or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple hits back at Nokia, asks ITC to ban handset imports
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple hits back at Nokia, asks ITC to ban handset imports - Page 2

post #41 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post

According to the article, Nokia has another 10,990 patents at it's disposal if need be.

Something is wrong if there are that many patents, it's like having 11,000 nuclear bombs for each city when one will do, and a few for backup. So obviously the system is being abused and Apple is being roped in the game or else they would have paid the peanuts Nokia gets from the others.


Thanks for the link Dorotea. it was good.

I guess according your "theory" IBM is also abusing the market as well. They have many, many more patents than Nokia. I guess the system is in danger. The fact that Nokia put forth only 10 is proof, in my mind anyway, that they feel they have a strong case and are willing to pursue it because they feel they can win. As unpleasant as it might be to many of the Apple-istas here, Apple might be in the wrong.
post #42 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by kyle172 View Post

Absolutely unprofessional by Nokia

Dumb post. They have a right to sue just much as sue-happy Apple.
post #43 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by monstrosity View Post


Quote:
Originally Posted by vinney57
Your posts have a pattern now I realise. They start with a fact that you have read somewhere; followed by an assertion that is simply wrong; followed by a conclusion that is breathtaking in its stupidity. Nobody can be such an idiot. I now suspect that you are in fact merely playing with the boring conventions of logic, wisdom, common sense etc and that we should all recognise and bow before your genius.

I await your next prose-poem with barely contained anticipation.

I enjoyed that. Thanks.

You would love Fox news then.
post #44 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobabyrtrns View Post

Dumb post. They have a right to sue just much as sue-happy Apple.

You mean "counter-sue happy".
post #45 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

I guess it's up to a court to unravel where Nokia's patents end and where Apple's and the technologies they have already licensed from other patent holders begins.

Regarding the specificity of Nokia's patents, where do you think Apples licensing of Qualcomm's patents for use of codecs for low bandwidth transmission of voice, which date back to Quicktime 3 fit in?

That is ONE of Nokia's "specific" patents.

Good point. As I am not a lawyer, nor do I have special access to inside info, I can only speculate like you. We will see how much leg the 10 patents have. It will be very simple in the end. Either case dismissed or Apple will pay. Apple is not this holy company of good that does nothing wrong. They are in the biz to make money and they are not above cheating to do it. Not to mention that Apple is one the of the most suit crazy companies out there. So if anything, this is a case of the chickens coming home to roost. Besides do you really think this will go to trial? Really?
post #46 of 86
One of the key questions to answer is Nokia are saying that their technology is required for a PHONE, Apple has been building COMPUTERS and PERIPHERALS that duplicate similar functionality in different ways, ways which Apple has licensed or patented themselves.

Where does the COMPUTER in the iPhone end and the PHONE begin?

That is the grey area to be decided in court.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobabyrtrns View Post

Good point. As I am not a lawyer, nor do I have special access to inside info, I can only speculate like you. We will see how much leg the 10 patents have. It will be very simple in the end. Either case dismissed or Apple will pay. Apple is not this holy company of good that does nothing wrong. They are in the biz to make money and they are not above cheating to do it. Not to mention that Apple is one the of the most suit crazy companies out there. So if anything, this is a case of the chickens coming home to roost. Besides do you really think this will go to trial? Really?
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
post #47 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobabyrtrns View Post

Good point. As I am not a lawyer, nor do I have special access to inside info, I can only speculate like you. We will see how much leg the 10 patents have. It will be very simple in the end. Either case dismissed or Apple will pay. Apple is not this holy company of good that does nothing wrong. They are in the biz to make money and they are not above cheating to do it. Not to mention that Apple is one the of the most suit crazy companies out there. So if anything, this is a case of the chickens coming home to roost. Besides do you really think this will go to trial? Really?

I don't really think of Apple as "suit crazy." I know they get their lawyers on leaks, and they're pretty aggressive about protecting their trademarks, but that's kind of a different matter.

Outside of the Psystar business (which wasn't exactly a trivial matter and Apple was found to be in the right) I can't think of many instances of Apple suing people for patent infringement and the like.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #48 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

One of the key questions to answer is Nokia are saying that their technology is required for a PHONE, Apple has been building COMPUTERS and PERIPHERALS that duplicate similar functionality in different ways, ways which Apple has licensed or patented themselves.

Where does the COMPUTER in the iPhone end and the PHONE begin?

