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

Apple Sued (Again) Over Playlists After Paying $8m Judgement

MacRumors

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
69,015
40,049



ipod_family_packaging.jpg


A few weeks ago, Apple lost a small jury trial related to a single patent related to downloadable playlists. The lawsuit was originally filed in June 2009 and accused Apple of infringement related to the "iPod classic, iPod mini, iPod shuffle, iPod nano and iPod Touch". The verdict awarded $8 million to patent holder Personal Audio LLC -- a very small chunk of Apple's $76 billion in cash.

Now though, Personal Audio LLC is suing Apple again, over the same patent. But this time, it's accusing Apple of infringing with different products: "the iPod Nano Generation 6, iPod Shuffle Generation 4, iPod Touch Generation 4, iPhone 4, and iPad 2" -- all products Apple has released since the first lawsuit was originally filed.

Florian Mueller at FOSS Patents explains:
Obviously the purpose of the second lawsuit is to expand upon the success of the first trial and squeeze even more money out of Apple...

This new lawsuit is more than just a nuisance for Apple to deal with. Damages in connection with the iPhone and iPad could could be substantially greater than in the previous trial that focused just on various iPod products. Also, Personal Audio LLC may now have an even better case for claiming willful infringement -- and one of Personal Audio LLC's prayers for relief is a request for an injunction.
Click to expand...
Just one more lawsuit for Apple Legal to deal with.

Article Link: Apple Sued (Again) Over Playlists After Paying $8m Judgement
 
Article Link
https://www.macrumors.com/2011/07/20/apple-sued-again-over-playlists-after-paying-8m-judgement/
Well it is justified. The initial case was over different products. If Apple deals out the heat on software patents they have to be able to take it too...though it's only $8 million.
 
If Apple failed to rectify the issue after the initial trial, then they only have themselves to blame. As much as I love their products, they do seem to have an attitude that suggests no one is above them.

Going to be a huge payout.
 
Happy to see that the posts immediately above mine don't suggest knee-jerk support for Apple.
Maybe they were in the wrong here, it's hard enough for a jury to determine let alone someone like me reading cursory coverage of the matter, but I get frustrated by MacRumors posters who sometimes express blind support for Apple in legal matters.
 
WiiDSmoker said:
Well it is justified. The initial case was over different products. If Apple deals out the heat on software patents they have to be able to take it too...though it's only $8 million.
Click to expand...

only this time it might be a lot more since they lost the first time and refused to clean up for newer products.

I would say it was a dumb move on Apples part to not pay up on some fee to begin with but instead try to dance around it and not play it.
 
Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

How did their prior settlement not cover all future and
Current products? Sounds like Apple's attorney dropped the ball here.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_8 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E401 Safari/6533.18.5)

Apple has demonstrated that they are more than willing to sue over sketchy patents. So they ought to be willing to be sued themselves.
 
jwsmiths said:
Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

How did their prior settlement not cover all future and
Current products? Sounds like Apple's attorney dropped the ball here.
Click to expand...

because it was not settled. It was ended by the jury which means Apple did not get anything extra.
Apple mistake here was not getting some agreement in place to protect themselves from being farther hit. This time it could easily be willful infringement which can add a huge chunk of change (3x) to the end result. I only not be shock at all if Apple ended up having to pay out a 100mil plus at the end.
 
Rodimus Prime said:
because it was not settled. It was ended by the jury which means Apple did not get anything extra.
Apple mistake here was not getting some agreement in place to protect themselves from being farther hit. This time it could easily be willful infringement which can add a huge chunk of change (3x) to the end result. I only not be shock at all if Apple ended up having to pay out a 100mil plus at the end.
Click to expand...

I can only assume Apple felt confident that they could have the patent in question overturned, or that a Jury would find the claim unjustified.

That outcome is still possible for this second case -- if Apple can produce sufficient quality prior art or build an argument that the claim does not apply. Although both are now much more difficult now.
 
Rodimus Prime said:
because it was not settled. It was ended by the jury which means Apple did not get anything extra.
Apple mistake here was not getting some agreement in place to protect themselves from being farther hit. This time it could easily be willful infringement which can add a huge chunk of change (3x) to the end result. I only not be shock at all if Apple ended up having to pay out a 100mil plus at the end.
Click to expand...
I'm not a lawyer, but I do play one on the internet ...

