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

[cmwade77]

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.

To point 4, Nokia USED to make phones, which means that they are more than just a patent troll.

That being said, here is how Patents are supposed to work:

1. Company A invents something really cool and useful through research and development.
2. Company A applies for a patent by submitting drawings and everything else that would be needed to build on the idea in the future.
3. The patent is approved
4. The patent prevents others from using the work or creating derivatives without a licensing deal with Company A for a limited amount of time to allow Company A time to recoup their costs and make a nice profit.
5. Once the limited amount of time is up, the original design becomes open source allowing other companies to freely use the concept and build new products upon it.
6. So Company B adds some cool new functionality and then they can patent that new functionality and the process starts over.

This is the way the process was designed to allow smaller companies the chance to actually be innovative and competitive and to encourage innovation from everyone. The problem is that patents have somehow evolved into many companies getting to keep the patents forever, which was never the intention.

Many question if the patent process still works in today's fast paced tech world and the reality is if it was run as originally intended is that while you might need to adjust the amount of time in step 4 accordingly, it would still work.

 

[robsp2000]

This is a thread about the controversy between Nokia and Apple over intellectual property. I know that anything to do with intellectual anything is probably the farthest thing from the troll agenda, but would you at least work on some originality? Let's see, you followed the script and brought up comments that bash Apple but are irrelevant to the actual discussion, but you used the very tired and lame "Apple can't innovate" and "No Mac upgrades by Cook." On the positive side, you do get credit give for not using "courage." Now, on your road to redemption, put on your thinking cap and let's see if you can formulate a response to this post that doesn't include "Fanboy," "Kool-Aid," " death of Jobs, " "thinness," "bean counter" or "dongles." I know that you probably haven't seen any homework from the Trolling Apple on-line course that doesn't include these terms, but I assure you it can be done. Never give up.

PERFECT

 

[vladi]

To point 4, Nokia USED to make phones, which means that they are more than just a patent troll.

That being said, here is how Patents are supposed to work:

1. Company A invents something really cool and useful through research and development.
2. Company A applies for a patent by submitting drawings and everything else that would be needed to build on the idea in the future.
3. The patent is approved
4. The patent prevents others from using the work or creating derivatives without a licensing deal with Company A for a limited amount of time to allow Company A time to recoup their costs and make a nice profit.
5. Once the limited amount of time is up, the original design becomes open source allowing other companies to freely use the concept and build new products upon it.
6. So Company B adds some cool new functionality and then they can patent that new functionality and the process starts over.

This is the way the process was designed to allow smaller companies the chance to actually be innovative and competitive and to encourage innovation from everyone. The problem is that patents have somehow evolved into many companies getting to keep the patents forever, which was never the intention.

Many question if the patent process still works in today's fast paced tech world and the reality is if it was run as originally intended is that while you might need to adjust the amount of time in step 4 accordingly, it would still work.

And then Disney shows up and delays the public domain into oblivion

 

[MaciMac100]

Nokia just filed additional patent suits against Apple.

 

[Solomani]

Knock knock?

Who der?

Nokia?

Nokia who?

Knockia off, you patent troll!

 

[MaciMac100]

"Apple's lawsuit against Acacia, Conversant and Nokia was filed only one day after Ottawa-based Conversant named Boris Teksler as its new chief executive. He had worked as Apple's director of patent licensing and strategy from 2009 to 2013, the latter half of his tenure overlapping with the lawsuits against Samsung."

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-nokia-corp-apple-patent-idUSKBN14A228

 

[shplock]

Fun

What's with the vindictive attitude?

funny I was going to say the same thing about your many posts doing the same thing against Apple
[doublepost=1482439754][/doublepost]

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]

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

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.)

True, but then what about the many patents that Nokia and others encroach on that were created by people like Nikola Tesla and Marconi. Without which their work would not be possible. I think that the whole patent system is just bonkers and the only winners at the end of the day are the dam lawyers

 

[dBeats]

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

Probably because I don't care, I just love my iPhone and I live my life happy with it.
[doublepost=1482440415][/doublepost]

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]

So anything sufficiently designed well enough that it's intuitive and natural should not be patentable because it's so good? Ok I see your logic, design is useless and a waste of time...

