Jury Says Apple iPhone Violated Three Patents

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
And the patent lawsuit roulette wheel lands on....come on baby....come on bay....daddy needs some new shoes....Apple! Tune in next time when Apple is on the winning end of a winning patent suit.

A U.S. jury on Thursday found that Apple's iPhone infringed three patents owned by holding company MobileMedia Ideas, though damages have not yet been determined. The three patents, which cover features like camera phone technology, were acquired from Nokia and Sony Corp in 2010, Horn said. Those two companies hold a minority interest in MobileMedia, he said.
Click to expand...
 
Lawyers must absolutely love the patent laws. Free money!
 
The sad thing here is it's just a patent whore.

They need a "Use it or lose it" law for patents.

You got 5 years. If you don't have a product, your patent is invalidated and the cycle restarts.
 
LeninGHOLA said:
They love all laws, which is why the US keeps getting more and more of them.
Click to expand...

It also helps that most of our law makers (Congressmen, Senators, and the like) are also Lawyers ... kind of a self pertuating cycle ... of course that's also why they have that classic joke "What do you call 1000 lawyers at the bottom of the ocean? ... a good start" :D

Maybe we should send all the lawyers to Rapture ... they might be even more terrifying than the splicers from the game :eek:
 
TechLarry said:
The sad thing here is it's just a patent whore.

They need a "Use it or lose it" law for patents.

You got 5 years. If you don't have a product, your patent is invalidated and the cycle restarts.
Click to expand...

That's an interesting idea for preventing patent trolls, but I'm wondering if they would find a way to bypass that.

Like making a "product" that used it and sell it in a single store or something dumb like that.
 
kbrickley said:
It also helps that most of our law makers (Congressmen, Senators, and the like) are also Lawyers ... kind of a self pertuating cycle ... of course that's also why they have that classic joke "What do you call 1000 lawyers at the bottom of the ocean? ... a good start" :D

Maybe we should send all the lawyers to Rapture ... they might be even more terrifying than the splicers from the game :eek:
Click to expand...

Don't litigate my HP bar.
 
I find patent trolls utterly despicable and should be deported to deep space or something, but still, it takes nerve to look at Apple's impressive lawyer army square in the eye and defy them...then win.
 
LeninGHOLA said:
They love all laws, which is why the US keeps getting more and more of them.
Click to expand...

What concerns me more then new laws are the regulations that often get tacked onto them after the fact, by various government agencies, and then which often carry the force of the original law.
 
LeninGHOLA said:
Don't litigate my HP bar.
Click to expand...

Maybe they could put them in the game like the Little Sisters ... where you could save them or harvest them ... unfortunately I don't think anyone would save them :p

Or maybe we need a new shooter franchise ... Battlefield Patent Law ... you can use your powerful Tort cannon to try and overpower your opponent who uses their Amicus Briefs and Objections to try and block your attacks ... if you can score a Purjury Headshot you get extra points ... we are missing a big opportunity here :D
 
ballistic90 said:
That's an interesting idea for preventing patent trolls, but I'm wondering if they would find a way to bypass that.

Like making a "product" that used it and sell it in a single store or something dumb like that.
Click to expand...
They'd probably just produce one unit, but never actually put it out on the market.
 
It's not like they didn't totally deserve this. Theyll totally deserve it the next 500 times as well. Though as a judge i'd agree to throw out these patents if crApple vow never to do any advertizing ever again(especially those condesending yet totally stupid "icrap on white background" ones they love so much).
 
mynamehere said:
They'd probably just produce one unit, but never actually put it out on the market.
Click to expand...

Maybe... it is expensive to make a single unit of anything, but they'd still probably make a lot more money off of the trolling for the patent.

Even if patent trolling only ever got you 150% return on your money after all expenses, it would still be worth it.
 
DeathPrincess said:
It's not like they didn't totally deserve this. Theyll totally deserve it the next 500 times as well. Though as a judge i'd agree to throw out these patents if crApple vow never to do any advertizing ever again(especially those condesending yet totally stupid "icrap on white background" ones they love so much).
Click to expand...

Apple's problem isn't that they patent troll, their problem is that they get patents for very basic stuff that should never have been given out in the first place. It's not something new either. They tried suing Microsoft over the first version of Windows over the concept of "overlapping windows" and "trash can".
 
ballistic90 said:
Apple's problem isn't that they patent troll, their problem is that they get patents for very basic stuff that should never have been given out in the first place. It's not something new either. They tried suing Microsoft over the first version of Windows over the concept of "overlapping windows" and "trash can".
Click to expand...