That is the grey area to be decided in court.

Nice point. Where does a phone stop being a phone. I guess the key ingredients will be what Nokia was asking for price wise for the IPR and Apple was not willing to pay. Again, I do not think this suit will see the light of day. It is a distraction for both. Cross-license and have it done with. The bottom line is that Apple will continue to do quite well, Nokia will lose a bit more ground (there are literally 10s of millions of people that simply do not want an iPhone no matter what) but will still have its 100+ million customers. There is plenty of market for the both of them. For me the end result does not matter as I will have a new iPhone no matter what (I change phones every 6 months regardless), and I will have a Nokia phone to fill in the blanks where the iPhone comes up short.

In my opinion, I think Nokia has a valid case but then again Apple has a point as well.
post #49 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanielSW View Post

No one saw it coming, or at least no one predicted the ultimate effects.

Well, I wouldn't say "no one", it's was certainly obvious to me at the end of the last century this would happen, just after they bought Next. And I'm sure I wasn't the only person. As processor speeds increased in smaller devices, and battery technology developed, at some point it was inevitable that phones would reach a tipping point in favour of the established computer companies and OS developers which were few and far between. In-fact after the demise of the Atari, Amiga and others late 80's 90's, Apple stood alongside MSFT as one of only two real contenders.
Microsofts business model crippled their ability to rise to the challenge, and Apple stood (certainly to me) as the only obvious contender to steal the show.

Those that matter however in the phone industry showed zero vision, and they deserve everything they got.
The biggest idiot of all is Microsoft, all that time, all that 'expertise', and all they needed was one man with vision.
post #50 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Outside of the Psystar business (which wasn't exactly a trivial matter and Apple was found to be in the right) I can't think of many instances of Apple suing people for patent infringement and the like.

I can - Apple sued Microsoft over the use of a GUI for an OS:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_C...ft_Corporation

Try Googling this search term: "apple sues"

You get 57,000 hits

Just a couple: "Apple Sues School For Using The Same Fruit In a Logo"

"Apple filed a lawsuit against Media Solutions Holdings for selling replacement power adapters that infringe on its patent."

and so on...

Apple fan-bois who think Nokia are the bad guys over wanting to charge Apple a different rate for use of their tech than other users, should have a look at this:

http://www.macblogz.com/2009/02/02/a...phone-imagery/

Where it appears Apple is being rather selective in charging for use of it's images.


Kodak is now suing Apple and RIM and has asked the ITC to ban the import of iPhones.

The whole concept of patents has been broken for years.
post #51 of 86
Results 1 - 100 of about 604,000 for nokia sues. (0.42 seconds)

Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post

Try Googling this search term: "apple sues"

You get 57,000 hits

Apple fan-bois who think Nokia are the bad guys...


...seem to be right.

A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
post #52 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Results 1 - 100 of about 604,000 for nokia sues. (0.42 seconds)



...seem to be right.


I only came up with 548,000 (but in 0.27 seconds).

The larger point is: everybody sues. The only question is whether there is any merit to it, and does it serve some important purpose other than to keep courts and lawyers busy.
post #53 of 86
How many phones did Nokia sell in the US last year? 7? 8?

Surely Apple should be taking this to Europe or Asia?
post #54 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post

According to the article, Nokia has another 10,990 patents at it's disposal if need be.

Something is wrong if there are that many patents, it's like having 11,000 nuclear bombs for each city when one will do, and a few for backup. So obviously the system is being abused and Apple is being roped in the game or else they would have paid the peanuts Nokia gets from the others.


Thanks for the link Dorotea. it was good.


I believe that the article has links to both lawsuits (District Court of Delaware). I've read both complaints. Both parties agree that they have been negotiating for some time, which implies that they both believe that royalties are due to Nokia. Nokias patents were incorporated in various wireless standards - and in return they agreed to charge Fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) royalties.

Nokia is saying that they have offered Apple FRAND rates. Apple says that Nokias rates are not FRAND and that Nokia wants cross-licensing of Apple's iphone patents in the bargain.

I expect that Apple will have to pay Nokia at some point. The dispute is the amount (money and cross licensing).

It will be interesting.
post #55 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

One of the key questions to answer is Nokia are saying that their technology is required for a PHONE, Apple has been building COMPUTERS and PERIPHERALS that duplicate similar functionality in different ways, ways which Apple has licensed or patented themselves.

