Caltech Accuses Apple of Violating its Patented Wi-Fi Technologies

[bbbb4b]

probably guilty by association..and using their tech.

Aren't you also "using their tech"?
Guess you're liable as well.

 

[now i see it]

Pirates of Silicon Valley.

One thing we know is that Caltech wouldn't file this suit against mega billion dollar Apple unless they knew they were in the right, with every T crossed and every i dotted.

Apple's in a heap load of trouble right now.

 

[1applerules1]

I thought is said acquired... My heart sank for a second lol. Oh look more sad bastards looking for money!​

 

[SHNXX]

Umm.. Go Beavers?

 

[Karma*Police]

It sounds to me like this would strictly be a problem with Broadcom... it doesn't seem to me that Apple should be found liable for using parts supplied by Broadcom which violate these patents. Apple just wants wifi chips - I don't think the inner workings that are detailed would be something they'd look at before making a purchase.

It's always a money grab with these lawsuits where the defendant isn't harmed by competition, and no one has more money than Apple. That's my guess, anyway, as to why Apple is named in the suit.

 

[MajorWebUser]

Do the math. Apple sitting on a mountain of cash. CalTech hemorrhaging cash (just like any other university). For the past two decades big colleges and universities have expanded their 'business operations' to chase down anything that even closely smells like it could generate a buck. They will claim anything and any idea, even if only the sound of it once simply drifted over their campus.

 

[QuarterSwede]

Is this a problem with Apple simply not licensing anything ever? It seems like they're getting sued over just about everything these days.

Up next: Apple getting sued over employees using breathing technology owned by air inc.

Or it's the fact that Apple has deep pockets. It wouldn't surprise me if they received a lawsuit almost daily. Most large corporations in the US do and that's the reason they have lawyers on staff.

 

[Plutonius]

It sounds to me like this would strictly be a problem with Broadcom... it doesn't seem to me that Apple should be found liable for using parts supplied by Broadcom which violate these patents. Apple just wants wifi chips - I don't think the inner workings that are detailed would be something they'd look at before making a purchase.

But Apple has the money.

 

[iModFrenzy]

*looks at front page* "Apple violating patents" Really? another one?. Patent trolls.

 

[BreadofWonder]

If Broadcom and Apple are in the wrong, why would they take years to do something about this? It seems like they wait around for more products to be released so as to be more impactful when they do bring it up. Or maybe it just takes a really long time to do this legal stuff, I have no idea.

That's one of the many reasons why there's such a thing as statutes of limitations. If they were waiting, they couldn't wait for long.

 

[PJWilkin]

Caltech's patents, granted between 2006 and 2012, are highly technical and relate to IRA/LDPC codes that utilize simpler encoding and decoding circuitry for improved data transmission rates and performance. The technologies are implemented in both the 802.11n and 802.11ac Wi-Fi standards used by many Apple products.

Broadcom, as one of Apple's main suppliers of Wi-Fi chips, is also named in the complaint. Apple currently uses Broadcom chips in the Apple Watch, iPhones, and iPads, as well as its line of Macs that support 802.11ac, including the MacBook Air, Retina MacBook Pro, and iMac.Caltech has demanded a jury trial against Apple and Broadcom, along with a preliminary and permanent sales injunction in the U.S. against the aforementioned products. The university also seeks "adequate" damages, and other relief that the court deems "just and equitable," but it did not specify a specific settlement target.

The asserted patents include U.S. Patent No. 7,116,710, U.S. Patent No. 7,421,032, U.S. Patent No. 7,916,781, and U.S. Patent No. 8,284,833.

So it's taken there 3+ years to notice and file a lawsuit, sounds like someone in their Patent department just woke up and decided to put the squeeze on apple for money

What about anyone else who uses Broadcom Wireless chips ? There are lots of companies out there making products that use them ..... oh wait, they probably don't have as much money as Apple

Broadcom should be the target of the lawsuit, not apple as they make the components

 

[thisisnotmyname]

Patent trolling has gone mainstream. Maybe this is what it takes to finally reform the patent system.

