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

Haptic Feedback Company Immersion Files Patent Infringement Lawsuit Against Apple

This litigation brings back memories.
I had a Logitech iFeel Mouse, the one that used Immersion's technology. Released in 2001...
At least Immersion is not some patent troll. The tech they developed was, and from some other comments I see is still, used by companies. I am by no means a lawyer, but this litigation seems to have some merit to it, more than many others I have seen. In fact, the iFeel Mouse had a haptic feedback tied to what you did on screen.
 
I know nothing, but "Haptic Feedback System with Stored Effects" sounds incredibly vague. That patent would ultimately cover any future haptic system? Seems a little unfair to me.

Years ago I had a Mercedes where the steering wheel would vibrate if I drifted over the white lines. Apart from being incredibly annoying, surely that was a "Haptic Feedback System with Stored Effects"?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Recognition
Mildredop said:
I know nothing, but "Haptic Feedback System with Stored Effects" sounds incredibly vague. That patent would ultimately cover any future haptic system? Seems a little unfair to me.

Years ago I had a Mercedes where the steering wheel would vibrate if I drifted over the white lines. Apart from being incredibly annoying, surely that was a "Haptic Feedback System with Stored Effects"?
Click to expand...
That's what I'm having trouble understanding!
If any company want to have a haptic feedback in any of their products, it can ONLY be done by paying Immersion for a license first?
Forever? For the rest of time?! Only Immersion?!
They have the monopoly on this technology?!
No one can create their own system from scratch?
 
Finding it hard to understand why some people can't grasp the lawsuit. Apple likely rolled the dice again and is now losing that toss. It's not the first time, won't be the last. For Apple. For Samsung. For every tech company. That doesn't make the company filing the suit evil, wrong, etc.
 
samcraig said:
Finding it hard to understand why some people can't grasp the lawsuit. Apple likely rolled the dice again and is now losing that toss. It's not the first time, won't be the last. For Apple. For Samsung. For every tech company. That doesn't make the company filing the suit evil, wrong, etc.
Click to expand...
Why is it so hard to wait and see what a court says?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Borin
samcraig said:
Finding it hard to understand why some people can't grasp the lawsuit. Apple likely rolled the dice again and is now losing that toss. It's not the first time, won't be the last. For Apple. For Samsung. For every tech company. That doesn't make the company filing the suit evil, wrong, etc.
Click to expand...

Who said they lost? They've sold hundreds of millions of iPhones with this "tech". I don't think they lost. Will they have to pay some millions? Probably, but they definitely didn't lose.
 
bluechair1984 said:
Who said they lost? They've sold hundreds of millions of iPhones with this "tech". I don't think they lost. Will they have to pay some millions? Probably, but they definitely didn't lose.
Click to expand...

I didn't say they lost. And I certainly didn't make any connection to the success of their devices. I supposed that they used the tech and either didn't bother to negotiate and/or couldn't reach an agreement. So now they may have to face their day in court. So it's possible they didn't "win" their ability to use it freely. They may have to settle for past use and pay a license fee going forward. If that's the case - it's a win for the plaintiff, isn't it. I don't care/am not addressing Apple's profits or sales figures. That's irrelevant.
 
Icy1007 said:
Sounds like a bunch of patent trolls to me.
Click to expand...

That is not what a patent troll is.

Patent trolls are companies who do nothing but purchase patents so that they can sue others for licensing.

Immersion is a development think tank. They are constantly inventing / innovating technologies, which they in turn license out their inventions to others. The Haptic feedback patent that they invented has been actively defended, and licensed out for years. They have been licensing out their inventions to Microsoft, Motorolla, and probably dozens of other companies for years (they were founded in 1993)

This is a clear defined example of a company that is NOT a troll.

A troll, would be Apple, forming Rock Star Consortium, purchasing millions of patents of failed companies, just to sit on to prevent others from using. http://www.ip-rockstar.com/
 
  • Like
Reactions: SirCheese, rjohnstone, Demo Kit and 5 others
samcraig said:
Not hard for me. Apparently others seem to want to dismiss the plaintiff and what can be a patent pretty easily
Click to expand...
And I'm not saying this suit isn't legit. I'm just not going to assume guilt because a lawsuit was filed.
 
You know who they should be REALLY suing? Cingular Wireless. They started this whole mess.
 
If Apple has indeed infringed on a legitimate patent, then they should be spanked. I don't care how important or successful they are, nobody is above the law.

Immersion's tactic of naming AT&T however, smacks of desperation (weak case?), and/or smells like something a patent troll would do.
 
