Lodsys Free to Continue Patent Threats Against Developers After Judge Tosses Apple's Legal Challenge

[kerryb]

What?

Go mr barack obama

The President has not selected the Judge for this part of Texas but the people of Texas have. Great now this site has Republitrolls.

 

[UmichAg]

So, Apple's rubberband patent is deemed invalid because they demonstrated it for 1sec in their own keynote.

Meanwhile, a patent is upheld despite never being implemented by the creator.

I feel like I'm taking crazy pills.

 

[unplugme71]

Innovation was slower. Patents were around near the beginning of the US as an independent nation but also existed in late medieval / renaissance times. If you have an alternative solution, provide it, but using contracts won't work. If someone invented something with no patent and tried to use that idea, it would be copied by a big company instantly and sold.

You know what else "doesn't exist"? Money in digital form.

Actually, currency is in digital form too.

----------

Apple and Google should just buy the company, shut it down, and not charge each other for the licenses that they hold.

 

[Gasu E.]

Never taken a history class in your life, eh .

By opening with this attack, you undermined the credibility of everything you said after.

 

[Kwill]

How can anyone justify a patent on a concept without any implementation?

Does this really mean that anybody can conceive anything (including broad general concepts) which may possibly exist in the future (even if it cannot yet be created with today's technology) and then patent it? Ridiculous.

Pretty much.

 

[Rafterman]

Sue or buy Lodsys and gut it. One of those options must be available.

 

[skinned66]

It would be nice if everyone combined forces on this one and committed serious resources to get these patents invalidated.

 

[Ciclismo]

Apple are sue-happy patent trolls themselves so it's unlikely.

Let's not forget the 'A touchscreen tap is a zero-length swipe' nonsense Apple was throwing around a few years ago.

True patent reform is needed to stop all of the craziness - even Apple's.

The difference with Apple, Samsung, HP et al, vs Lodsys is that they not only invented something, but have turned it into a product that they are selling.

If Lodsys were actually pro-actively approaching companies trying to sell the "technology" they hold patents for, then I wouldn't hold such contempt for them. But instead, Lodsys and other Trolls just hoard patents with ridiculously broad definitions, and then wait until someone starts making money with a product that could be construed by some judge in Texas to violate said patent, then sue the pants off them, especially small entities that cannot afford to defend themselves.

 

[charlituna]

Is there any chance or way for The President to intervene in favor of Apple? I feel like after blocking the ban on iPhones before seemed to suggest The President played favorites.

The President blocked the ban because it was over SEP not because it was Apple.

----------

It's pretty clear after several years of hearing about this Eastern Texas Court giving consistent rulings in favor of the patent trolls that they are corrupt so why isn't anything being done about it? Patent trolls always file there because they know they will always win there. Every time there is an article there it is, like clockwork.

This.

Now what Apple needs to do is sue LODSYS for breach of contract. If the contract says the patents were exhausted, the developers owe nothing. Yes the contract was signed by another party but when you make such a purchase you assume all contracts involving said items unless you contact the parties to dissolve the existing contracts, which LODSYS didn't or we'd have heard by now. So their silence is agreement to stand by said contracts.

And a class action for harassment by the developers wouldn't hurt.

----------

I hope Apple puts together a fund for developers that get slapped with a suit. If the judge won't hear Apple directly, then throw $10M and a stack of lawyers in the ring when Lodsys attacks a dev. Get these patents invalidated once and for all.

Apple can't legally get involved if they aren't a party to the suit. Which is what their motion was about. They wanted the court to make them one, since they provided the SDK etc. Once they are a party they could submit the contracts that prove LODSYS has no claim etc

The real issue here, and one that needs to be halted like yesterday, is this game of being about to file in any district. That is why they all go to East Texas which is biased to the plaintiff every time. It should be law that you can only file in a district where one of the parties has its corporate presence.

 

[Squilly]

In other words: Lodsys is in the clear for squeezing as much money from developers as it wants without any repercussions. Evil company.

 

[charlituna]

This is NOT a patent!

Lodsys are claiming they have some unique process when almost every application on any platform has an update button, it's not a huge leap of anyones imagination to link in purchases and extras.

Yes it is a patent. And it was unique when it was created.

That is not really the dispute here. The real dispute is that Apple legally and properly licensed the patent from the original owner with terms that covered anyone that used the patent via the API that Apple created and Lodsys is not honoring the terms of said deal after buying the patent from the original company.

But since they haven't sued Apple alongside the developers said contract can't be presented in court because the developers weren't part of that deal.

 

[Risco]

If this stops developers price gouging with Freemium, then I am all for it!

 

[ActionableMango]

Does this really mean that anybody can conceive anything (including broad general concepts) which may possibly exist in the future (even if it cannot yet be created with today's technology) and then patent it? Ridiculous.

Yes they can, and yes it is.

 

[mdelvecchio]

I have no sympathy for the Dev's who are actually charging for an App then getting kids [and adult's] to pay up to £60+ for useless gem packs and upgrades etc.

1) IAP parental controls. problem solved. 2) adults are free to make their own purchase decisions. in the games ive made IAP in (infinity blade, zombie-scooter, etc), they were a couple bucks. less than the price of a beer.

At least if an App is free, I know not to bother downloading it as it will invariably be full of adverts and IAP con-tricks.

how are they cons or tricks? things are clearly marked. if they offer value to you, engage. if they do not...dont. pretty simple, not sure why youre feeling tricked.

So if the Dev's are abusing the system [making huge amounts of money from it] and ruining the spirit of the original idea,

you dont get it. devs are doing just what the original idea was -- making money from add-ons. that isnt abuse, thats sales.

what is so different to what Lodsys is doing?

