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 Sued Over iPhone's Proximity Sensor in New Patent Troll Lawsuit
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
A patent troll is someone who sues because they own a patent they don't even use. Apple fiercely protects their patents, some of which are very basic, but they only do it with patents that they use and consider to be vital to the product's success.
Please provide evidence of your claim. "I'm sure that..." is NOT evidence, it is a claim.
Project Titan? Maybe you've heard of it? Look, Apple is a manufacturer, and MAKES A PRODUCT/PRODUCTS. They are not a patent holding firm. How can you not see the enormous difference?
Not true, many have, including me.
No, add a time period for you to do something with the patent. Sell it to a company that includes in their sales contract that they will be using the technology in manufactured product. If the company does not use it, you as the patent holder get to take the patent back, keep the money, and sell it again. If you "patent" something no one wants/can use... yes, it goes into the public domain. NOT UNREASONABLE. A patent exists for a period of time, and is renewed by use. If it isn't used, it becomes public domain.
Are we done here?
This is a junk lawsuit. They saw they had proximity patents and decided to sue Apple. Well just about every phone these days has a proximity sensor. The sensor is not used to identify an object but to know if the thing is in a pocket or near your face. It's more aptly a light/dark sensor.
Sheesh....
Sheesh....
You might not like Apple for your own personal reasons, but they are most definitely NOT a patent troll by definition.
A patent troll has no intention of developing the patents that they own to produce products, and in most cases did not develop the patent themselves. Apple defends their patents when they see a competitor stealing their IP and using it to damage their core business.
Ideally a patent holder's revenue is from patent licenses.
Like the way LiquidMetal makes most of their money, or university think tanks.
The lawsuits come when someone refuses to license, which will almost always happen in Apple's case.
And our ideologically constipated Congress won't do a damn thing about it. (Which actually isn't a bad thing, considering how bad they have tried to screw up everything else they have tried to do. The 'Zika bill'? In the House, it comes with a lot of really retched amendments that make it even so much less likely to be passed than a fart in a resort hot tub)
But the downside potential for investing in patent trolls is huge. All they need is one case to invalidate their 'patent', and licensees can start suing for return of their (usually exorbitant) fees.
Invalidations do happen, and if Congress ever gets their head out of their butts, they might actually pass legislation (GASP!) that could end this scourge...
This is just sloppy behaviour by the Texas State Government. If some lawyers and judges, with connections, were not making good money on these cases, the whole fiasco would be shut down by reasonable legislators. One solution is to make the trolls pay for the legal bills of their accused if they lose the case. And if they don't pay, neither the company nor its legal firms can file any more patent cases.
Patents don't last forever, they expire and after anyone can use the idea freely. That makes the world a better place. Would you rather the invention not be shared with society? In return for helping make the world better, the society/government let's the owner of the patent have a limited time monopoly on the idea to do whatever they want with it to make money. The patent owner can do whatever he wants with it, including licensing out the idea.
I don't understand why people don't want companies to be able to license things out to other companies.
If people hate patent trolls so much, then it is OK if Samsung releases tomorrow a car using many of the car patents Apple currently owns? Apple shouldn't be allowed to sue Samsung for that because Apple doesn't have a iCar out.
There is some A-1 trolling in this thread. A thread about trolls. Oh the irony.
Lol, Macrumours just called them as a "patent troll" directly in the title.
It's like no mercy!
Patent Case && Eastern Texas District => 99,999% chance it's a patent troll.
Patents can't be renewed. I believe they only last 20 years in USA. It can be less if maintenance fees are not paid.
Why is that? If you're still in high school you get a pass. Otherwise, you might want to think about why that would make you feel better.
If they do have patents for cars and are working on an 'iCar', I'm sure that they can point to their actual R&D efforts, whereas this company that's suing, has absolutely nothing to show for it, nor have they produced anything tangible.
Quote
[insert NPE Name here] has demanded a jury trial and is seeking damages in the form of a reasonable royalty, plus interest and fees, in addition to a permanent U.S. sales ban on iPhones and all other infringing products and services.
Sounds like a lot of cut/paste going on here. PErhaps their lawyers are fresh out of Law School.
Can I patent a device to 'Nuke East Texas and neuter all lawyers and judges and all those standing for election as a judge'?
When granted, I'd give away licenses to anyone who is being sued there free of charge.
Yes, I am joking but something has to be done about the NPE's there. They must be wasting millions of $$$$ that could be put to better use.
[insert NPE Name here] has demanded a jury trial and is seeking damages in the form of a reasonable royalty, plus interest and fees, in addition to a permanent U.S. sales ban on iPhones and all other infringing products and services.
Sounds like a lot of cut/paste going on here. PErhaps their lawyers are fresh out of Law School.
Can I patent a device to 'Nuke East Texas and neuter all lawyers and judges and all those standing for election as a judge'?
When granted, I'd give away licenses to anyone who is being sued there free of charge.
Yes, I am joking but something has to be done about the NPE's there. They must be wasting millions of $$$$ that could be put to better use.
Yes. I think MR should just run a banner at the top each morning with the number of lawsuits Apple is currently involved in. Really no need to write an entire article about it. THe banner can have the count and a statement "Apple is being sued. Apple will fight it. We believe the company suing is a troll. If ever the case is fully closed (maybe next century) we will update you on that. Otherwise, assume same old, same old and move on. Thank you. MR"
It's in development. You likely do not realize an undertaking of that magnitude does not result in a released product in a year or two.
because he's a troll troll.
[doublepost=1470410958][/doublepost]
karma for what? apple is a practicing entity that builds actual products with real implementations. a patent troll is a non-practicing entity that doesnt build anything and instead tries to scare people into paying them via costly litigation, or fooling dumb jurors in East Texas.
yeah words, they matter.
Specificity helps your argument. Ask that question without it relating to car patents. Because Apple has:
1. Acquired a dying company's patent portfolio
2. Not introduced a product based on that portfolio
3. Shortly after the acquisition of the patent portfolio they initiated multiple lawsuits.
Is this not the exact behavior people are deriding in this thread? Does this not fit the definition of patent troll per some members of this forum?
Fortunately, they came to their senses and divested themselves of that debacle. But not before they took a choice number of patents as their own. Seem some MR members have selective amnesia.
Apple is no different than any other business. Not sure why some people here think they are somehow above the fray. Companies sue Apple. Apple sues companies.