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.
Lodsys Takes On Gaming Heavyweights Including Rovio, EA, and Atari in Patent Dispute
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Not me. I think software, design and trivial patents are wrong not mater who sues who.
But then I am only an Apple user and not a Fanboy.
They buy patents and liscense them out to businesses, or wait for someone to infringe on one of them and sue.
So if I invent something, get a patent you want to tell me I only have a right to protect it if I produce a product that uses this patent? That comment is pure crap and you know exactly why.
If someone owns the rights to IP they own the rights to it. I own a copy of Premiere Pro CS5, I don't use it, does this now mean I don't own a copy of premiere pro CS5? You either own the rights or you don't and I guess we are going to find out who is right in court.
What really sucks is that patents don't mean anything outside the courtroom. It costs a fortune to register patents and even then you need to fight over it in court, the whole system is rotten and pointless.
If someone owns the rights to IP they own the rights to it. I own a copy of Premiere Pro CS5, I don't use it, does this now mean I don't own a copy of premiere pro CS5? You either own the rights or you don't and I guess we are going to find out who is right in court.
What really sucks is that patents don't mean anything outside the courtroom. It costs a fortune to register patents and even then you need to fight over it in court, the whole system is rotten and pointless.
Quoting Edison? Really?
Perhaps the country can get a historical background on Edison wrt that Quote and discover just truly how the history around Edison doesn't match up to facts.
I'm sure Tesla would have had plenty to say about his former boss and later competitor while at Westinghouse.
Perhaps Apple should quote Tesla in describing their vision.
Perhaps the country can get a historical background on Edison wrt that Quote and discover just truly how the history around Edison doesn't match up to facts.
I'm sure Tesla would have had plenty to say about his former boss and later competitor while at Westinghouse.
Perhaps Apple should quote Tesla in describing their vision.
Hopefully Lodsys is able to protect their patents against all infringers, regardless of what fanboys say.
This fight really highlights the problems of the Patent system especially in the US. I have been closely involved in some patent applications and find that in the EU it is very hard to get a patent recognised and filed. The patent office here wants to avoid extensive litigation litigation in the future.
In the US, the patent office seems to grant patents very easily and relies on shady patents to be decided over in court. This creates a culture of patent litigation and insecurity for people who want to innovate.
Has anyone seen what Lodsys claims to cover in it's patents?
That's all very broad. You basically cannot fart on the internets without violating their patents.
And by the way.... if they did not really hold these rights... why has Apple licensed them? They would not be so stupid as to pay for patents that are doubtful? They have a big enough legal department to figure these things out.
What seems to be happening is that LODSYS is not happy with just Apple paying them fees. When they initially licensed their technology out, they had no idea how big this whole thing was going to get. They just want more money now...
In the US, the patent office seems to grant patents very easily and relies on shady patents to be decided over in court. This creates a culture of patent litigation and insecurity for people who want to innovate.
Has anyone seen what Lodsys claims to cover in it's patents?
That's all very broad. You basically cannot fart on the internets without violating their patents.
And by the way.... if they did not really hold these rights... why has Apple licensed them? They would not be so stupid as to pay for patents that are doubtful? They have a big enough legal department to figure these things out.
What seems to be happening is that LODSYS is not happy with just Apple paying them fees. When they initially licensed their technology out, they had no idea how big this whole thing was going to get. They just want more money now...
Great. So for us, developers, there are more problems coming up. If such patent trolls are not shut down, then middleware will cease to exist, as no small or medium company will have the money to pay for licenses for patents that should not exist in the first place.
I read somewhere that patents licensed by Lodsys were licensed in Texas court, a patent-troll-friendly court which has also licensed patents to other patent trolls that now make money from suing developers who unknowingly infringed their patents.
This is a very broad patent license we need. All the purpose of the Internet is those services. I intended to make an update to one of my apps with In-App purchase, and also make a mechanism for updating a small file over the internet with later data from my server, but seeing how this evolves, I won't do it.
I read somewhere that patents licensed by Lodsys were licensed in Texas court, a patent-troll-friendly court which has also licensed patents to other patent trolls that now make money from suing developers who unknowingly infringed their patents.
