better summary of this story at Arstechnica. Apple basically stole the idea.

Steve Jobs told his employees to check out the idea cause Apple might want to license it. Later Apple didn't license it but still used the idea
 
  • Like
Reactions: grahamperrin
grahamperrin said:
The change was to Cover Flow; not to the button.
Click to expand...

Well neither have changed, cover flow, the button placement, the way you access it, the way it works - it's exactly the same in every version of OS X since it was first introduced.
 
Cartoonkid said:
And, I clearly said that they're entitled to sue for damages if Apple or anybody else infringed on the patents which they legally own. I just don't respect companies (including Apple, if they do or were to start doing it) who hoard patents for the sole purpose of suing for infringement.
Click to expand...

And indeed, Apple was part of a consortium which spent billions to buy thousands of Nortel patents, and then later transferred them to a patent holding company that the consortium created expressly to look for infringement.

Even if they had kept the patents themselves, few people thought that it would be for defensive purposes only; not with Apple's history of using patents to try to slow down their competition.

What I have a problem with is companies like Network-1 who acquire other companies for the sole purpose of suing for infringement, whether actual or perceived.
Click to expand...

Such companies don't acquire patents with the sole purpose of suing, of course.

The primary purpose is to get others to license the patents. It's only after they refuse, that a lawsuit comes into play.

In Apple's case (and possibly others), this is almost always going to happen. Apple is said to ignore licensing requests UNTIL a lawsuit is brought. Then they can bring their lawyers in to try to prove it's invalid, or not infringed. So, in most cases it makes more sense for Apple to wait and then fight.

But that's why we see so many lawsuits against Apple. It's simply the normal result of the way Apple operates. Heck, look at the way they delayed paying known valid Nokia and Ericsson patents for years until finally sued. It's all a legal game on both sides.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: rjohnstone
Angus576 said:
Why don't companies like Apple, Microsoft, Google, etc... just purchase companies like this in the first place. Instead Patent trolls buy up these companies and patents for nearly nothing with the sole purpose of suing Companies like Apple. They have no intention of making a product that uses the patent and don't even have people working there with the knowledge of how to use the patent.
Click to expand...

Sorry, late replying. Going backwards:

Of course they have people who understand the patents; that's why they bought the rights.

You don't have to intend to make a product to own a patent. Apple has thousands of unused patents, for example.

These companies don't buy the rights "just to sue". They buy the IP to make money licensing it. They only have to sue e.g. Apple because Apple has a policy of not paying unless sued.

--

And finally, to answer your question, Apple and others do use an anti-patent troll weapon quite a lot, which is the recent (2012) ability to file a challenge with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).

In fact, Apple files more patent challenges than any other company. A report in early 2016 noted that Apple had filed over 250 such challenges since 2012, which is a hundred more than the next most prolific filer Samsung. After that comes LG, Google and Microsoft.

It's not uncommon for these companies to all file against the same patents owned by a "troll" who's trying to get them to pay a license.

So yep, they're kind of working "together".
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: rjohnstone
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back