 

[kdarling]

Probably because I don't care, I just love my iPhone and I live my life happy with it.

Anyone can see someone's past posts by simply clicking on the name above their avatar. The number of your posts dissing non-Apple products, shows that you apparently care a lot!

So anything sufficiently designed well enough that it's intuitive and natural should not be patentable because it's so good? Ok I see your logic, design is useless and a waste of time...

I think he was saying that a common sense gesture should not be patentable. This goes for anyone, not just Apple.

No single entity should have a lock on gestures like swipe to go back, up or down to pull up a menu, long-press ditto, and so forth. That would make it much more difficult for the common consumer to learn. Fortunately, no one really does, mostly because touch UIs have been around since the early 1980s.

Btw, I can think of only one gesture that Apple came up with that was different from what had been done for many years before. That was where double-tapping right after a zoom, moved the center over to the new tap point. And I can't even swear that was new.

 

[pankajdoharey]

Aha the Chinese, if they cant make money after buying Nokia, well lets make money suing others to keep the operations afloat.

 

[8692574]

Aha the Chinese, if they cant make money after buying Nokia, well lets make money suing others to keep the operations afloat.

This post shows you know nothing about Nokia....

 

[jtjk]

I just needed to comment as I have been working for Nokia some ~15 years. The patent war have been existing always in this field. All the players are having strong patent decks (well maybe not small Chinese ones). Normally it goes like all the major ones are having quite strong decks. From time to time, it is good to go to the court and check the weight of the deck just to be sure and get the current rankings.

Now the situation is totally different as Nokia is having one of the strongest patent decks, but they are not using patents of other players anymore. That means that they can get more fees from others.

Other thing that many does not know here is that there is actually two type of patents:
1) Normal patent that you can license for others if you want
2) Essential patent. Without this technology, you cannot implement smart phone. That's why you must license this for all manufacturers and all players must pay royalties for you.

Nokia happens to have very big deck of essential patents related to 3G/4G technologies for example. Apple and others must pay royalties and if they don't, Nokia is going to court and going to win. This is how it goes.

 

[vladi]

Apple suing Nokia on antitrust and conspiracy grounds. Wow! LOL

 

[tooltalk]

I just needed to comment as I have been working for Nokia some ~15 years. The patent war have been existing always in this field. All the players are having strong patent decks (well maybe not small Chinese ones). Normally it goes like all the major ones are having quite strong decks. From time to time, it is good to go to the court and check the weight of the deck just to be sure and get the current rankings.

Now the situation is totally different as Nokia is having one of the strongest patent decks, but they are not using patents of other players anymore. That means that they can get more fees from others.

Other thing that many does not know here is that there is actually two type of patents:
1) Normal patent that you can license for others if you want
2) Essential patent. Without this technology, you cannot implement smart phone. That's why you must license this for all manufacturers and all players must pay royalties for you.

Nokia happens to have very big deck of essential patents related to 3G/4G technologies for example. Apple and others must pay royalties and if they don't, Nokia is going to court and going to win. This is how it goes.

Well, Apple's problems here are that they consider:

1) all normal patents worthless : Apple won't pay because they are already invalid or they don't infringe.
2) all SEP close to being worthless : Nokia's patents are worth $0.000000x since they are FRAND.

That pretty much sums up why it's so difficult to agree on anything.

In all seriousness, I really wish I knew where all Apple's R&D money goes to. Their bread and butter now is in communication devices, yet we feel hardly any influence (or contribution) on wireless communication from Apple. It would make sense to invest some serious $$ in the underlying tech instead of Ive's playground. They continue to make beautified phones using others' IPs, but complaint when they are asked to pay.

 

[I7guy]

Well, Apple's problems here are that they consider:

1) all normal patents worthless : Apple won't pay because they are already invalid or they don't infringe.
2) all SEP close to being worthless : Nokia's patents are worth $0.000000x since they are FRAND.

That pretty much sums up why it's so difficult to agree on anything.