Anyways, I don't think it's a case where Apple willfully infringed on the patent. The case was filed in 2009 and a verdict was recently handed down. If the judge did not order Apple to halt production of the iPods, then Apple has the right to continue to manufacture and market devices until the case is settled or a verdict handed down. Now, I would guess that Apple will settle this case, or perhaps buy the patent/company outright. Either that or appeal the decision.

Apple would only be willfully infringing on the patents is they were to continue with new devices, etc., after the verdict. I'm guessing that Apple's lawyers are in negotiation with the patent owners right now.

Nevermind. I just skimmed over the FOSS Patent blog. Looks like Apple could be exposed for a bit of cash. Just buy them out and move on.
 
Last edited:
Don Kosak said:
That outcome is still possible for this second case -- if Apple can produce sufficient quality prior art or build an argument that the claim does not apply. Although both are now much more difficult now.
Click to expand...

Apple is likely out of luck on the issue of the validity of the patent. Having been sued once and lost, Apple will likely not be allowed to challenge the patent's validity in the second lawsuit. Apple cannot re-try that issue again.
 
ftaok said:
I'm not a lawyer, but I do play one on the internet ...

Anyways, I don't think it's a case where Apple willfully infringed on the patent. The case was filed in 2009 and a verdict was recently handed down. If the judge did not order Apple to halt production of the iPods, then Apple has the right to continue to manufacture and market devices until the case is settled or a verdict handed down. Now, I would guess that Apple will settle this case, or perhaps buy the patent/company outright. Either that or appeal the decision.

Apple would only be willfully infringing on the patents is they were to continue with new devices, etc., after the verdict. I'm guessing that Apple's lawyers are in negotiation with the patent owners right now.

Nevermind. I just skimmed over the FOSS Patent blog. Looks like Apple could be exposed for a bit of cash. Just buy them out and move on.
Click to expand...

I was about to say. As for the 3x part I pulled that from wiki. Reason that I figured it could break 100mil is a lot more of those devices being targeted now have been sold than the ones in the first case so you are going to have higher cost because more devices then 3x those devices.
 
Surely you would have expected any decent legal team to address to the issue of subsequent/future product releases as part of the original settlement?
 
Apple will earn the money back...

I dare say, even if they do get more money out of Apple, Apple will just have made the amount again with the inveitable soon release of iPhone 4S/5. But, these people think they can take Apple on, let them, it will just backfire. Although, this article doesn't explain exactly what Apple has infringed??
 
Personal Audio LLC sounds like it is about to become another member of the Apple family. Honestly, if they lost the first one, they are likely to lose the second. They'll buy them out, then use that to see if they can make that patent stick against the Android phones. But I guess we'll never know; it will all just become quiet.
 
samcraig said:
What does that have to do with anything? Do you know about every company that holds a patent?
Click to expand...

It's the difference between a potential innovator and a patent troll. A patent troll has rights like every other patent holder, except they abuse them.

See Mirror Worlds vs. Apple.

In fact, Personal Audio LLC is a non-practicing entity.

They are PATENT TROLLS.

Shady outfits like this need to be bankrupted.
 
Last edited:
samcraig said:
What does that have to do with anything? Do you know about every company that holds a patent?
Click to expand...

+1. Quit downplaying the fact that your beloved Apple have infringed on someone else's patent. You act as though it's so criminal when HTC does it to Apple, but when the tables are turned, you reply with arrogant retorts that establish you as a fanboy.

The fact remains that if HTC are "crooks" and "criminals" for stealing Apple's IP and infringing on patents, then so are Apple for doing the same.
 
*LTD* said:
On a patent troll's patent.
Click to expand...

Since you know nothing about the company (you admitted yourself) - nor the time, resources and expense of their R&D from the past - you can't possibly determine if they are a patent "troll" or not.

But sling that word around as much as you do - and the thing that is certain is that you'll a) look ignorant and b) turn the words "patent troll" into something meaningless.

Good luck.
 
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