Which was also similar because they didn't invent either concept (they blatently stole them from Xerox and HP)! :D
 
ballistic90 said:
Apple's problem isn't that they patent troll, their problem is that they get patents for very basic stuff that should never have been given out in the first place. It's not something new either. They tried suing Microsoft over the first version of Windows over the concept of "overlapping windows" and "trash can".
Click to expand...

That's actually all part of the same problem, I mean most patents held by trolls are exactly the same types of patent that Apple constantly sues for.

Sorry but I don't care if a company sells a product with rounded corners or not allowing a patent for it is asinine.

The worst part is I don't see things ever changing, at least for the better, since can you imagine the can of worms that would be opened if Congress starts rewriting patent law? And can anyone honestly say that it would improve things, for anyone other than lawyers?
 
DarkStar_WNY said:
That's actually all part of the same problem, I mean most patents held by trolls are exactly the same types of patent that Apple constantly sues for.

Sorry but I don't care if a company sells a product with rounded corners or not allowing a patent for it is asinine.

The worst part is I don't see things ever changing, at least for the better, since can you imagine the can of worms that would be opened if Congress starts rewriting patent law? And can anyone honestly say that it would improve things, for anyone other than lawyers?
Click to expand...

I think you misunderstood my point. The point I was trying to make is that Apple's parents are general, but technically applies to an actual product. Patent trolls own patents but never make a product.

A solution that cracks down on patent trolls probably won't do anything to Apple because they're not a troll in the same sense. It's two different (but related) ways that the patent system is being abused and there is not likely to be a "one rule fixes all" situation.
 
How long do we have to keep hearing about patent lawsuits (particularly software and technology related patents) until we see change? This system is so screwed up and it's hindering innovation the way it currently is. Pretty sick that so many millions of dollars are still being lost and won over these patents some to which are so vague and broad it's rediculous!
 
TechLarry said:
The sad thing here is it's just a patent whore.

They need a "Use it or lose it" law for patents.

You got 5 years. If you don't have a product, your patent is invalidated and the cycle restarts.
Click to expand...

I don't think this is a very good idea. Part of the point of the patent system is that you never have to reduce to practice. If you are a brilliant basement inventor, but lack the start up capital to build a new, let's say, super efficient engine, then you can sell your idea to the auto manufacturers. You can then get rich off your idea, and revolutionize a market that has a high barrier to entry.

I think part of the problem is that the public doens't understand the patent system. Sometimes I see articles bashing how dumb the USPTO, but then the link is for a patent application. Anyone can submit anything as an application. Only Patents have legal protection, and only for the claims.

Case in point Nicterys Called out
"They have one for...alarm clocks on phones:

US - 6,011,967 - Phone Operation/Features - alarm mode - 1/4/00 - Cellular telephone alarm "

This might lead one to think that this is a dumb patent that covers using a phone as an alarm clock. If you actually read the patent here is what is protected
"1. A cellular telephone operable in an alarm mode, comprising:

means for receiving a sensor signal representing an occurrence of a predetermined event;

means for providing said cellular telephone in said alarm mode;

radio communication means for transmitting and receiving radio transmissions to and from a base station of a cellular network to establish channels of communication with called telephone numbers;

control means for controlling, in response to the receipt of said sensor signal representing the occurrence of said predetermined event when said cellular telephone is in said alarm mode, said radio communication means to establish a channel with a predetermined telephone number, and to transmit to said predetermined telephone number identification data identifying said cellular telephone; and for establishing said cellular telephone in a selected operating mode after transmitting said identification data to said predetermined telephone number,

wherein said control means is operable to control said radio communication means to disconnect the established channel with said predetermined telephone number and to automatically answer a call from a calling telephone number without ringing, and to establish said cellular telephone in a designated operating mode after the call is automatically answered."

The actual patent is regarding having a phone call a certain number after some pre-defined event occurs.

It is really easy to crap on a system without taking the time to understand it.
 
cdig said:
The actual patent is regarding having a phone call a certain number after some pre-defined event occurs.

It is really easy to crap on a system without taking the time to understand it.
Click to expand...
I don't see this as a new idea myself. This is how so many things function, even people. A sensor senses something and sends a signal to a device that will react in a certain way. Just because they use the words cellular network, cellphone, and telephone identification number doesn't chage the main idea behind this patent.

I think patents should be new ideas, not old ideas with new technology.
 
Patents like that shouldn't be filed. They aren't actually explaining how it's technically done. That was the original requirement for a patent.

