Nokia Sues Apple for Patent Infringement in Germany and the U.S. Following Licensing Disagreement [Updated]

[SirRahikkala]

What's a Nokia?

Worlds largest networking technology company who owns Alcatel and Bell labs (ever heard about that?). Most of the technology used by cell phones has been developed by Nokia. Maybe you tried to be edge about the old Nokia phones which were sold to Microsoft but that ain't the same company anymore.
[doublepost=1482401645][/doublepost]

Nokia still exists?

Check your facts. Old Nokia phones <> Nokia 2016.
[doublepost=1482401789][/doublepost]

Since Nokia can't make a decent smart phone they buy up patients and then sue the like of Apple to make money. Maybe Apple should just buy Nokia

They are not buying patents. They create them. Your iPhone would not work without them or any other cell phone or network in world.

http://www.prime-patent.com/nokia-patent-portfolio/

(I'm so ****ing tired of Apple fanboys with blind faith and zero knowledge. Reality distortion field is real.)

 

[where is it]

Doesn't Microsoft own Nokia? So this is an Apple v Microsoft thing?

 

[MaciMac100]

Deal Nokia and Apple made in 2011 was 5 year deal, so new deal was anyway coming. Since Nokia sold it's phone division, they don't need those slide-to-unlock and other UI patents that Apple currently has for exchange (for their 5G network development and such) hence Nokia wants a better deal.

 

[FelixDerKater]

A bridge is missing its patent troll?

 

[SirRahikkala]

Doesn't Microsoft own Nokia? So this is an Apple v Microsoft thing?

No. Nokia sold their smartphone business to Microsoft 2013 (which was only part of the company).
[doublepost=1482402853][/doublepost]

A bridge is missing its patent troll?

Yeah, Apple should pay the Nokia patents they use which Nokia has created (Nokia has one of the largest patent portfolio in cellular world. And no, not due buying them).

Rockstar Consortium Inc., originally named Rockstar Bidco, is a consortium formed to negotiate licensing for patents acquired from the bankrupt multinational telecommunications and data networking equipment manufacturer Nortel. Members of the consortium are Apple Inc., BlackBerry, Ericsson, Microsoft, and Sony.

In 2012, Business Insider listed Rockstar as number 3 on its list of the 8 most fearsome patent trolls in industry. Wired magazine notes that some call them a "straight-up patent troll".

In October 2013, Rockstar had initiated legal action against eight companies, including Google, Huawei and Samsung, as well as other makers of Android phones including Asustek, HTC, LG Electronics, Pantech, and ZTE. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockstar_Consortium

 

[Stella]

Can't be. That doesn't seem anything like what Nokia is doing.

Refer to the sub thread... re: rockstar during android manufacturers.. when the op claimed this never happened.
[doublepost=1482406510][/doublepost]

nokia trying to stay relevant....

Nokia are one of the largest cellular networking companies in the world...

 

[vladi]

Does anyone know how many Apple's patents are considered FRAND?

How come some stupid design patent (that shouldn't even be approved) such as slide to unlock or scrolling rubber band effect is not considered FRAND?

 

[Pikkuroope]

--Nokia is gasping for air.--

Nokia lol, seriously. This is what happens when you have a company who pretty much doesn't evolve their products. You lost the game, take the hit..

nokia trying to stay relevant....

Doesn't Microsoft own Nokia? So this is an Apple v Microsoft thing?

Seriously though... What are these people talking about? Gasping for air? You have got to be kidding me, the company literally made like a couple billion in profit last year. Trying to stay relevant? First of all, isn't every company trying to do that, and if somebody says Nokia is not relevant nowadays then they don't have absolutely any clue about what's happening in the world.

Having said that, I don't think any one of these companies is any better or less immoral in the sense that they are all aiming to make the most money they can, utilizing whatever means they can. It's not like Apple is not stealing staggering amounts of money from a bunch of other companies and countries and such by going shady stuff in the tax department, for example. And what comes to these patents, it is highly likely that Apple has actually offered to pay a substantial amount of money as they say, but at the same time saying that just because Nokia failed to eternally utilize their own patents to make huge amounts of money, the patents are somehow less valuable. That's just utter rubbish. If somebody invents something and has no other use for it themselves than to sell it to others, it's no less valuable than if they were to use it themselves. They're all just trying to make a ton of money by ripping of everybody else as much as legally possible, and why not illegally as well.
[doublepost=1482409632][/doublepost]

Does anyone know how many Apple's patents are considered FRAND?

