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.
Nokia Files iPhone-Related Suit Against Apple Regarding Wireless Patents
- Thread starter ChazUK
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yes, The Great Maemo Promise, The Great Android Promise, and The Great Palm Pre Promise That Never Was, etc. We're all still waiting.
Meanwhile, iPhone development continues.
As other peoplehave pointed out, Nokia have tried negotiating with Apple without any success, which may have been for quite some time. Now, Nokia is turning to the courts as a last resort.
Furthermore, Nokia are not wanting to prevent the sale of iPhones.. they want to protect their IP and get the licensing fees that they feel is owed to them by Apple.
If Apple want to protect their IP, then they should start suing those who have infringed on their patents.. but at this point in time, I really don't believe there are any. Patents can be lost if not protected.
No, I said the webkit-based ones were usable, not that they wouldn't have a web browser without it, and webkit IS the default S60 browser on their smart phones. But you're right about Mozilla on the new Maemos.
http://www.allaboutsymbian.com/news/item/7951_Is_WebKit_going_to_take_over_t.php
I should have been more clear, I put the quotation marks around threaten because you're right, they didn't threaten to sue Palm, when asked about the Palm Pre they indicated that they would actively protect their IP (I think it was also in reference to the UI design elements, the multitouch AND the iTunes workaround - not just the iTunes workaround). I was getting at what they weren't saying (and by doing so, assuming) that's what they were getting at.
EDIT: Found the story (https://www.macrumors.com/2009/01/2...ssively-protect-iphone-intellectual-property/). The declaration of protecting their IP was (at least originally) not in reference to the iTunes workaround/hack. So perhaps I should say to you, "stop making things up".
Sorry, I had to, I'm not actually upset.
Are you actually claiming that the Maemo browser was not significantly influenced my Mobile Safari and other Webkit browsers?!
Actually, it would have probably been Mozilla, instead.
Nokia started its interest in Mozilla a few years back and will release a Mozilla based client for one of its other devices - N900(?).
The N900 that has not been released yet?
Sure!
Sales in units are rather uninteresting.
Sure if you really want to use that rigged way of analysing. Omitting US sales is just hilarious. Also in China Nokia mostly sells cheap crap. Also remember that iPhone 3GS was available only on about 60-70 countries and was supply constrained the almost whole quarter.
From companys POV the most interesting is sales in dollars. Apple and Nokia smartphones sell in dollars about the same amount (Apples ASP is double Nokia Smartphones).
Not bad from a company who is selling only high end, mostly with one operator deals in only part of the world.
And the crap phone sales are about as high as Nokias smartphone sales. Less profit obviously.
True.
Bzzt. Wrong.
It's not what you are headed to that counts, it's what you deliver. No sing of
a Nokia smartphone with a usable browser even today. AFAIK, of course. I've played with a N97 for a couple of hours and it looked to me like an avarage imitation of the iPhone.
my 2 c
a) the first Maemo browser existed before Mobile Safari saw the light of day. Before it was even announced. That was definitely NOT influenced by Mobile Safari in _any_ way.
b) "influenced by" is not the same as "wouldn't exist without it".
c) "significantly influenced by"? No. Not significantly. They're rather different. For one, Maemo's microb is (or at least, was) an actual desktop browser engine (flash, firefox desktop browser plugins, etc.). Mobile safari is not. And the UI's are VERY different.
Perhaps fennec is significantly influenced by mobile safari (I don't know, one way or the other) ... but Maemo is not yet using fennec.
Please note we do not know what "patents" Apple has supposedly broken.
While that is true it is VERY odd that this "press release" comes out on the very same day that Microsoft debuts Windows 7.
If Apple didn't pay up then they should but I'd be looking into a possible collusion pact to try to manipulate Apple stock.
Just out of interest, whom would benefit out of this manipulation? (I genuinely don't understand stock markets so I had to ask.
)
Just out of interest, whom would benefit out of this manipulation? (I genuinely don't understand stock markets so I had to ask.
Everybody except Apple. That's who.
Exactly!
Maybe I'm very naive but I'm really getting tired of smaller or less successful companies suing over patent infringment well into the dominating success of a competitors product. Why on earth did it take Nokia over 2 years to attempt to file a suit? This same thing happens all the time for nintendo with the wii and it seems kind of disgusting. From what I follow, when a successful company sues another company, it generally happens before I even knew the other device existed, allowing the other company to get the results of the trial much quicker so they can fix any contract disputes early in the product cycle and move on.
This, however, means nokia could receive back payments on 3 versions of the iPhone, rather than just one model and then apple would have made the necessary adjustments in time for the 3g. This allows nokia to cash in on tons more sales at a higher price than they would receive from an ordinary contract.
If meatspace crimes have a statute of limitations, the same should apply for patent infringements. While I dunno if nokia has a legit case, I'm rooting against them for their scummy practice of waiting for iPhone domination before speaking up.
Another thing about where you're headed to, wouldn't it be safe to say that Apple also has a roadmap with different phases of the development of the iPhone OS? Just because it wasn't public (as I assume Nokia's was, sorry, I just started following this discussion) doesn't mean that the iPhone concept hasn't been in development for a long time (I remember several stories saying that the iPhone was in development for at least 3 years, likely more I just can't remember, before they actually announced it)
At least for the speech-codec related patents, shouldn't the SOC chipset manufacturers (such as Samsung in the iPhone's case) be the one's being sued, as the codecs are implemented in hardware, Apple is just sending a raw unencoded datastream to the chipset and receiving a decoded datastream from the chipset.
Perhaps there were 2 years worth of negotiations? Until more details are reported its a bit too soon to find out who (Nokia or Apple) are being "scummy".
I hate to nit pick (though I'm doing it a lot lately) but, in the phone world, Apple is the smaller, less successful company.. isn't it? Maybe not long-term, but certainly currently Nokia is the bigger of the two (I guess we could debate who's more successful).
What's your point? Lots of web browsers existed before Mobile Safari. How usable was it on mobile phones before Mobile Safari was released?
Who are you quoting? I never claimed the Maemo browser "wouldn't exist without it".
Moble Safari is as much an actual desktop browser engine as the Maemo browser is. I think it is unlikely that we would be seeing the Maemo browser as it currently is in the Fall 2009 if the iPhone was never released.
You know, I have to say I'm all for Nokia pursuing this. They made some major innovations in real-world technology, which they rightly hold patents for. This is exactly what the patent system is there for. These aren't just patents Nokia held for ambush; they are innovations which have literally shaped an entire industry. Nokia should by all rights be rewarded for those innovations.
I have a hard time believing that Apple disagrees. The main question, though, is "how much should Nokia be charging" for these foundational patents (which will eventually run out, but that's several lifetimes down the road in the tech sector). Apple obviously believes Nokia is demanding far too much, and so has been dragging out negotiations. Nokia is filing suit to force Apple to accept their offered licensing prices or lose the iPhone business altogether.
I'm not privy to the prices Nokia demands for their licensing deals, so I can't say if they are fair or not. I'd hazard a guess that none of the posters on this board are privy to those details - much less are knowledgeable enough about the industry to say if they are reasonable or not - either.
So, right now, I think it's best we all just stop the blind fanboyism / attack-dogism and just let the grownups decide what the right outcome should be.
These types of IP lawsuits seem to always get brought to court several years after the initial IP infrigement.
Yup that's just how Nokia felt about Qualcomm suing them a few years ago.
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2007/05/nokia-qualcomm-patent-dustup-bad-for-3g.ars