Nokia Increases Scope of Patent Complaints to Include 'Virtually All' Apple Products

[surferfromuk]

Apple's filing

http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Guardian/documents/2009/12/11/ApplevNokia.pdf


Nokia's filing

http://i.i.com.com/cnwk.1d/i/ne/pdfs/complaint.pdf


Enjoy

 

[EagerDragon]

I've been following this for awhile (like many of you) and the latest claim by nokia seems a bit ridiculous - are the ITC going to rule against an American company in the home of capitalism?? And it seems like both parties are blowing smoke now.

But I do agree that apple should pay a fair amount if found they do infringe on the GSM technology patents, as from what I've read from previous posts/articles the rest of the mobile industry are paying nokia for use of thier GSM tech, why are apple so special in not paying?!

But what annoys me most is that Nokia think in reperation for any infringement on Apple's part they should have access to iPhone patents when at best they should recieve and fair compensation package i.e. a wedge of dollar.

I could be wrong, but I do not understand why Apple has to pay for GSM technology use. If they buy the GSM radio from someone else that apparently did pay for the GSM tech, why should Apple or anyone else pay again???? THe price of the chips for GSM should in my opinion cover use of the technology implemented by the chip(s). Why pay twice?

If the chip price included the licensing of such tech, then it would even out the field as all radio makers of the same tech would have the ability to set their own prices and compete for Apple business.

Like the recent suite about cameras, if I purchase the parts that can only be used for a camera and it is obvious that those parts are for a camera, why should I pay again when I put together the parts and guess what.... it is a camera that was made from camra parts.

Right or wrong, in my opinion If I buy the chips, it should include a license to use those chips in what ever device I want and come free and clear of all patent violations charges. Why else buy a chip? I could have made it myself and pay the royalty on the pattent.

 

[kzin]

Nokia, in paragraph 44 of its complaint, says that all the offers it made to apple were subject to reciprocity.

It says no such thing.

It says that its offers _included_ reciprocity offers/requests. It does not say that all of the offers, or that offers "from the get-go" (as you asserted in a previous post) were based on reciprocity.

 

[aegisdesign]

It says no such thing.

It says that its offers _included_ reciprocity offers/requests. It does not say that all of the offers, or that offers "from the get-go" (as you asserted in a previous post) were based on reciprocity.

That's my take too. Nokia seem to have tried quite a few different tactics to negotiate, none of which Apple were happy with, so they asked the courts to decide. Apple counter sues. Nokia goes to ITC. Game continues. I still think Apple are being jerks here.

 

[Goona]

the basis of the GSM suit is well founded and is 100% in Nokia's favour. Apple even come close to admitting it.

I just don't know why Apple won't pay the same dues as everyone else..?

the rest of it I don't really know.

Maybe because Nokia doesn't want them paying the same dues, they want them paying 3 times what others are paying.

 

[Goona]

It gets better. Apple outlines the nature of Nokia's potentially illegal strong-arm tactics. ( Apple specifically claims Nokia to be unlawful in article 84)

From Apple's counter-claim;

Article 81. In Particular, in or about the spring of 2008, Nokia demanded that, as part of it’s compensation for licensing Nokia’s portfolio of purported essential patents, Apple must grant Nokia a license to a particular number of Apple non-standards-essential patents...Apple immediately rejected the proposal and reiterated Apple’s position that Nokia’s F/RAND obligations required it to licence Nokia’s purportedly essential technologies.

Article 82. ...In or about May 2009, Nokia demanded a royalty approximately three times as much as the royalty proposed the prior spring, which was itself in excess of a F/RAND rate, as well as “picks’ to Apple’s non-standards-essential patents.


Nokia have been very naughty.

Where are the Nokia fanboys, I wonder why the skipped this post.

 

[Goona]

Every single other handset I still own, holds signal better than the iPhone. I don't know if it's hardware or software, but it surely is not the network as any other phone is just fine.

iPhone sucks at being a phone - it's good for little apps and things to keep the middle classes from being bored.