In all seriousness, I really wish I knew where all Apple's R&D money goes to. Their bread and butter now is in communication devices, yet we feel hardly any influence (or contribution) on wireless communication from Apple. It would make sense to invest some serious $$ in the underlying tech instead of Ive's playground. They continue to make beautified phones using others' IPs, but complaint when they are asked to pay.

In all seriousness, the bolded is basically business as usual for american corporations. The patent system is basically broken and maybe that is why apple (and other companies) do what they do.

 

[kdarling]

In all seriousness, the bolded is basically business as usual for american corporations. The patent system is basically broken and maybe that is why apple (and other companies) do what they do.

That's all true. At the same time, what the person you replied to said, is also true:

Other companies spent many billions and decades designing, building and improving the global communications network and user market, while often selling phones near cost just to get wide adoption.

Without all that tremendous hard work and cost to create such an infrastructure, there could be no iPhone for Apple to come in late with and make their own billions from. This is why they owe royalties, and no, it's not up to Apple to decide how much those are.

All that said, I think Apple could have a point with their complaint against Nokia, depending on the license term changes.

 

[pankajdoharey]

Nokia is owned by Foxconn, and now Foxconn is conning the S**t out of Apple. One one side it gets manufacturing deals from Apple to produce Apple products. On the other hand they are suing Apple in guise of Nokia. Chinese are indeed curiously cunning people.
[doublepost=1482697973][/doublepost]

This post shows you know nothing about Nokia....

Enlighten me.

 

[8692574]

Nokia is owned by Foxconn, and now Foxconn is conning the S**t out of Apple. One one side it gets manufacturing deals from Apple to produce Apple products. On the other hand they are suing Apple in guise of Nokia. Chinese are indeed curiously cunning people.
[doublepost=1482697973][/doublepost]
Enlighten me.

Nokia is NOT owned by Foxconn for starters..

HMD (a Finnish company) signed a licensing agreement with Nokia Corporation giving HMD sole use of the "Nokia" brand on mobile phones and tablets worldwide for the next decade, and cellular standard essential patent licenses, as well as design rights it acquired from Microsoft.

The remainder of the Microsoft Mobile feature phone business, including factories, has been acquired by FIH Mobile, a subsidiary of Taiwan-based Foxconn, who will manufacture HMD's products.

Foxconn owns factories but not Nokia!

Nokia is not Chinese, it is Finnish! Foxconn cannot sue Apple because patents are Nokia's.

Nokia (the patent owner) by itself (the Finnish company) sued Apple.... Foxconn has nothing to do with this!

Nokia itself does not directly invest in HMD but has a board member representative, sets mandatory requirements, and receives royalty for patents(from HMD).

 

[I7guy]

That's all true. At the same time, what the person you replied to said, is also true:

Other companies spent many billions and decades designing, building and improving the global communications network and user market, while often selling phones near cost just to get wide adoption.

Without all that tremendous hard work and cost to create such an infrastructure, there could be no iPhone for Apple to come in late with and make their own billions from. This is why they owe royalties, and no, it's not up to Apple to decide how much those are.

All that said, I think Apple could have a point with their complaint against Nokia, depending on the license term changes.

That's all true, but at the same time, Nokia had nothing to do with the infrastructure. Verizon built it out, ATT built out their infrastructure. This infrastructure opened the door for the early visionaries such as BB, et-al who came in "late" as you say and made billions. Others like apple(2007) and samsung(1988) came in later (1973 was the year I believe for the first cell phone for Motorola, with wireless telephony in 1908) and made billions. Don't want to make it seem like anybody really came in like a super-hero and saved the day.

So yeah, a lot of different fingers in the pot starting at the turn of century to come up to where we are today. We'll see where it goes.

 

[kdarling]

That's all true, but at the same time, Nokia had nothing to do with the infrastructure. Verizon built it out, ATT built out their infrastructure.

Nokia had a ton to do with the infrastructure. For one thing, they were one of the primary designers of GSM, which is widely used around the world. They deployed some of the first networks in Europe, at the behest of various carriers.

This is why Nokia was and is also a main supplier of infrastructure equipment. (No, they didn't just make phones, like many laypeople think.)

Same goes for companies like Ericsson, Motorola, Samsung, LG, all of whom have spent billions creating cellular patents and/or network infrastructure equipment. And yes, the carriers spent a lot of money buying this equipment.

