backtop


Print 27 comment(s) - last by Donkey2008.. on Nov 2 at 12:18 PM


  (Source: Digitaltrends.com)
Apple has history of bullying competitors through lawsuits

The Wall Street Journal is reporting that Apple has filed two lawsuits against Motorola in a Washington-based U.S. district court, alleging that its smartphones and OS infringe on Apple's intellectual property. This development is a response from Apple for the lawsuit Motorola filed against it in October, alleging patent infringement.

Apple alleges that Motorola violates six of its patents related to touch-screen and multitouch technology, "as well as ways to display, access and interact with information on the phone," WSJ reports.

Motorola had this response: "Motorola has a leading intellectual-property portfolio, one of the strongest in the industry, and we intend to vigorously defend ourselves in this matter. We are confident in our position and will pursue our litigation to halt Apple's continued infringement."

This is a similar lawsuit to one Apple filed against mobile phone manufacturer -- and prominent Android player -- HTC last March. Because attacking Google directly isn't very effective since it gives Android away for free, Apple can go after the manufacturers that employ the threatening OS. After all, they have enough revenue to make it worthwhile for Apple.

"Apple's coming under assault now and they're using every tool at their disposal to try and hold the fort," an analyst for Charter Equity Research told WSJ, adding that he doesn't expect much to come of the lawsuits. Apple, it turns out, has a history of bullying competitors with lawsuits.

This comes at a crucial time for Motorola, which is planning to split off its mobile unit into a separate entity, and Android is the only OS used on the manufacturer's smartphones. Some analysts are predicting that Motorola -- which has basically been resurrected thanks to Android -- might suffer once the iPhone hits Verizon.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

What would this be about?
By BastiWebMaster on 11/1/2010 9:39:45 AM , Rating: 1
I think they're going over some blatant patent infringement like "using finger pressure to interact directly with the display". Or something like that. Motorola is in deep trouble.




RE: What would this be about?
By dark matter on 11/1/2010 10:23:44 AM , Rating: 2
You are aware that to have a patent you have to license such works. A patent is an artificial monopoly after all. Say the wheel was not invented and you invented and patented it yet refused to license it to anyone else. Now there is nothing to stop anyone else copying you apart from the law, but the law is you have to license it. If you don't agree, you shouldn't get the patent.


By BastiWebMaster on 11/1/2010 12:40:03 PM , Rating: 2
Apple is used to suing for ridiculous charges. Processor throttling ring any bell?


RE: What would this be about?
By acer905 on 11/1/2010 12:54:47 PM , Rating: 2
Wrong, patent law revolves around the exact wording in the constitution. (at least in regards to US patent law)

"To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;"

Exclusive right means you, the inventor, have the right to exclude anyone and/or everyone from use. However, it is your job to ensure that people you wish to exclude do not use it (ex: sue them). However, until such time as the patent holder tells the person using the patent that they are not allowed, there is no "infringement"

Having a patent actually does allow you to be the only person producing a product, without licensing it to anyone, because the patent has a fixed term length.


RE: What would this be about?
By BastiWebMaster on 11/1/2010 1:12:16 PM , Rating: 2
I can't really see what I'm wrong about. Apple has alleged in the past infringements of ridiculous patents. My guess was that this is yet another stupid attempt at restricting common technology or methods.

As for the definition of a patent, I was aware of what it actually means.


RE: What would this be about?
By seamonkey79 on 11/1/2010 2:50:01 PM , Rating: 2
You do realize he was responding to the same post you were responding to, right?


By BastiWebMaster on 11/2/2010 2:09:57 AM , Rating: 2
Now I do. My bad.


RE: What would this be about?
By PCR on 11/1/2010 11:49:21 AM , Rating: 3
This is about the fact that both HTC and Motorola have had decent android based smartphones that are giving iPhone a run for its money. So is response Apple decides to sue both companies, I hope this garbage gets thrown out.


RE: What would this be about?
By mckinney on 11/2/2010 12:14:39 PM , Rating: 2
The only news here is that it is Apple. MS was recently suing all of the android based handset makers also. The target is Google.


RE: What would this be about?
By Donkey2008 on 11/2/2010 12:15:44 PM , Rating: 2
"This development is a response from Apple for the lawsuit Motorola filed against it in October, alleging patent infringement. "

Of course you don't mention this part. You Android fanboys need to learn to actually read the story and not just the headline.


The one that should sue
By rocky12345 on 11/1/2010 10:16:10 AM , Rating: 2
The one that should sue Apple is Palm they had touch screen tech long before Apple even ever thought of the iPhone & iPod.

Oh wait I guess it would be HP that needs to sue Apple since they now own Palm.

I guess Micorsoft could also sue Apple they had Windows Mobile out before Apple had the iPhone also I think.