Lodsys isnt a developer. in fact, theyre not even a technology company. theyre a patent holding company with no implementation. they extort other small businesses by threatening legal action if they dont pay up for something that doesnt require payment, but will be expensive to defend. thats what makes them a troll. duh.

They can all burn in patent hell.

developers arent in the patent business, so im really unsure why youre grouping them w/ your rage. sounds like you may have issues or have some growing up to do.

 

[mdelvecchio]

Apple are sue-happy patent trolls themselves so it's unlikely.

you have a base misunderstanding of the term paten troll. what makes a troll a troll is the fact that they dont have any implementation -- they dont use tech, theyre a holding company that sues others over dubious claims, knowing that many will pay rather than the higher cost of defending a valid use.

thats a troll. and not apple.

 

[litmag01]

It's pretty clear after several years of hearing about this Eastern Texas Court giving consistent rulings in favor of the patent trolls that they are corrupt so why isn't anything being done about it? Patent trolls always file there because they know they will always win there. Every time there is an article there it is, like clockwork.

Could just be jusidictional. But, then again, it is in Texas: the sqarest of the square states.

 

[tdmac]

the president blocked the ban because it was over sep not because it was apple.

----------



this.

Now what apple needs to do is sue lodsys for breach of contract. If the contract says the patents were exhausted, the developers owe nothing. Yes the contract was signed by another party but when you make such a purchase you assume all contracts involving said items unless you contact the parties to dissolve the existing contracts, which lodsys didn't or we'd have heard by now. So their silence is agreement to stand by said contracts.

And a class action for harassment by the developers wouldn't hurt.

----------



apple can't legally get involved if they aren't a party to the suit. Which is what their motion was about. They wanted the court to make them one, since they provided the sdk etc. Once they are a party they could submit the contracts that prove lodsys has no claim etc

the real issue here, and one that needs to be halted like yesterday, is this game of being about to file in any district. That is why they all go to east texas which is biased to the plaintiff every time. It should be law that you can only file in a district where one of the parties has its corporate presence.

+1,000,000

 

[MacDav]

Well then you probably should have been working for such a company in the first place if all you can do is invent and you don't have the ability to market, sell, and distribute the product as well. Just because you invent something doesn't mean you're all of a sudden entitled to a mountain of cash.

Are you entitled to anything? If you come up with a brilliant idea, but are dirt poor and living in Africa and have no way to build a product or make a physical representation then you're just S.O.L? Yes, it can be a cruel world, but you seem to be celebrating that fact. I just finished reading about the life of Tesla.
Sad story, but for you I guess he got what he deserved.

 

[9000]

Yes it is a patent. And it was unique when it was created.

No, it was not unique, at least not the "565" patent.

----------

I can't post a direct link, but search for WO 2011149558 A2. At first I thought it was one of Google's April's fools jokes.

Wow! Thanks for the laugh. Luckily, you can sure get some patents more easily than you should be able to, but they won't necessarily hold up in court. I heard that the patent offices are set up for them to be encouraged to pass out patents without much restraint but without the patents promising too much in the future.

 

[chrono1081]

This filthy disgusting judge was obviously paid off.

There is NO difference between someone who owns a bakery getting sued because their ovens they use are in a patent dispute vs what is happening with Apple.

Lodsys: Burn in hell.

 

[kdarling]

The real issue here, and one that needs to be halted like yesterday, is this game of being about to file in any district. That is why they all go to East Texas which is biased to the plaintiff every time. It should be law that you can only file in a district where one of the parties has its corporate presence.

Umm. Filing in one of the parties' districts wouldn't be seen as fair either. There were (unfounded, IMO) accusations of bias in the California based trials.

... what makes a troll a troll is the fact that they dont have any implementation -- they dont use tech, theyre a holding company that sues others over dubious claims, knowing that many will pay rather than the higher cost of defending a valid use.

There are legitimate holding companies though. Say you invented something, but could not afford to take on big companies yourself. Your smartest move might be to sell your invention to someone who can.

There are also patent license groups that don't make anything themselves, but act as a one-stop royalty coordinator.

 

[darkplanets]

I love how people argue that without patents, nobody would invent anything. Because nobody ever invented anything before patent offices started sprouting up, right?

The whole system is one giant waste of time. Intellectual property doesn't exist. You can't own something that you can't define with objective criteria. Inventing something shouldn't require a slew of lawyers. All that does is make people less productive. Don't want somebody selling "your" product that you invented? Lock in your customers with long-term contracts with escalators. Be creative. Making a law to entitle people to something that doesn't exist is the most backwards idea I've ever heard.

This is short sighted and naive, and wouldn't work in most fields.

Take medicine. You know how much it costs to develop a drug and bring it to market, accounting all the failures in between? $4 billion (today). So let's say you're a pharma company. You invest $4 billion into R&D. Of 100 clinical candidates (and countless preclinical failures), one compound finally gets FDA approval. Great, right? Not so much with your idea. A generics company could then come along and produce that same drug, and undercut any sort of return on that investment. That company would basically lose 4 billion as charity to the entire industry.

Good luck getting people to invest in R&D in that sort of environment, especially in high cost fields.

 

[satcomer]

Well the new news is Martha Stewart Joins the Fight Against Lodsys as Apple Takes a Timeout.

 

[Gav2k]

Thats the problem.
I think somewhere i read that patents are also awarded based on time limit, if they don't come out and make product or utilize it in their product then it gets nullified. Not sure where i read. I think it will be good idea that way.

It was the iPhone name in Brazil. That company built a tacky phone to block apple using the name.

 

[kdarling]

I think somewhere i read that patents are also awarded based on time limit, if they don't come out and make product or utilize it in their product then it gets nullified. Not sure where i read. I think it will be good idea that way.

You're thinking of trademarks.

A patent holder can sit on an invention and do nothing with it, if they wish.