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 to 'Vigorously' Defend Itself in Nokia Lawsuit
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Honestly, I wish Apple were more of a bully to these big companies sometimes. I can't wait until this Droid phone gets hit with infringement suits for the stupidest of things like the unlock slide swipe. I think in the long run, all of this back and forth patent nonsense will end up a net gain for Apple.
What I don't get is what is Nokia specifically saying Apple infringed upon? All I saw was they infringed on some patents pertaining to Wi-Fi, GSM, etc. But what about them?
No, all I know is that is Nokia's stance. I know nothing of the facts of the case, nor of Apple's position. And neither do you.
or maybe its folks that can see the forest for the tree's and don't condone apple's elitist behavior? Its a pos or neg, with no expination, so what are you going to do?
Apple is getting sued, a new article gets posted that they are now going to vigorously defend themselves AS THEY SHOULD, but the article currently has more negatives than positives. Sometimes I wonder are these negatives from Windows fans or is it that people just want Apple to fail?
LOL... You have any idea how big Nokia is? Nokia's revenue is probably double that of Apple's if not even more...
Exactly, though actually, Nokia is quite a bit bigger than Apple (but for how longer?), so they probably already have a decent amount of money I'm sure.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia
Its not only GSM, its the whole mobile communications thinggy....
That's how standards work. Whenever a standard is needed, all the companies involved get together, they all sign a paper that they will tell about any related patents they have (Rambus managed to pull a fast in by _not_ telling about patents in a standard, which caused some lawsuits that have been going on for many years, and still no end in sight), and then they negotiate that everyone has to make their patents available under certain terms that are acceptable for everyone. If someone doesn't agree, then the standard will be changed so that the patent isn't needed.
That's how it has to work, because otherwise you would never get any standard going. It works because all these companies are not primarily interested in patent revenues, but in making money from selling products. If Nokia had said "we will keep our patents and try to get as much money as possible", then there would be no standard, or a standard that doesn't use those patents, either way the consumer would be hurt by not having standards, and Nokia and everyone else would be hurt by selling fewer phones.
It is quite possible that Nokia took a look at Apple's bank balance and decided that Apple should pay more for the patents than everyone else, and Apple didn't agree. If Nokia signed contracts about the licensing of their patents, which they most likely did, then Apple might very well be in the right if Nokia's proposed terms are not "fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory". The "non-discriminatory" seems to mean that Nokia can't charge Apple more than they charge others.
I love how when apple possibly has their hand caught in the cookie jar, some how they are the victim. Folks even here believe apple is suing Nokia and there are a lot of assumptions on apples part, i don't think anyone is clean and apple is no exception on toeing/ overstepping the lines.
Okaaaay.
How about you read that paragraph again?
You will see it is a tad different from your outraged interpretation.
LOL. I can't believe people are that blind with rage...
Quite true. For FY08, Apple had roughly US $30 billion in revenue. Nokia had something like US $70 billion in revenue. Nokia is much, much larger than Apple.
Ericsson also holds some fairly broad patents in this field. Apparently there's a history of "You can use our patents if we can use yours" between the major players. Ericsson has also stated that Apple indeed uses some of their patents and that they are paying according to agreement.
I think it's quite obvious that Nokia's real goal is to be able to use some of Apple's patents. They will settle with an agreement of mutual understanding and usage of each others patents.
I think it's quite obvious that Nokia's real goal is to be able to use some of Apple's patents. They will settle with an agreement of mutual understanding and usage of each others patents.
if i recall correctly, Qualcomm is the actual 'owner' of several of the patents in questions, thanks to a settlement last year. also Qcom, Nokia and a couple of other companies have a joint licensing on many of the patents in question and it is likely unlikely that Apple isn't paying the group all the correct fees.
think about it, Apple has a huge legal department. don't you think they would have researched and keep up on all the issues that affect the company's work. and don't you think they would have crossed all Ts and dotted all Is before Jobs ever muttered the word iphone. and has the paperwork to prove it.
this really seems more like Nokia ain't happy with their cut from the group and is trying to double dip cause they need the money and they know Apple has a lot. won't shock me if they lose
I just skimmed through some of the patents claimed in the lawsuit. I'd suggest others do the same.
It seems that some of those patents were derived from patents issued to other companies such as Bell labs etc.
Good reading for those that want to see the real picture.
It seems that some of those patents were derived from patents issued to other companies such as Bell labs etc.
Good reading for those that want to see the real picture.