It is not like Apple invented the touch screen tech all they did was refine it a bit & made it so you could only use your fingers to interact with the screen. Other touch devices before the iPhones allowed both finger touch & stylus to interact with the screen.

let the Apple fanboys start picking this apart but in the end we all know I am pretty much right.




RE: The one that should sue
By priusone on 11/1/2010 11:54:17 AM , Rating: 2
Apple Newton was released in 1993, but the Psion Organiser was in development since 1984.


RE: The one that should sue
By Donkey2008 on 11/2/2010 12:18:10 PM , Rating: 2
So you have read the lawsuit? You know the context of it and what patents are involved?


Really sick of Jobs claims.
By Negronpope on 11/1/2010 1:58:43 PM , Rating: 2
Patents only count if you can prove you were the first to do something, if you originated the idea.
Jobs really ought to be more judicious with his choice of law suits. Considering, as has been pointed out in the past, that many of the ideas his company has created products based on come from projects originated at Xerox PARC, his claim to be the source of much of his companies "intellectual property" is not very valid.
If he pushes these issues too hard, in an obvious attempt to unfairly controll the market, he may may find the patents that he thinks back up his position rendered invalid.

Oh, and BTW, which one of you said patents have something to do with the Constitution? Wow, that's way off.
Our laws are NOT soley controlled by what is or isn't in the Constituation.
We continue to define our legal system via an active judicial system based on the rule of law (which in itself is derived from the English Common Laws principle of precedents). Only someone with a poor understanding of our country would think the Constitution limits us. It only provides us with a noble basis for our government and with the Bill of Rights, provides us with basic guarantees of our liberties.




By foolsgambit11 on 11/1/2010 3:27:12 PM , Rating: 2
Yes and no. In theory, the limits on power laid out in the Constitution do restrict the ability of Congress to make laws. In practice, though, it rarely does, though some laws are struck down as unconstitutional. At issue is the fact that the Constitution uses broad language that can be interpreted to allow actions that some might think extend beyond the enumerated powers of the Constitution (like the use of the Commerce Clause, for instance). However, on the narrow point of whether a patent allows its holder to use it without licensing it to others, the poster was correct. US Law does not require a patent-holder to license their intellectual property.


Cross licensing
By nafhan on 11/1/2010 9:43:52 AM , Rating: 2
My feeling is that Apple's got a bunch of software/interface patents, but not a lot of hardware patents. They're worried that companies that have a lot of hardware patents could cause them some real trouble in the future, and are therefore trying to secure some cross licensing agreements by striking first.




In other news...
By morphologia on 11/1/2010 3:09:33 PM , Rating: 2
Steve Jobs is suing Richard Branson, Mel Gibson and Russell Crowe for violating his patent on being a self-absorbed, pretentious jerk.




Haven't Apple patented profit yet?
By Phoque on 11/1/2010 4:37:22 PM , Rating: 2
They could sue the world over.




here is the updated link
By sprockkets on 11/1/2010 5:25:15 PM , Rating: 2
This article better explains the lawsuits (yes, 2 of them) that apple is crapping about:

http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2010/1...

It's their "We invented multi-touch" patent and "We patented pinch to zoom and scroll lock unless you wanted to scroll horizontal."

"And while we are at it, let's put in the patent about us inventing how to put stuff on the phone without an installation program."

Stupid apple. Completely ignorant of all the people, including the LG Prada who also right before the iphone had a capacitive touch screen.

F uck off apple.




By BZDTemp on 11/1/2010 8:38:53 PM , Rating: 2
Eventually their fan base will see this and move on.




Correction
By Tony Swash on 11/1/10, Rating: -1
RE: Correction
By MDGeek on 11/1/10, Rating: -1
RE: Correction
By Shatbot on 11/1/2010 9:37:59 AM , Rating: 2
Ignored.

Anyway, does anyone ever get anywhere with these lawsuits? In this whole thing I just feel sorry for Xerox.


RE: Correction
By dark matter on 11/1/2010 10:25:23 AM , Rating: 2
Obvious Troll makes obvious troll noises. Come on then Troll, feeding time for you....


RE: Correction
By bug77 on 11/1/2010 11:23:08 AM , Rating: 1
And it may very well have a history of being more eco-friendly than the competitors. But what's any of those got to do with the lawsuit?


RE: Correction
By morphologia on 11/1/2010 3:11:32 PM , Rating: 2
Apple doesn't sue the people they outperform. They sue the people who outperform them. There's a difference.


RE: Correction
By rcc on 11/1/2010 4:36:18 PM , Rating: 1
And this would make them different from Intel, Microsoft, Nokia, RIM, and most other companies how?

Just curious.


“So far we have not seen a single Android device that does not infringe on our patents." -- Microsoft General Counsel Brad Smith














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki