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 Steps Up in Lodsys Lawsuits, Files Motion to Intervene
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
not a chance
Not a chance once Apple is in it's all over. Lodsys doesn't have the resources to fight Apple especially since they also have to fight another group in NY that has challenged their patents after they sent letters to the wrong companies. This wont make it to court. Apple can and will bankrupt Lodsys in a few months of filings and motions easily. The troll woke up a dragon and will be eaten.
Lodsys is dead they cant even give up and go home now if they do Apple will sue to establish it's rights and Lodsys will cease to exist buried under the legal burden.
Not a chance once Apple is in it's all over. Lodsys doesn't have the resources to fight Apple especially since they also have to fight another group in NY that has challenged their patents after they sent letters to the wrong companies. This wont make it to court. Apple can and will bankrupt Lodsys in a few months of filings and motions easily. The troll woke up a dragon and will be eaten.
Lodsys is dead they cant even give up and go home now if they do Apple will sue to establish it's rights and Lodsys will cease to exist buried under the legal burden.
Some people sure like living with their heads in the cloud. Lodsys is getting licensing money from the likes of Apple, Microsoft and Google. If anything, Apple is paying for Lodsys' efforts in this case through their licensing of their patent.
This isn't going to be an easy fight for either party and both will stick through it.
You mean the 0.5% this would cost them extra ? Where's the other 29.5% going then ?
Wow, lawyers must be cheap in Canada!
Ms m.o.
Ala - IBM & OS/2, Sybase and SQL Server, etc.
Thus the phrase was coined "Good programmers write great code. Great programmers steal it."
I can't believe Microsoft was able to repeat this pattern of theft, they went for the cookie jar one too many times and got caught red-handed. While not a fanboy, I have to give Apple credit for innovation, creativity and above all else standing up for developers in the market they created.
Ala - IBM & OS/2, Sybase and SQL Server, etc.
Thus the phrase was coined "Good programmers write great code. Great programmers steal it."
I can't believe Microsoft was able to repeat this pattern of theft, they went for the cookie jar one too many times and got caught red-handed. While not a fanboy, I have to give Apple credit for innovation, creativity and above all else standing up for developers in the market they created.
A lot of people here have absolutely no fundamental understanding of the nature of civil/business law and proceedings. More than that a lot of people here have no basis in reality and actually associate companies as being living entities that you can love and care for and will love and care for you. That to me even as a business owner is very frightening.
There is only one thing fundamentally obvious about this case: the patents are garbage and pertain to the vast majority of our online or disconnected world. That is the fundamental reason the Foresee case in Illinois and the power player law firm behind the Declaratory Judgment filing will succeed.
You should all be thanking, Foresee, Best Buy, Adidas and a host of other parties that have been initiating filings over the tenure of these suits to have these patents declared invalid.
Apple is last in line here and simply filed a motion to intervene. Apple waited they sat on their hands before typing a strongly worded letter when they should have filed a motion for Declaratory Judgment and a change of venue.
"Oh, but they had to wait and research the facts!" Freaking nonsense! It would take any undergraduate engineer let alone anyone with a college education to come to the conclusion that these patents are at the extreme of, "broad based" and therefore technically invalid. This isn't a patent for an invention it's a patent for an idea.
You want to know why they were last to the plate? You want to know why Google hasn't stepped up to the plate? You want to know why Microsoft hasn't stepped up to the plate? Because they are the idiots that licensed the damn patents to begin with and perpetuated all this nonsense! You want to know why they did that? Because the previous owner of the patents was an inside player in the tech world and they were supporting one of their own.
How about some accountability for companies prolonging the life of baseless patents by simply licensing in bulk and not investigating the nature of what they are licensing to begin with???
A lot of you (not all there are some developers here) have absolutely no idea how much this nonsense has slowed down contract development for general use apps and enterprise apps. That's why Apple is involved - they are already losing money - not because they love and care about you!
Newsflash: a corporate entity cannot love and care about you it's not alive!!!
