They are just Jerk covered Jerks.
Impressive analysis.
Do you write for Yahoo News?
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 Targets Disney's 'Where's My Water?' and Others in New Round of Lawsuits Over In-App Purchasing
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Impressive analysis.
Do you write for Yahoo News?
Jetpacs, I patent Jetpacs!!
I have no ability or technical resources, financing or even inclination to try and invent, build and productionise an actual Jetpac, but when somebody else does, they're gonna owe me a whole lotta money.
Teleportation, that's mine too.
As soon as I have another random crazy thought or go watch some 50s scifi movie for ideas, I'm gonna patent it all.
Deathstars, tobacco flavoured chocolate, iShoes - patent and trademark I claim them all.
10 years from now I'll be rich. This is eeaazzyy. I trademark that word, right now!!
I have no ability or technical resources, financing or even inclination to try and invent, build and productionise an actual Jetpac, but when somebody else does, they're gonna owe me a whole lotta money.
Teleportation, that's mine too.
As soon as I have another random crazy thought or go watch some 50s scifi movie for ideas, I'm gonna patent it all.
Deathstars, tobacco flavoured chocolate, iShoes - patent and trademark I claim them all.
10 years from now I'll be rich. This is eeaazzyy. I trademark that word, right now!!
You really think a company as big as Apple, where the CEO farting is front page news everywhere, is going to claim something like this if it wasn't true. If they're lying that would sink the company basically overnight. And if they are lying why hasn't Lodsys proven it. Their defense to try to keep Apple out of the cases is that they didn't include Apple as a party so Apple has no right to butt in. At no point have they simply said, here's the contract, that stuff isn't in there so Sierra Tango Foxtrot Uniform to Apple
And Apple can't sue Lodsys because they have nothing to sue over. They aren't being sued so they can't countersue and so on.
The court system is slow and thus this stuff takes time. I suppose Apple could attempt to sue Lodsys for contract violation but at this point the best they might gain is the Courts tells Lodsys to cease and desist sending out any new letters or starting new lawsuits until this matter is settled. And that's iffy. However this new batch of letters could result in such a ploy being tried.
Yes apple can claim something like this and it is not true and no it would not sink apple. I don't know where you come up with this stuff. Perfect example is the naming rights of the Ipad in China. Whether you agree or not Apple claimed to have the rights to the name but than had to settle to pay for it.
Because Apple already paid for a license that should have covered their API (and those using the API). Lodsys is just choosing to ignore that and go after the devs anyway.
That was just...gawwwww, man. Gawwww. It's ridiculous some of the stunts you see getting pulled these days.
Benefit of the doubt, I guess they kinda have to. It's not nearly as bad with trademarks as it is with patents, but if they don't, someone else might, and end up costing them tons of cash getting a pointless and far too vague trademark invalidated. I can fault all these acting like vultures trying to monetize every little nondescript thing thing, but it's all ultimately pointing towards a system that's severely broken, and in desperate need of some new administration.
I take it you are not actually familiar with this case? Even as someone that is seldom kind to Apple, you should probably be on the side of the devs in this case. And Apple, who has stood up and defended their devs despite not necessarily being required to.
Others have already explained the case to you.
I thought I heard that they had done this too.
Dont just think that Lodsys is going after the big boys. They are making an all out assult on developers. There are devs that make less than $200 a month that are getting emails from Lodsys demanding payment. The scary thing is Apples response to these indie devs has been to get a lawyer...
If what you say is true, then why did so many companies buy licenses, and why would a small player like Lodsys sue companies who have more lawyers than God?
Disney is major player in the IP game. They are responsible for major changes in copyright law. ISTM that Lodsys would NOT go after Disney if what you say is true.
My guess is that what you are saying is not accurate.
You should seriously get a grip on yourself. Here is a short summary of the facts:
1. Lodsys has a patent about giving feedback about a product. They purchased this patent together with others.
2. When the patent was applied for, prior art was found and promptly excluded from what the patent covers. Basically, prior art was found about giving feedback about a product to someone other than the maker of the product. As a result, this patent covers only sending feedback about a product to the maker of the product.
3. The feedback is sent to Apple's server. Therefore, sending feedback about any product that isn't made by Apple isn't covered by this patent. Obviously that doesn't stop them from suing.
4. Apple bought a license to this patent, together with licenses to other patents. The software that is claimed to infringe the patent is made by Apple and shipped by Apple as part of MacOS X. And Apple has a license.
5. Lodsys is therefore suing people who don't do anything that would infringe this patent if it covered what they are doing, and it doesn't cover what they are doing in the first place.
Companies like Apple bought whole packages of patent licenses. And not from Lodsys, but from the previous owner of the patent. And Lodsys is suing because (a) they hope that some people will be paying them because paying is cheaper than going to court, and (b) they hope to find a really stupid jury that awards them tons of money for garbage patents.
A. Because Disney's app doesn't do anything infringing. The app asks iOS to do something, and Apple's code inside iOS does something that might be infringing except for some other reasons, but that's Apple doing it, and Apple has a license.
B. Because what Disney's app asks iOS to do isn't actually infringing on Lodsys' patent. There was prior art presented when the patent was applied for that covered 99% of the usefulness of this patent. Most people wouldn't have bothered with the patent. The company applying for the patent did. The patent now covers sending feedback of _your_ product to _your_ server. But the app talks to Apple's servers, and that is excluded as prior art.
Last edited:
Methinks you're wasting keystrokes responding to this man/woman (never got the picture this person uses) as past posts seems to be someone not unlike my retired gramps who enjoys going to events he doesn't like so he can tell everyone who is there how bad it is. Sadly he's never created on his own and the family says its the way he gets attention. Sad.
I'm not a developer, but work in film, and can appreciate, as a parallel, the paralyzing effect a lawsuit can have on an indie filmmaker. Throwing the suit against Apple didn't yield for them, so they went after little guys, before they started with some other big boys. Sad.
"For nearly two years, we've been following the saga of patent troll Lodsys"
Now they're just outright saying it. This company needs to burn to the ground and then explode, killing the founder in the blast. They're doing nothing but wasting US tax money in courts suing every company out there for no reason.
----------
IAPCracker for the win!
Now they're just outright saying it. This company needs to burn to the ground and then explode, killing the founder in the blast. They're doing nothing but wasting US tax money in courts suing every company out there for no reason.
----------
IAPCracker for the win!
If what you say is true, then Lodys is wasting hundreds of thousands (millions?) of dollars suing major, Fortune 500 companies who will not put up with nuisance suits.
ISTM that this makes little sense. It makes a LOT more sense to me that Apple's license protects Apple, but does not protect every third party software developer in the world who might happen to sell some software to Apple. Maybe Apple's license allows Apple to sell infringing products with impunity. But to allow the infringer to get off scott free just because Apple is one of their vendors? I don't know how that makes any sense at all.
Patent which seems to cover any sort of purchasing of add-ons made inside of an app - GRANTED, despite its exceeding broad coverage.
Patents for specific software quirks (not just Apple's, but Android ones too) which are undeniably unique and narrow in their application, not to mention non-essential - DENIED.
Patents for specific software quirks (not just Apple's, but Android ones too) which are undeniably unique and narrow in their application, not to mention non-essential - DENIED.