LordVic said:
That is not what a patent troll is.

Patent trolls are companies who do nothing but purchase patents so that they can sue others for licensing.

Immersion is a development think tank. They are constantly inventing / innovating technologies, which they in turn license out their inventions to others. The Haptic feedback patent that they invented has been actively defended, and licensed out for years. They have been licensing out their inventions to Microsoft, Motorolla, and probably dozens of other companies for years (they were founded in 1993)

This is a clear defined example of a company that is NOT a troll.

A troll, would be Apple, forming Rock Star Consortium, purchasing millions of patents of failed companies, just to sit on to prevent others from using. http://www.ip-rockstar.com/
Click to expand...

I guess you missed the forum memo: patent trolls are simply companies that sue Apple.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SirCheese, rjohnstone, Demo Kit and 4 others
Hey Apple, you don't want to mess with Victor Viegas or his brother Vincent Viegas - they're well known violent offenders who will cut off your ears or blow yer face off. (by the way, I know it was Vega in films) :)
 
This is kind of the problem with Apple being years behind the industry for certain features AND how patent hording Apple has been. Eventually Apple can't break new ground without digging up someone else's IP.

I think, however, Apple is getting into the business of infringing on 3rd party patents if the companies holding them are small enough. What is it to Apple to pay a few million in litigation fees, or even if found guilty, a few hundred million to settle the lawsuit compared to the billions of profit they have already made on the infringing products?

Also Apple can never claim they were unaware of the infringement, a company like Apple has more than enough resources and money to be keenly aware of any patent that might even touch upon their own IP and future products. I think Apple sometimes blatantly violates these patents because they know it will have little impact on their bottom line either way.

Of course I have no respect for patent holders trying to extort Apple or any successful company for a payoff just to make a nuisance claim go away, but this doesn't seem to be the case. I have a big problem with a company like Apple who has been very litigious in the past of protecting their own IP to be careless and ambivalent about infringing on smaller company's IP.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Demo Kit, apolloa and Wowereit
danakin said:
How it's written:

Reality: And I'm not saying this suit isn't legit. I'm just not going to assume guilt because then I won't get to keep my Gold Star Apple Apologist Badge and cap.
Click to expand...
Right because people that come to a site called MacRumors should be expected to be Apple hating trolls. Care to tell me what patent Apple has been found guilty of infringing in this case?

ChrisCW11 said:
Of course I have no respect for patent holders trying to extort Apple or any successful company for a payoff just to make a nuisance claim go away, but this doesn't seem to be the case. I have a big problem with a company like Apple who has been very litigious in the past of protecting their own IP to be careless and ambivalent about infringing on smaller company's IP.
Click to expand...
What patent has Apple been found guilty of infringing here? Just saying something doesn't "seem to be the case" is not equal to a court finding Apple guilty of infringement.
 
Rogifan said:
Right because people that come to a site called MacRumors should be expected to be Apple hating trolls. Care to tell me what patent Apple has been found guilty of infringing in this case?
Click to expand...

I'll address the two sentences of your reply individually.
Sentence 1. Only a simpleton would suggest that and no I'm not numb to ironical statements.
Sentence 2. Guilt or innocence was never brought up; that came from the recesses of, what I can only assume is, your psyche relative to AAPL (your avatar is introduced as supporting documentation).
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: SirCheese, Demo Kit, Dave.UK and 1 other person
kdarling said:
In civil cases, both sides start out even
Click to expand...
This is not true.

The burden of proof still lies with the party that brought the action; however the standard is lower: preponderance of the evidence instead of "beyond a reasonable doubt". The plaintiff must still prove his case and the defendant need not even utter a sound nor produce any evidence.
 
Recognition said:
That's what I'm having trouble understanding!
If any company want to have a haptic feedback in any of their products, it can ONLY be done by paying Immersion for a license first? Forever? For the rest of time?! Only Immersion?! They have the monopoly on this technology?!
No one can create their own system from scratch?
Click to expand...

Not sure how you got that idea. I guess I have to repost this next part on every page of this thread:

kdarling said:
Nope, that's not what it means. I've explained the patents in a couple of posts already:
  • Figuring out the correct haptic to play by checking what kind of "object" on the screen was touched.
  • Preventing haptics from getting out of sync with user's touch (e.g. running on after your finger moves).
  • Allowing one program to interrupt another one already playing a haptic (I think).
If found to infringe, Apple could license the patents. Or, avoid future infringement by removing the above functionality, albeit with some relatively minor loss of user enjoyment. But they'd still have haptics.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
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