Code:
provide online help, customer support, and tutorials
conduct online subscription renewals
provide for online purchasing of consumable supplies
survey users for their impressions of their products and services
assist customers to customize their products and services
display interactive online advertisements
collect information on how users actually use their products and services
sell upgrades or complimentary products
maintain products by providing users notice of available updates and assisting in the installation of those updates.This is a very broad patent license we need. All the purpose of the Internet is those services. I intended to make an update to one of my apps with In-App purchase, and also make a mechanism for updating a small file over the internet with later data from my server, but seeing how this evolves, I won't do it.
You're missing a big part of the picture. Lodsys didn't invent any of this. They bought the patents from the original inventor, Dan Abelow.
Personally I think patents should be non-transferable (along with a ban on software patents).
Last edited:
To Soulstorm
One of the reasons there is innovation is that there is a framework in which we can innovate and earn from this innovation. Lodsys seems to be protecting patents that were filed by a specific inventor who probably saw possibilities long before companies like Apple saw them. I guess the inventor in question will want to be rewarded for his foresight.
What I find interesting is that developers do not mind paying Apple 30% of their income and then do not want to pay licenses to companies that hold patents to parts of the technologies they want to use.
So what I find shocking is that Apple charges 30% without really taking care of the full Appstore environment.
How much % of the profits does Lodsys want? 1%? 2%? 5%? This could easily come from Apples share.
One of the reasons there is innovation is that there is a framework in which we can innovate and earn from this innovation. Lodsys seems to be protecting patents that were filed by a specific inventor who probably saw possibilities long before companies like Apple saw them. I guess the inventor in question will want to be rewarded for his foresight.
What I find interesting is that developers do not mind paying Apple 30% of their income and then do not want to pay licenses to companies that hold patents to parts of the technologies they want to use.
So what I find shocking is that Apple charges 30% without really taking care of the full Appstore environment.
How much % of the profits does Lodsys want? 1%? 2%? 5%? This could easily come from Apples share.
Hahahaha. That really is a a terrible analogy and makes no sense at all.
And yes, it is a good thing that you can not hold patents unless they are being used.
Hoarding a bunch of patents that will not be used can be used to stifle a competitors innovation, which in turn is bad for consumers. ie: The majority.
If Lodsys bought the patents, the Inventor has been paid. It would be crazy if from they moment Lodsys would not be able to profit from the patent.
Inventors should be able to free their time for inventing more stuff. So they sell their patents to people like Lodsys.
I hate this situation as much as anyone else, and am very interested to see if these patents hold in court. Also I hope Apple will find a way to cover all developers. But it is unfair to simply bash these guys.
Anyone knows how much they ask for using "their" tech?
Inventors should be able to free their time for inventing more stuff. So they sell their patents to people like Lodsys.
I hate this situation as much as anyone else, and am very interested to see if these patents hold in court. Also I hope Apple will find a way to cover all developers. But it is unfair to simply bash these guys.
Anyone knows how much they ask for using "their" tech?
Dear Lodsys, I think I speak for alot of people when I say "I hope you get smacked down onto your fat ass"
Ah but thats not it at all, Lodsys didn't invent something either, they purchased the patent from someone else, who purchased it from the inventor.
In some strange way I must admire Lodsys. It is a single man company that has nothing but a few weak patents and now that guy is trying to take on all the big names out there. He must be either a total idiot or very sure of what he is doing (he is probably both).
One big mistake was to go after iOS developers to double dip since they are already covered by the Apple license. They can at least (with support from Apple) defend them based on weak patents and already payed licenses. If the Lodsys guy would have been smart he would have gone after those that are not covered first and pointed to apple as example of someone already paying. Than the defense would have been only 'week patents'.
That is even more interesting for Angry Birds developer since the iOS application is covered by the license but the Android version is not covered.
One big mistake was to go after iOS developers to double dip since they are already covered by the Apple license. They can at least (with support from Apple) defend them based on weak patents and already payed licenses. If the Lodsys guy would have been smart he would have gone after those that are not covered first and pointed to apple as example of someone already paying. Than the defense would have been only 'week patents'.
That is even more interesting for Angry Birds developer since the iOS application is covered by the license but the Android version is not covered.