Not quite. A standard can very much be developed by a single corporation, and then ultimately accepted as the universal standard by others. Thus, even though it becomes the "standard" that everyone uses, the original developer of said standard can still receive royalties.
Sony is a perfect example of this: they continuously try to push a "standard" that they develop to be the universally accepted implementation, as ultimately it means they will continuously receive royalties as a result. That's why the fact that Blu-ray came to be the "standard" high-definition format was such a huge victory for them, since everyone is now paying them royalties to be able to build Blu-ray drives, etc.
Standards have a huge, encompassing definition. The only time where a standard is usually "free" for anyone to implement is if it is released or approved by an organization whose purpose is just that. Think the likes of the IEEE or JEDEC.
Also, Rambus didn't "hide" patents. They were trying to push their memory interface to be the standard, but when JEDEC wanted them to agree to a licensing structure that was free and reasonable, Rambus didn't agree and withdrew. They had shared some of the information regarding their proprietary memory interface with certain manufacturers under secrecy, and many didn't want to see any licensing costs going to Rambus.
Rambus took some of the freely-available technical data on what JEDEC was considering for future implementation, and patented it. Thus, when a lot of that technical data resulted in the formats such as SDRAM and DDR RAM, Rambus came after all of the memory manufacturers, claiming that they were in violation of the patents they had registered.
Some settled quickly, some fought it, and as far as I know, some of the lawsuits are still going on, almost a decade later, because the source of blame keeps flipping. Some courts have sided with the other memory manufacturers, saying Rambus is guilty of both fraud and anti-competitive practices. Other courts have sided with Rambus, saying their patents have been violated. It's a huge, huge mess that likely still won't be cleaned up any time soon.
Ultimately though, most "standards" usually incorporate numerous patents, and usually the standards body controlling the standard has to get those companies to either waive their licensing fees, or agree to a reasonable and non-discriminatory licensing structure. Giving that most other companies, including cellular companies larger than and smaller than Apple, have agreed to Nokia's terms, it doesn't really sound like the rates are that outrageous.
So it comes down to two things:
* did Nokia try to change the rates in regards to Apple? Possibly, but I find it hard to believe, as they would have agreed to a fixed licensing structure at the time the standard was finalized. Thus, Nokia would have to know that trying to increase the licensing would not hold up in court.
* Apple felt that it deserved a lower rate, or because it is now part of a standard, they shouldn't have to pay at all.
It's funny to see people so blindly defending Apple without any knowledge of the facts (and if it is revealed that Nokia is at fault, Apple should be defended. But right now, we don't quite know where to direct the blame). Remember, the whole reason that Firewire never took off was because of Apple's large royalty request (as well as the cost of the hardware itself). It was certified by the IEEE, but USB ultimately "won".
I've posted this in other threads on the topic:
Intomobile article with links to the complaint, and to each patent.
Nokia claims that Apple has gotten an unfair marketshare by being able to sell the iPhone for less.
That's believable. (Heck, for example, Nokia has paid Qualcomm over $1 billion dollars for patent licensing over the years. That's a lot of money they had to make back on handsets.)
Also of note: Ericsson says Apple has been paying them. So Apple hasn't ignored everyone.
Intomobile article with links to the complaint, and to each patent.
Nokia claims that Apple has gotten an unfair marketshare by being able to sell the iPhone for less.
That's believable. (Heck, for example, Nokia has paid Qualcomm over $1 billion dollars for patent licensing over the years. That's a lot of money they had to make back on handsets.)
Also of note: Ericsson says Apple has been paying them. So Apple hasn't ignored everyone.
I still think my statements hold true. A lot of speculation at this point. I don't doubt apple as other's toe the line and no one is clean.
Now there is an educated question.
while researching that issue, don't forgot to look at the issue that Nokia was recently sued by Qualcomm over some of the same collection of patents.
and some people don't like seeing folks assume that because it is Apple, they are guilty.
backwards. It is Nokia that is suing.
so in your sitch it would be that Nokia named a price, Apple didn't like it, Nokia didn't want to budge so they are suing instead.
yeah cause wikipedia is an excellent source of information. lets not forget that is it user created and edited and take anything you get that with a grain of salt.
possibly is a heavy word here. some folks have already condemned Apple over the broken cookie jar all based on Nokia saying that Apple broke it. When in fact it could be that Nokia broke it and doesn't want to get into trouble. So perhaps the "what a bunch of douche bags" talk against Apple should wait until they are proven guilty, particularly of any 'we just didn't feel like paying' games.