 

[things]

the article fails to mention that caltech is also suing others over the same patents

i had just a quick look, i assume the patents do not cover the codes per se but rather the encoders/decoders, if so, they are under absolutely no obligation to license (other than in the "limited circumstances" mentioned in the patents) and others are free to come up with their own encoders/decoders that do not infringe

 

[rigormortis]

It sounds to me like this would strictly be a problem with Broadcom... it doesn't seem to me that Apple should be found liable for using parts supplied by Broadcom which violate these patents. Apple just wants wifi chips - I don't think the inner workings that are detailed would be something they'd look at before making a purchase.

i heard somewhere.. i think it was backtrack .. that broadcom wifi chips have no bios or firmware. and the wifi device driver loads the software into the broadcom wifi's ram. so maybe this explains why apple got sued??

its something i picked up somewhere. i don't know where the original link was

 

[crsh1976]

Lawyers will be lawyers.

 

[kdarling]

It sounds to me like this would strictly be a problem with Broadcom... it doesn't seem to me that Apple should be found liable for using parts supplied by Broadcom which violate these patents. Apple just wants wifi chips - I don't think the inner workings that are detailed would be something they'd look at before making a purchase.

I haven't read the complaint yet, but the way this often works with multi-protocol chips, is that Broadcom simply sells a chip that's capable of many things.

Then it's up to the end chip user to license every type of IP that they plan to use on it.

Think of it like buying a CPU chip. By itself it doesn't need any licenses. But if you made an MPEG player with it, you likely would.

Wouldn't patent exhaustion mean they can only actually sue BroadCom? You know, since Apple is just buying the chips, while BroadCom are the ones designing and manufacturing them and thus having to license the relevant patents.

See above about licenses.

As for patent exhaustion, Apple has previously had problems claiming that rule.

You see, such protection only applies to chips bought in the US. However, it's very likely that, in order to avoid paying US taxes, Apple did a purchase deal outside of the US.

 

[Carlanga]

If anything, this would be Broadcom not licensing instead of Apple, since Broadcom is the one that makes and sells the chips to Apple and other companies. IMNSHO, this is people picking on Apple for the sake of picking on Apple.

So Apple had nothing to do with the software side of the hardware that Broadcom made for them which couod have been made to whatever Apple specs demanded?

 

[SomeSecurityGuy]

So Apple had nothing to do with the software side of the hardware that Broadcom made for them which couod have been made to whatever Apple specs demanded?

Or Apple made the software to meet the specs that Broadcom created.

 

[bergert]

I can understand they go after Apple - $$ signs in the eyes. This is like suing a car buyer because the tires use some patent. Weird.

Note not a single CALTEC patent is listed for 802.11ac - why do they come out now (years after 802.11ac is being used) ?
http://standards.ieee.org/about/sasb/patcom/pat802_11.html

 

[AFEPPL]

Said it before, once apple opened pandoras box and started sueing companies for silly things it was all going to come back on them. It's getting to the point of a new case against apple every week.

What goes around, comes around.

 

[tardegrade]

Is this a problem with Apple simply not licensing anything ever? It seems like they're getting sued over just about everything these days.

Up next: Apple getting sued over employees using breathing technology owned by air inc.

It's just part of being a large successful company. The bigger your company becomes the more you get sued. It's nothing new.

 

[bergert]

Aren't you also "using their tech"?
Guess you're liable as well.

Of course I am using it - and I'm liable too ! Good that I don't have 140 billion in the bank.

 

[EricTheHalfBee]

I can understand they go after Apple - $$ signs in the eyes. This is like suing a car buyer because the tires use some patent. Weird.

Note not a single CALTEC patent is listed for 802.11ac - why do they come out now (years after 802.11ac is being used) ?
http://standards.ieee.org/about/sasb/patcom/pat802_11.html

This is what I'm wondering. How can they claim to have patents that are part of a standard?

 

[bbzzz]

All four patents say they were done under NFS grant so the government has a right to use. The public should tell their government that having already paid for this work they do not wish to lose access to products using it.

I can't see if these are essential patents necessary to implement 802.11n and 802.11ac or just efficient methods for doing it. If the former then Broadcom should have discovered that during their design work, if the latter then they probable knew and thought they'd get away with it as nobody can tell easily how chips work inside, perhaps the deal was Caltech reverse engineering it to find out

 

[mrgraff]

I once drew a rectangle before 2007. Checkmate! Where's my money?