How come some stupid design patent (that shouldn't even be approved) such as slide to unlock or scrolling rubber band effect is not considered FRAND?

Yeah well, some of the design patents might really be patent-worthy, but a bunch of them definitely are just them trying to patent hot water and why not breathing air as well while they're at it. It's not really up to the companies anyway, any rational company would try to patent every single thing they come up with, and then it's just up to the patent authorities or something if they accept them or not. It's just logical to try and patent everything, even if it's not logical to accept everything to be a patent.

 

[where is it]

No. Nokia sold their smartphone business to Microsoft 2013 (which was only part of the company).
[doublepost=1482402853][/doublepost]

Yeah, Apple should pay the Nokia patents they use which Nokia has created (Nokia has one of the largest patent portfolio in cellular world. And no, not due buying them).

Rockstar Consortium Inc., originally named Rockstar Bidco, is a consortium formed to negotiate licensing for patents acquired from the bankrupt multinational telecommunications and data networking equipment manufacturer Nortel. Members of the consortium are Apple Inc., BlackBerry, Ericsson, Microsoft, and Sony.

In 2012, Business Insider listed Rockstar as number 3 on its list of the 8 most fearsome patent trolls in industry. Wired magazine notes that some call them a "straight-up patent troll".

In October 2013, Rockstar had initiated legal action against eight companies, including Google, Huawei and Samsung, as well as other makers of Android phones including Asustek, HTC, LG Electronics, Pantech, and ZTE. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockstar_Consortium

That was it, knew there was a connection somewhere.

 

[8692574]

Well, you know what they say... "If you can't win, sue them!"

You mean like Apple did with Samsung?

 

[RowellE]

A little something that was selling 468,000,000 phones in 2008, a mere 8 years ago.

That is nearly double the 251m iphones that Apple sold last year.

Shows just how quickly things can change...

It's a telecommunications company with 25 billion USD revenue last fiscal year.

Wow, that's pretty massive. I didn't realize they were still in business. Nokia was my very first phone back in the day.

... Whos Nokia?

Nokia is that one black chick that works at that one place.

 

[kdarling]

Does anyone know how many Apple's patents are considered FRAND?

FRAND patents are generally part of a standard. The inventors voluntarily submit them as part of the standard, and promise to license them to everyone fairly.

NOTE: this does not mean everyone gets the same rate. If you cross license patents, you pay less. If you buy more licenses, you pay less. If you have better credit, you pay less. Etc. No different than any other product. Apple, as newcomer, often wanted the lower rates that others got for sharing, but Apple didn't want to share.

As far as I know, Apple has not invented and contributed any such patents. They might've bought some LTE patents that are FRAND encumbered. Not sure. Will have to check.

How come some stupid design patent (that shouldn't even be approved) such as slide to unlock or scrolling rubber band effect is not considered FRAND?

Because those patents are not required for anything. Btw, Apple originally wanted something ridiculous like $40 a device in return for using their first iPhone related patents. (Naturally, Apple demands a lot for its patents, but wants to pay almost nothing for anyone else's.)

Interestingly, FRAND patents are generally considered more valuable longterm than standalone patents, simply because you MUST license them to use their standard. They are called SEPs (Standards Essential Patents), because there's no easy way around them.

Contrast that to, say, slide-to-unlock, which was easily bypassed with workarounds. Heck, even Apple doesn't use slide-to-unlock any more. Apple's patents are not essential to making a phone, unlike, say, a Nokia cellular patent.

 

[sracer]

Has there ever been a patent infringement lawsuit brought against Apple that people here considered to be legitimate?

 

[dBeats]

Those sound like things Apple would try to patent. Like how they patented slide to unlock and pinch to zoom.

Please show prior art for any of those. Oh right, you can't....

 

[admob71]

Has there ever been a patent infringement lawsuit brought against Apple that people here considered to be legitimate?

That day will never happen my friend!!
[doublepost=1482415658][/doublepost]

What's with the vindictive attitude?