The upshot of all this work was that most of the big names belonging to the ETSI standards group have had cross licensing set up so that they paid relatively little in royalties to each other. (I've heard that Nokia itself pays nothing because of such cross licensing.)

Newcomers like Apple who have contributed nothing towards the standards, have to pay much higher rates and/or license some unrelated IP as partial payment.

 

[I7guy]

Nokia had a ton to do with the infrastructure. For one thing, there were one of the primary designers of GSM, which is widely used around the world. They deployed some of the first networks in Europe, at the behest of various carriers.

This is why Nokia was and is also a main supplier of infrastructure equipment. (No, they didn't just make phones, like many laypeople think.)

Same goes for companies like Ericsson, Motorola, Samsung, LG, all of whom have spent billions creating cellular patents and/or network infrastructure equipment. And yes, the carriers spent a lot of money buying this equipment.

The upshot of all this work was that most of the big names belonging to the ETSI standards group have had cross licensing set up so that they paid relatively little in royalties to each other. (I've heard that Nokia itself pays nothing because of such cross licensing.)

Newcomers like Apple who have contributed nothing towards the standards, have to pay much higher rates and/or license some unrelated IP as partial payment.

That's like saying Cisco is responsible for the internet, because their equipment was mostly used in the early days. They didn't lay the transatlantic fiber/cables, provide connectivity to the home, etc,even though in those days, they spent a fortune on R&D and were almost the sole supplier of internet routers.

All companies spend billions on their patents, but who put the cell towers up in the US? Who acquired the land? permits etc? Building the infrastructure in the US cost billions and billions and Nokia did not build that infrastructure, just like Cisco didn't build it in the 1990s.

 

[lowendlinux]

That's like saying Cisco is responsible for the internet, because their equipment was mostly used in the early days. They didn't lay the transatlantic fiber/cables, provide connectivity to the home, etc,even though in those days, they spent a fortune on R&D and were almost the sole supplier of internet routers.

All companies spend billions on their patents, but who put the cell towers up in the US? Who acquired the land? permits etc? Building the infrastructure in the US cost billions and billions and Nokia did not build that infrastructure, just like Cisco didn't build it in the 1990s.

That not what he said at all.

 

[vladi]

That's like saying Cisco is responsible for the internet, because their equipment was mostly used in the early days. They didn't lay the transatlantic fiber/cables, provide connectivity to the home, etc,even though in those days, they spent a fortune on R&D and were almost the sole supplier of internet routers.

All companies spend billions on their patents, but who put the cell towers up in the US? Who acquired the land? permits etc? Building the infrastructure in the US cost billions and billions and Nokia did not build that infrastructure, just like Cisco didn't build it in the 1990s.

Oh boy! SIM card inside your iPhone works based on Nokia's patents right? Who laid out the blueprint to infrastructure of manufacturing SIM cards and modems inside your iPhone? Nokia and Ericsson did. And what about towers? Yup that's mostly Ericsson but Nokia has some fair share in communication technology to what's attached to the tower.

So without Nokia and Ericsson there would be no towers for ATT to deploy. ATT is in business of making money by offering service. Nokia is in the business of creating the service and in a pyramid of scheme it sits on top of the mountain.

GSM service
Service providers
Handset manufacturers

And in case you are interested mobile infrastructure in US was heavily subsidized by state of federal government so its not like Verizon took care of all the cost.

 

[I7guy]

Oh boy! SIM card inside your iPhone works based on Nokia's patents right? Who laid out the blueprint to infrastructure of manufacturing SIM cards and modems inside your iPhone? Nokia and Ericsson did. And what about towers? Yup that's mostly Ericsson but Nokia has some fair share in communication technology to what's attached to the tower.

So without Nokia and Ericsson there would be no towers for ATT to deploy. ATT is in business of making money by offering service. Nokia is in the business of creating the service and in a pyramid of scheme it sits on top of the mountain.

GSM service
Service providers
Handset manufacturers

And in case you are interested mobile infrastructure in US was heavily subsidized by state of federal government so its not like Verizon took care of all the cost.

But Nokia didn't subsidize the cost either.