It sucks at being a phone for you. Your anecdote about the iphone doesn't hold true for the majority of iphone customers who have voted the iphone with the highest satisfaction rates in the industry.

That doesn't sound naughty at all.

That sounds like Nokia, after trying to licence and Apple saying NO, tried two more times giving Apple options and they still said NO whilst Apple persistently infringed.

So Nokia asks the court to settle what the fees should be and Apple counter-sues.

Apple are being jerks. Just pay up already like everybody else has. It's peanuts. It's less than this court battle will cost you. Or just let Nokia use some of your patents in exchange? What's the worst than can happen? Nokia are more interested in lower priced phones and business phones where you don't compete, not shiny hipster toys.

Maybe Apple doesn't want to pay 3 times what everyone else is paying.

Profit only means Apple makes higher margins off their devices, not that they sell more or better quality devices.

In fact, quite the contrary, Apple making more profit only goes to show that Apple is scamming you in a sense. I wouldn't make that argument to promote any kind of intelligence on the part of Apple.

Seriously, you're grasping at straws. Nokia has patents that Apple needs to license. They can't agree to the terms. The courts will decide, and Apple will end up paying. This will end in settlement. Both sides are just pilling up the charges as way to push negotiations. This is business as usual.

No genius, profit means Apple has a better business model than Nokia. Customers and carriers find more value in iphones and are willing to pay more for the iphone. iphone's have the highest satisfaction rates in the industry. This shows customers are satisfied with iphones more than the cheap crap Nokia keeps shoving. No wonder their n97 was met with a meh when introduced and this was supposed to be their flagship phone.

Nokia is the one that is scamming you. They are scamming you by peddling cheap crap and are now forced to sue companies because they can't compete. Heck they even admitted they are jealous of the marketshare that Apple has gained. They've seen Apple stroll in and get huge marketshare within less than 3 years. Meanwhile Nokia who is supposed to have the top dog is scare of newcomer Apple. You are the one grasping at straws buddy.

 

[pmjoe]

This was past due. Apple, on the surface (and particularly with the iPhone), appears to mostly have a bunch of junk user interface patents, most of which are preceded by prior art. Nokia and other phone/chipset companies have been truly inventing in the cellular phone market for decades.

Despite what folks around here think, Apple is not a particularly inventive company. They're great putting a slick, polished design on a final product (but based around proven design work from others) and great at making hardware products play together in a slightly more friendly way (by bundling drivers and including iLife/iTunes/etc. with the Mac). Neither are patentable concepts in the general sense.

Apple has put a perception of significant patentable value around the iPhone most of which I suspect will not hold up in court.

 

[*LTD*]

Despite what folks around here think, Apple is not a particularly inventive company.

ROFL.

Then I suppose the competition has been keeping their groundbreaking devices under wraps until just the right moment, while allowing Apple to release all manner of devices that redefine entire industries overnight. Those "inventive" mystery devices from the also-rans are just around the corner . . .

Nokia is unfocused, wandering around aimlessly in a completely new smartphone market that has all but left it behind. Apple has a goal and a plan. Do one product and do it very well. Nokia and the also-rans "inventive"?? LOL, coulda fooled me! The industry waits for Apple's "inventiveness" and then proceeds to copy furiously. Do what the next guy is doing, but shove in a bigger camera. When the next guy pops in a bigger camera, just throw in an even bigger one for the next update. Rinse, repeat. THAT is the extent of this industry's inventiveness. It's complete BS. No wonder Apple shook everything up the likes of which no one could have anticipated.

By the time this goes to court it will be well into 2011, and God only knows the sorry state Nokia will be in by then. Hell, I'd push Apple to throw money at them out of sheer pity.

 

[zacman]

Where are the Nokia fanboys, I wonder why the skipped this post.

Because it only covers the part after Apple denied the first offer in late 2007.

Nokia made its first offer in 2007 which Apple denied. In 2008 they made a new offer. Only that offer is covered in the paragraphs 81+82.

 

[Goona]

They actually alleged Nokia asked for three times what they'd offered the previous year, not three times the industry rate, whatever that is.

If you're suggesting the second offer was three times the industry rate then the implication is that Apple initially refused to pay even the "industry rate" whatever that is.

I suspect what actually happened was that Nokia offered a very low rate but included use of patents in the deal. Apple refused to include patents so the second offer was higher to reflect that.

Or maybe Nokia demanded the previous year that Apple pay the industry rate plus include patents and when Apple told them to shove it, they came back the following year demanding the 3 times the payment plus patents.

Why don't you even read the complaint? Nokia offered the same amount as they asked all other companies (paragraph 45). Apple does not even deny that.

The 3 times higher amount is including the compensation of damages that Nokia asked for after Apple rejected the initial offer under the FRAND rules.

So Apple didn't want to pay the FRAND amount first and later didn't want to pay the compensations. They turn out just to be nothing more than thieves.

Errrrrrrrrrrrrm no, I read that Nokia wanted 3 times the rate that they demanded from the previous year. It seems that Nokia's demands increase the more profits Apple pulls from the iphone. This is what they have been turned into, they see Apple come into the market and make a killing and they become jealous. Heck they even admitted they are jealous of Apple's success. If Apple didn't want to pay the industry rates, why the heck aren't they getting sued by all the companies who own patents relating to the standards. Why is it only Nokia that is being bullied by big evil Apple.

 

[AidenShaw]

Or maybe Nokia demanded the previous year that Apple pay the industry rate plus include patents and when Apple told them to shove it, they came back the following year demanding the 3 times the payment plus patents.

Sounds like a reasonable tactic if someone refuses to pay for what they're using, and tells you to "shove it" instead of paying.

Apple is playing the Psystar role in this little drama. Bad Apple. Bad!

 

[j26]

I haven't read the pleadings, but the gist of them is pretty obvious from reding this thread.

The thing is that's exactly what they are - PLEADINGS. If claims are not pleaded, they can't be decided on by a court - that's why the documents are so comprehensive and seem to claim ridiculous things.

None of the statements are facts, and unless proved in evidence, are merely part of the argument. The next step is probably that the lawyers for each side will deny that the other sides pleadings are true. Then a huge process of discovery begins.

My guess on the court proceedings is that Apple has been a bit naughty. Almost all tech firms infringe patents in some way, sometimes because they never realised the patent existed, other times because they believe they can get away with it. Apple just seems to have been a bit cheeky and has been called on it by Nokia. I see a settlement before this ever gets to trial.


The ITC complaint is an interesting twist. I wonder if a similar complaint will be made in the EU.

 

[zacman]

No wonder their n97 was met with a meh when introduced and this was supposed to be their flagship phone.

Yeah, like that N95 that didn't sell at all - only 30 million. But hey every single iPhone model sold 30 million times, right?

iPhone 2G? - Oh, eh nope.
But iPhone 3G? - Ups, no.
But hey the iPhone 3GS, right!? - Well no.

Too bad. Next try: iPhone 4

 

[Goona]

The Macs and the iPod (touch) all include wireless lan technology which is also part of the initial lawsuit. Nokia just didn't include the other products in the law suit first because they probably thought that Apple would just be clever and pay for the iPhone. Instead Apple decided to counter sue. Nokia is now threatening to stop Apple's whole business.

Remember when almost all SanDisk MP3 players that were imported into the EU got distrained a few years ago because a chip manufacturer didn't pay Fraunhofer for their patents (Sisvel) and SanDisk was the only company that didn't want to pay for it. Same could happen to Apple very quickly. There is no such obligation in EU law to licence technology to other companies like it is in the US law (FRAND).

See for example: http://www.sisvel.com/english/news/sisvelnews/sisvelandsandiskatif
http://www.design-reuse.com/news/14...ional-legal-troubles-sandisk-mp3-players.html

Keep living in la la land. You wish Nokia could put a stop to Apple's products. Your company is becoming irrelevant and the only way to get noticed is by suing.

 

[zacman]

Your company is becoming irrelevant and the only way to get noticed is by suing.

So Apple is "your" company? Steve, is it you?

And I wouldn't call a company that still sells every quarter around 3-4 times the number of phones Apple has ever sold today "becoming irrelevant".