You haven't met Mr Tim c..... have you.. lol

 

[samcraig]

Yep, every intelligent argument begins with "LOL". Thanks for bringing the IQ of this forum down to a level a kindergartener can understand. Your input here is utterly invaluable.
[doublepost=1482390300][/doublepost]


FYI, Apple ARE already paying licensing fees for the FRAND technology, so be fair and honest about that firstly, but now Nokia want to gouge more money than they have ever been paid through previous licensed agreements. How is it old tech under FRAND, now worth more under new holdings? Answer, it isn't. A scam is a scam is a scam, only a fool believes it isn't, which is why they go to Texas for a totally biased judgement. See my previous response for the proof.
[doublepost=1482390377][/doublepost]

And if they are so great, where are they now????

Roll your eyes some more. Your post is hypocritical since you just would rather insult vs answer the question. I'm sorry if you felt attacked when I pointed out that corporations would do their due diligence on whether or not they owned the patent in question. I would think that would be obvious to anyone.

 

[temna]

Can't be. That doesn't seem anything like what Nokia is doing.

There is a huge difference here kids.. Rockstar bought the patents from a third party (Nortel I believe, not from Apple).. Nokia is transfering their patents to a patent holding company in order to extort higher licensing fees.. See the difference kids?
[doublepost=1482416140][/doublepost]

Kinda like Apple

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockstar_Consortium

Not at all.. Completely different.. Apple didn't transfer their patents to Rockstar to go after another company for higher licensing fees.. Rockstar bought those patents from a third party.. Nokia *IS* transferring patents to a patent holding company for the express purpose of trying to get around FRAND and extort higher licensing fees, which is likely illegal.

 

[Naraxus]

There is a huge difference here kids.. Rockstar bought the patents from a third party (Nortel I believe, not from Apple).. Nokia is transfering their patents to a patent holding company in order to extort higher licensing fees.. See the difference kids?
[doublepost=1482416140][/doublepost]

Not at all.. Completely different.. Apple didn't transfer their patents to Rockstar to go after another company for higher licensing fees.. Rockstar bought those patents from a third party.. Nokia *IS* transferring patents to a patent holding company for the express purpose of trying to get around FRAND and extort higher licensing fees, which is likely illegal.

Rockstar is a NPE, a nice way of saying "Patent Troll". Their methods of getting their may differ but their outcome is the same: both are holding companies that exist solely to make money off patents without producing anything.

http://www.dailytech.com/Google+Cav...es+Pet+Patent+Troll+Rockstar/article36922.htm

 

[kdarling]

There is a huge difference here kids.. Rockstar bought the patents from a third party (Nortel I believe, not from Apple)..

Ah, I think I see your confusion. There were TWO totally separate entities called Rockstar.

The first one was a consortium of companies which bought up the Nortel patents. Then each company took some and later on gave the rest to a brand new company... also incidentally named Rockstar... which has been called one of the worst patent trolls ever created.

Not at all.. Completely different.. Apple didn't transfer their patents to Rockstar to go after another company for higher licensing fees.. Rockstar bought those patents from a third party..

Nope. See above. Apple was a big part of the consortium that bought the patents, and then later transferred them to a newly created patent troll company.

(I normally wouldn't call anyone a patent troll, but Rockstar was specifically created to reverse engineer the original consortium's competitors' code, to try to find infringements.)

As a side note, there is a good legal reason for a company to give its patents to a separate holding company. That way, the non-practicing entity can sue infringers without fear of the infringer suing back over one of their patents being infringed.

 

[mistasopz]

Please show prior art for any of those. Oh right, you can't....

I don't need to. Common sense things like putting your finger on a screen and moving it to unlock should not be patentable. So if you complain about those suing apple for patent infringement then you should also complain when Apple does it.
[doublepost=1482422849][/doublepost]

You clearly have no understanding of how the patent laws work, so let me help you. There is trade dress, like colour and look (i.e. Cadbury purple) as well as form and function, then there's pinch to zoom and slide to unlock, which come under intellectual property because they are listed under computer code, which all are legally patented, remembering Samsung lost the lawsuit covering these very things. What was your point again?