But, somehow "dreams" can be patented now lol.
 
cdig said:
I don't think this is a very good idea. Part of the point of the patent system is that you never have to reduce to practice. If you are a brilliant basement inventor, but lack the start up capital to build a new, let's say, super efficient engine, then you can sell your idea to the auto manufacturers. You can then get rich off your idea, and revolutionize a market that has a high barrier to entry.

I think part of the problem is that the public doens't understand the patent system. Sometimes I see articles bashing how dumb the USPTO, but then the link is for a patent application. Anyone can submit anything as an application. Only Patents have legal protection, and only for the claims.

Case in point Nicterys Called out
"They have one for...alarm clocks on phones:

US - 6,011,967 - Phone Operation/Features - alarm mode - 1/4/00 - Cellular telephone alarm "

This might lead one to think that this is a dumb patent that covers using a phone as an alarm clock. If you actually read the patent here is what is protected
"1. A cellular telephone operable in an alarm mode, comprising:

means for receiving a sensor signal representing an occurrence of a predetermined event;

means for providing said cellular telephone in said alarm mode;

radio communication means for transmitting and receiving radio transmissions to and from a base station of a cellular network to establish channels of communication with called telephone numbers;

control means for controlling, in response to the receipt of said sensor signal representing the occurrence of said predetermined event when said cellular telephone is in said alarm mode, said radio communication means to establish a channel with a predetermined telephone number, and to transmit to said predetermined telephone number identification data identifying said cellular telephone; and for establishing said cellular telephone in a selected operating mode after transmitting said identification data to said predetermined telephone number,

wherein said control means is operable to control said radio communication means to disconnect the established channel with said predetermined telephone number and to automatically answer a call from a calling telephone number without ringing, and to establish said cellular telephone in a designated operating mode after the call is automatically answered."

The actual patent is regarding having a phone call a certain number after some pre-defined event occurs.
Click to expand...


Just curious which part of this do you think is actually new? They just placed the word cellular in front of the word network and said it was a new idea. Cellphones have become ultra-portable computers, taking a basic idea which was common on computers and filing for a patent just because the computer is smaller is absurd, but firms are forced to do this if they want to win in court. When someone can control the common previous design of a rectangle with rounded corners, you better have some of your own absurd patents/IP if you want to survive.
 
Yakk said:
I find patent trolls utterly despicable and should be deported to deep space or something, but still, it takes nerve to look at Apple's impressive lawyer army square in the eye and defy them...then win.
Click to expand...

This makes it worst.... really. Proves patent trolling is worth it.
 
On a side note....... come on.... Their name blatantly sells them out that they are patent trolls.


TechLarry said:
The sad thing here is it's just a patent whore.

They need a "Use it or lose it" law for patents.

You got 5 years. If you don't have a product, your patent is invalidated and the cycle restarts.
Click to expand...

BTW, horrible idea, because it's very easily bypass, ever 4 and a half years, change out one thing and claim it to be a new product. So in theory it'll last them a centuries.,.. as long as they change out one thing. 1 more pixel would probably count... and you never know... maybe they don't even have to do that, and just plaster on a new sticker.

But at least it's an idea, that's already better than what we got.
 
ballistic90 said:
That's an interesting idea for preventing patent trolls, but I'm wondering if they would find a way to bypass that.

Like making a "product" that used it and sell it in a single store or something dumb like that.
Click to expand...

Haha pretty sure that's exactly how you bypass it. Minimal R&D or investment, maximum ROI cuz you only do it every 4 years 11 months :p
 
Ponder said:
Just curious which part of this do you think is actually new? They just placed the word cellular in front of the word network and said it was a new idea. Cellphones have become ultra-portable computers, taking a basic idea which was common on computers and filing for a patent just because the computer is smaller is absurd, but firms are forced to do this if they want to win in court. When someone can control the common previous design of a rectangle with rounded corners, you better have some of your own absurd patents/IP if you want to survive.
Click to expand...

Rather then highlighting this as the pinnacle of a good patent, I was attempting to illustrate that it is rather more specific then someone might get at cursory review.

Would you at least agree "lol dumb patent office thinks alarm clocks on phones are new" is a lazy attempt to analysis or criticize?

In general the courts have ruled that phone basically are computers, so what you say is true.

However, lets go back to this specific case. The patent was filled in 1997. Was there a computer system that did all the above before 97? I think the "newest bits" might be where they talk about a set of predetermined numbers that are notified without ringing in the case of the event whereby the calls are automatically answered. An example might be like the newer lifeline devices for old people that automatically calls 911 and answers the call if an old person falls.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top