 

[Goona]

This was past due. Apple, on the surface (and particularly with the iPhone), appears to mostly have a bunch of junk user interface patents, most of which are preceded by prior art. Nokia and other phone/chipset companies have been truly inventing in the cellular phone market for decades.

Despite what folks around here think, Apple is not a particularly inventive company. They're great putting a slick, polished design on a final product (but based around proven design work from others) and great at making hardware products play together in a slightly more friendly way (by bundling drivers and including iLife/iTunes/etc. with the Mac). Neither are patentable concepts in the general sense.

Apple has put a perception of significant patentable value around the iPhone most of which I suspect will not hold up in court.

LOL at some of these Nokia fanboys, what has Nokia invented, heck they are even trying to sue Apple with regards to Macs and ipods. What have they invented in that space.

 

[Goona]

Sounds like a reasonable tactic if someone refuses to pay for what they're using, and tells you to "shove it" instead of paying.

Apple is playing the Psystar role in this little drama. Bad Apple. Bad!

Who told you they aren't paying, they just don't want to pay 3 times the industry rate.

 

[Goona]

Yeah, like that N95 that didn't sell at all - only 30 million. But hey every single iPhone model sold 30 million times, right?

iPhone 2G? - Oh, eh nope.
But iPhone 3G? - Ups, no.
But hey the iPhone 3GS, right!? - Well no.

Too bad. Next try: iPhone 4

We're talking about the n97 wise guy.

 

[kdarling]

I could be wrong, but I do not understand why Apple has to pay for GSM technology use. If they buy the GSM radio from someone else that apparently did pay for the GSM tech, why should Apple or anyone else pay again????

Because the chip price doesn't include a license. You pay for what you actually do with each chip.

For example, if you buy a 2G+3G capable chip but only use its 2G radio, you should not be forced to pay for the 3G technology that you didn't use. After all, a few dollars times millions of units is not chump change.

Right or wrong, in my opinion If I buy the chips, it should include a license to use those chips in what ever device I want and come free and clear of all patent violations charges.

Not at all. For instance, say you bought the parts to make an iPod clone. But just buying the parts does not give you the right to use Apple's patents on such a device. Parts do not come with global licenses to make anything that others made with the same chips.

 

[Goona]

So Apple is "your" company? Steve, is it you?

And I wouldn't call a company that still sells every quarter around 3-4 times the number of phones Apple has ever sold today "becoming irrelevant".

But Apple is making more profits of the phones they are selling than all those cheap 30 dollar phones Nokia are pushing.

 

[zacman]

what has Nokia invented, heck they are even trying to sue Apple with regards to Macs and ipods. What have they invented in that space.

Ok, it seems you don't even read the news your commenting on but rather are pressing some F-keys which contain pre entered phrases.

The patents are about wifi technology (802.11), power management (APM) and user interfaces.

 

[zacman]

But Apple is making more profits of the phones they are selling than all those cheap 30 dollar phones Nokia are pushing.

Of course they earn more money because they are saving the patents licencing costs and are stealing technology. No surprise that they can earn more that way.

 

[Speedy2]

Nope, Nokia has asked for exactly the same amount (5 percent of revenue), Apple doesn't even deny that. They are just saying that it is to much. Quite a tough argument as 30+ mobile companies agreed to pay the exactly same amount to Nokia before.

Well, a smartphone is not exactly a simple phone with GSM functionality, is it? It is a portable Internet multimedia device, that adds a hell lot of value to a simple GSM Nokia-style phone. Apple has every right to demand a lower percentage.

 

[Goona]

This says it all about Nokia's strategy of late:

“Nokia has been very active of late, and in general, there has been an increase in litigation in the industry,”

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/28/business/global/28nokia.html?_r=1

Nokia sure has been active in the litigation department, instead of spending more time fixing their crappy phones, they are suing the companies actually making good products.

Of course they earn more money because they are saving the patents licencing costs and are stealing technology. No surprise that they can earn more that way.

No they earn more money because they are smart enough to know when not to get extorted by con artists.