My, my, you need to work on your reading and comprehension skills. This is about the hipocracy of Apple. FTA:

The lawsuits cover 32 patents that cover technologies including display, user interface, software, antenna, chipsets, and video coding.

Did you know that you can patent these items? Apple needs to pay to use these patented technologies. This is not a one way street. If Apple can sue for slide to unlock then Nokia can CERTAINLY sue for chipset, antenna, software, technologies and design. Apple saying that they should get a free ride here is hilarious.

 

[Zarniwoop]

What's a Nokia?

I know you didn't ask for this, but here you go anyway:

Nokia is a multi-national company, that employs ~114.000 people world wide.
Apple is a multi-national company, that employs ~115.000 people world wide.

Nokia is researching new network technologies (5G and 6G) and building and maintaining a wide series of network cell (tower) equipments and other high end network technologies. They've invested 115 billion USD to these technologies.

Apple has been - and still is using Nokia tech in their products. The dispute is that Apple thinks Nokia is over-valuing their IP (patents) value and refuses to pay. So it's up to the court rooms (again) to decide who's right. Last time (2011) Apple lost. Of course they will lose this time too. Even they know they'll lose the legal case. But that's not the issue who owns the IP. The problem is, what is it worth. Apple says, that Nokia is making an unfair offer.

So, see you 2020 when the case is settled. And Apple will pay, what the judge says. And they hope to save couple of billions with the decision.

 

[Amazing Iceman]

MR, a better title for this article would be:

THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK

 

[Wondercow]

I'm so ****ing tired of Apple fanboys with blind faith and zero knowledge. Reality distortion field is real

Do you know all the details of everything that interests you? Some people only know Nokia from their phone business and so comment on that. Why should they be called "fanboys" caught in a reality distortion field?

So you know more than them--great. Educate, don't berate.
[doublepost=1482423503][/doublepost]

How come some stupid design patent (that shouldn't even be approved) such as slide to unlock or scrolling rubber band effect is not considered FRAND?

Because there's no requirement that companies open their patents to others through FRAND or open standards.

 

[macfacts]

There is a better summary of this at Bloomberg ... https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...-over-alleged-patent-infringement-in-products

1. Apple and Nokia had a contract that both cross licenced patents which expired.
2. Nokia doesn't make phones any more so the patents Apple owns are useless to Nokia, so Nokia wants to be paid in money instead in of Apple gift cards or cross licencing of Apple's patents.
3. Nokia won a court case last week against Apple. Jury said Apple was using Nokia's patents.
4. Apple is calling Nokia a patent troll now cause they don't make phones.
5. The patents in the story say they are use in the iPhone for video over cell connection and for Siri. Those don't sound like FRAND patents.

 

[kdarling]

Please show prior art for any of those. Oh right, you can't....

How can anyone who's been on the forum this long, not know about all the prior art by now? Seriously.

The NeoNode N1 and N2 smartphones had swipe unlock gestures starting back in 2002. In fact, when the iPhone came out, several reviewers commented that it copied the NeoNode unlock method (although it added graphics).

"... announced the Neonode N1 back in 2002. It was very small. It had no keypad or keyboard at all. It did not use a stylus either. Instead, it used a swipe and tap system on a novel touch screen that used a grid of infrared beams to sense finger movement.

So those who marvel at how a swipe from left to right unlocks the iPhone, well, the Neonode N1 was unlocking that way more than five years ago. And if the iPhone's swipes and taps seem futuristic, they are not. Neonode has been using them since the first N1 came out."

It also mimicked a deadbolt (an unpatentable action in most countries, and likely unpatentable now in the US after the recent Alice decision).

and looked like decades-old industrial touch On/Off switches (more prior art).

For all these reasons, over ten judges around the world invalidated Apple's patent. Even a US court invalidated it this year over prior art (although another court turned over the invalidation, saying that since the prior art was not seen by a jury, the original ignorant jury's decision should stand. WTH? Legalities instead of common sense.).

--

As for pinch to zoom, it especially dates back decades. That's why Apple does not have a patent on it.

They only got a patent on a particular way of detecting it instead of scrolling, and even that patent has been invalidated for obviousness.

U.S. patent examiner stands by rejection of Apple's pinch-to-zoom API patent claims - Foss Patents, 2014

Now we're off topic. Let's stick to Nokia patents.