There is only one thing fundamentally obvious about this case: the patents are garbage and pertain to the vast majority of our online or disconnected world. That is the fundamental reason the Foresee case in Illinois and the power player law firm behind the Declaratory Judgment filing will succeed.
You should all be thanking, Foresee, Best Buy, Adidas and a host of other parties that have been initiating filings over the tenure of these suits to have these patents declared invalid.
Apple is last in line here and simply filed a motion to intervene. Apple waited they sat on their hands before typing a strongly worded letter when they should have filed a motion for Declaratory Judgment and a change of venue.
"Oh, but they had to wait and research the facts!" Freaking nonsense! It would take any undergraduate engineer let alone anyone with a college education to come to the conclusion that these patents are at the extreme of, "broad based" and therefore technically invalid. This isn't a patent for an invention it's a patent for an idea.
You want to know why they were last to the plate? You want to know why Google hasn't stepped up to the plate? You want to know why Microsoft hasn't stepped up to the plate? Because they are the idiots that licensed the damn patents to begin with and perpetuated all this nonsense! You want to know why they did that? Because the previous owner of the patents was an inside player in the tech world and they were supporting one of their own.
How about some accountability for companies prolonging the life of baseless patents by simply licensing in bulk and not investigating the nature of what they are licensing to begin with???
A lot of you (not all there are some developers here) have absolutely no idea how much this nonsense has slowed down contract development for general use apps and enterprise apps. That's why Apple is involved - they are already losing money - not because they love and care about you!
Newsflash: a corporate entity cannot love and care about you it's not alive!!!
Sorry no. Apple has never paid Lodsys a cent! Apple licensed from the previous owner of the patents. Lodsys has very few actual "Sales" and as far as anyone can tell is composed of one lawyer who bought 4 old mostly worthless patents and decided to go trolling. Apple can beat this guy bloody with legal costs and wait for him to bleed to death. How many years can they exist with no income? At this point nobody will pay till after Apple's suit is decided and that suit will be put on hold until the suits to invalidate their patents are decided. Die quick or die slow Lodsys cant survive long enough to ever win.
You usually pay better attention. Apple licensed the patents from an earlier holder. Apple has not paid Lodsys for them.
Are you that crazy?
Do you really think a patent license works the same way as you buying a coffee pot from Sears? Do you not understand that it's more than likely a perpetuating license with perpetuating income over the life of the license and that Lodsys more than likely has a mighty war chest from it?
Do you understand how much it takes in legal fees to get into a patent dispute?
It's one thing to support one side (and if you do it should be the developers) over another, but posting pure conjecture about something you know zilch about - the licensing of these patents - is bordering on insanity.
I had this in mind personally, but hey
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NiENHeSoA1I&feature=player_detailpage#t=35s
Are you that crazy?
Do you really think a patent license works the same way as you buying a coffee pot from Sears? Do you not understand that it's more than likely a perpetuating license with perpetuating income over the life of the license and that Lodsys more than likely has a mighty war chest from it?
Please. Reality check. Apple bought this license as a part of a package deal, and they didn't buy the license from Lodsys, but from the previous owner. Lodsys has not and will never, ever receive one penny of fees for this license from Apple. And Lodsys has just been sued by Adidas, Best Buy, and WE Energies over exactly the same patent, which will hopefully put a bit of drain onto their "mighty" war chest that doesn't contain any money from Apple. These three and other companies are asking for a declaratory judgement against Lodsys.
Just found this funny bit of information:
One employee! There is also a nice analysis here: http://www.applepatent.com/2011/06/lodsys-anatomy-of-********-claim-chart.html Anatomy of ******** claim! And it seems that all employees of the company are on MacRumors and have voted me down!
Last edited:
First, Lodsys may be getting money from licensing of the patent, they might not be. We don't know. Apple could have paid an upfront fee for the patent (which did not go to Lodsys), or they are paying per unit sold.
Second, lawyers don't cost anything if you are a sole proprietor of a company and you are also a lawyer. This seems to be the case for Lodsys. This one person company can file and fight court cases for relatively nothing. He is wealthy right now, and is using his scheme here to try to become extremely wealthy.
Buying him out is EXACTLY what he wants. This one of the main problems with our legal system in the United States.
He is trying to sue the little guy because the little guy doesn't have lawyers. This is just like the MPAA suing individual people for pirating - it's too costly for the average person to fight these lawsuits.
Read the filings! The owner of Lodsys is not representing himself.
Who on earth even claimed that? Mark Small is not representing himself - once again a case of things being posted as fact in this forum when they could not be further from the truth.
Lodsys is being represented by one: Mike Goldfarb from the firm: Kelley Donion Gill Huck Goldfarb whose base of operations is out of Seattle Washington.
Reality check - fact check before posting falsehoods.
Added: Mr. Small of Lodsys is also being represented at times by one: William E. Davis III of: The Davis Firm, P.C. whose speciality is IP law.
I'm wrong. I didn't read the filings.
But my gut instinct because of the wordings of the his emails, and the way he is going about this, is that Mark Small is just trying to make it rich, and is only able to do this because he either (a) knows the lawyers, and they will work for him cheaper than normal - maybe because the payoff is so big if they win or (b) he has enough money to fight big companies like Apple, Google, Microsoft, and he thinks he can win, or (c) he's nuts
Facts!
The original inventor:
Daniel H. Abelow (Whose most recent patent filing is also nonsense if you look it up http://www.faqs.org/patents/app/20100070345 )
Who they were sold to:
Intellectual Ventures
Who founded Intellectual Ventures?
Nathan Myhrvold founded Intellectual Ventures after retiring from his position as chief strategist and chief technology officer of Microsoft Corporation.
http://www.intellectualventures.com/WhoWeAre/OurTeam/Bio/Nathan_Myhrvold.aspx
Who they were sold to after Intellectual Ventures?
Mark Small of Lodsys LLC
Who is Mr. Small from his Linkedin Profile:
CEO Lodsys LLC Information Technology and Services industry February 2011 Present (4 months)
Strategic Advisor Independent Management Consulting industry September 2010 Present (9 months)...
VP, Enterprise Sales North America Websense, Inc Public Company; WBSN; Computer Software industry October 2006 July 2010 (3 years 10 months)
Responsible for North American Enterprise Sales organization
VP of Sales, Americas Code Green Networks, Inc. Privately Held; 201-500 employees; Computer & Network Security industry December 2005 September 2006 (10 months)
Senior Vice President, Sales McAfee Public Company; MFE; Computer & Network Security industry October 1998 November 2005 (7 years 2 months)...
Education
University of California, Davis BA, Political Science, International Relations 1974 1979"
The case that deals with Apple Developers:
RFC Case Number: P-L11-272C
Court Case Number: 2:11-cv-00272-TJW
File Date: Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Plaintiff: Lodsys, LLC
Plaintiff Counsel: William E. Davis III of The Davis Firm PC
Christopher M. Huck, Michael A. Goldfarb of Kelley
Donion Gill Huck & Goldfarb PLLC
Defendant: Combay, Inc.
Iconfactory, Inc.
Illusion Labs AB
Michael G. Karr d/b/a Shovelmate
Quickoffice, Inc.
Richard Shinderman
Wulven Game Studios
Cause: 35:271 Patent Infringement
Court: Texas Eastern District Court
Judge: Judge T. John Ward
So before posting a retort you might want to...just maybe... research what you are even posting about.
The original inventor:
Daniel H. Abelow (Whose most recent patent filing is also nonsense if you look it up http://www.faqs.org/patents/app/20100070345 )
Who they were sold to:
Intellectual Ventures
Who founded Intellectual Ventures?
Nathan Myhrvold founded Intellectual Ventures after retiring from his position as chief strategist and chief technology officer of Microsoft Corporation.
http://www.intellectualventures.com/WhoWeAre/OurTeam/Bio/Nathan_Myhrvold.aspx
Who they were sold to after Intellectual Ventures?
Mark Small of Lodsys LLC
Who is Mr. Small from his Linkedin Profile:
CEO Lodsys LLC Information Technology and Services industry February 2011 Present (4 months)
Strategic Advisor Independent Management Consulting industry September 2010 Present (9 months)...
VP, Enterprise Sales North America Websense, Inc Public Company; WBSN; Computer Software industry October 2006 July 2010 (3 years 10 months)
Responsible for North American Enterprise Sales organization
VP of Sales, Americas Code Green Networks, Inc. Privately Held; 201-500 employees; Computer & Network Security industry December 2005 September 2006 (10 months)
Senior Vice President, Sales McAfee Public Company; MFE; Computer & Network Security industry October 1998 November 2005 (7 years 2 months)...
Education
University of California, Davis BA, Political Science, International Relations 1974 1979"
The case that deals with Apple Developers:
RFC Case Number: P-L11-272C
Court Case Number: 2:11-cv-00272-TJW
File Date: Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Plaintiff: Lodsys, LLC
Plaintiff Counsel: William E. Davis III of The Davis Firm PC
Christopher M. Huck, Michael A. Goldfarb of Kelley
Donion Gill Huck & Goldfarb PLLC
Defendant: Combay, Inc.
Iconfactory, Inc.
Illusion Labs AB
Michael G. Karr d/b/a Shovelmate
Quickoffice, Inc.
Richard Shinderman
Wulven Game Studios
Cause: 35:271 Patent Infringement
Court: Texas Eastern District Court
Judge: Judge T. John Ward
So before posting a retort you might want to...just maybe... research what you are even posting about.
I won't comment on this case in particular, because I haven't researched it.
It is common practice though for the Law Firms running these cases to take a large percentage of the licensing revenue instead of billing a flat rate for services. The Patent owner seldom needs to take all the risk or pay for the entire legal bill.
As long as the risk/reward ratio makes sense, Patent owners can usually find a firm to represent them. Of course the owner of the patent only gets a fraction of the settlement in these cases.
It is common practice though for the Law Firms running these cases to take a large percentage of the licensing revenue instead of billing a flat rate for services. The Patent owner seldom needs to take all the risk or pay for the entire legal bill.
As long as the risk/reward ratio makes sense, Patent owners can usually find a firm to represent them. Of course the owner of the patent only gets a fraction of the settlement in these cases.
I respectfully will disagree. The one man company has ran around like a bull in a china shop so far and I dont expect them to do much better in the future. Starting 7 lawsuits early (before the 21 days had ran out) was a direct response to Apples letter and frankly a silly move, his two lawyers now have 7 cases to work, all while others are trying to get the patent thrown out. A better move would have been to sue Apple, (because they are going to get joined anyways) and only have one case to litigate. Now he's paying lawyers hours for 6 cases he doesnt need. In reality I think some have agreed to pay him, he's suing others that havent and had no idea Apple would get into the mess he stirred up.
Sue Apple based on what? For already paying the license?
But that is the exact problem, Apple (as a producer) is already paying the license which should cover the developers (as consumers). The whole suit is about if developers are covered by this license or not - and for that they have to sue the developers, not Apple. (Well, Lodsys claims it does not cover and sues for license)
This is similar to when Microsoft declared last year that they would defend anyone sued over any IP licensed from them.
Apple had to jump in, because they're protecting their own license rights and revenue.
Apple stands to lose far more than the developers involved. Apple could lose millions in revenue from developers frightened away from doing IAPs.
As for the developers, the Lodsys fee (0.575%) is extremely tiny in comparison to other hands in their pot.
If a developer sells $1,000 worth of IAPs, then...
Apple had to jump in, because they're protecting their own license rights and revenue.
Apple stands to lose far more than the developers involved. Apple could lose millions in revenue from developers frightened away from doing IAPs.
As for the developers, the Lodsys fee (0.575%) is extremely tiny in comparison to other hands in their pot.
If a developer sells $1,000 worth of IAPs, then...
- $300 goes to Apple with their 30% fee, leaving $700 profit for the dev.
- $150 or more goes to taxes out of the profit.
- $4 goes to Lodsys out of the profit.