Where does the COMPUTER in the iPhone end and the PHONE begin?

That is the grey area to be decided in court.

I don't know that these patents really cross the boundary between phone and computer. Here is a list of the patents and their associated names. Check out the text of the patents by going to
www.patentlens.net , go to the search function and enter the patent number. (Select just US Patents). The text is technical but you can get a flavor of what each is about.


US 5802465 - Data transmission in a radio telephone network

US 6359904 - Data transfer in a mobile telephone network

US 6694135 - Measurement report transmission in a telecommunications system

US 6775548 - Access channel for reduced access delay in a telecommunications system

US 7092672 - Reporting cell measurement results in a cellular communication system

US 5862178 - Method and apparatus for speech transmission in a mobile communications system

US 5946651 - Speech synthesizer employing post-processing for enhancing the quality of the synthesized speech

US 6882727 - Method of ciphering data transmission in a radio system

US 7009940 - Integrity check in a communication system

US 7403621 - System for ensuring encrypted communication after handover
post #56 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanielSW View Post

The most important fact of the matter is that Apple is on an epic roll with its overall production and its products and services.

It's literally devastated the old complacent mobile phone industry, kicking the cornerstones out of their corporate walls and making the old citadels start to crumble.

They've got NOTHING in answer to not just the hardware of the iPhone, but to the OS, the app store, the third-party developers, and the overall support system of MoblileMe synching, iTunes, and the whole Apple Digital Hub which it's been steadily building up now for a DECADE.

No one saw it coming, or at least no one predicted the ultimate effects.

And now they're also realizing that no pile of goofy touch-screen little Android gewgaw gadgets are going to sell without something to compare with Apple's 800-pound gorilla array of products and services.

Agreed. Apple's kicking ass right now, from a business perspective. Despite the little nit-picky astroturf issues people come up with about Apple's products (no flash, changeable battery, glossy screen, blah, blah, blah, ad nauseum), Apple's products are selling and people are happy with them.

Can't wait to see what the tablet is all about. Will I get one? Hmm . . .

As far as Nokia is concerned, they're a dinosaur and need to either evolve or get buried in muck with the rest of them.
post #57 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dorotea;1550959[QUOTE=Dorotea View Post

I believe that the article has links to both lawsuits (District Court of Delaware). I've read both complaints. Both parties agree that they have been negotiating for some time, which implies that they both believe that royalties are due to Nokia. Nokias patents were incorporated in various wireless standards - and in return they agreed to charge Fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) royalties.

Nokia is saying that they have offered Apple FRAND rates. Apple says that Nokias rates are not FRAND and that Nokia wants cross-licensing of Apple's iphone patents in the bargain.

I expect that Apple will have to pay Nokia at some point. The dispute is the amount (money and cross licensing).

It will be interesting.



Oh yes it will certainly be interesting. Nokia is the aging dinosaur and Apple is the upcoming upstart.

Both need each others technology to survive, one less than the other though. It was probably just a stalemate if they just stole/copied each others tech and let the marketing departments battle it out.

But Apple is winning in the market and that has prompted Nokia to act.

There is also two frames of thought, Nokia is used to cross licensing and Apple is a rigid defender of it's intellectual property. If Apple didn't, anything they make or invent would be copied in a few short months.

So the only course I see is a long protracted battle now that it has entered the courts. If Nokia so happens to lose the roll of the jury dice, they got another 10,090 chances to even the odds.

But if Apple allows Nokia to waltz in and demand cross licensing of it's tech as soon as it hits the market, Apple wouldn't get far with it's innovation in the marketplace and it would die.

Apple has no choice but to use Nokia's tech, a lot of it is established and part of the infrastructure for all devices to use, there is no way around it. But Nokia doesn't have to use Apple's tech, they can go invent their own like they did before.

It think the jury will see the benefits to the marketplace that Apple's innovation succeed, and that it has a least a fair chance of recouping it's investment, not being immediately copied by a old and resentful Nokia who's only choice is to leverage technology everyone has to use.
The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...
Reply
The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...
Reply
post #58 of 86
[QUOTE=MacTripper;1550975][QUOTE=Dorotea;1550959



Oh yes it will certainly be interesting. Nokia is the aging dinosaur and Apple is the upcoming upstart.

Both need each others technology to survive, one less than the other though. It was probably just a stalemate if they just stole/copied each others tech and let the marketing departments battle it out.

But Apple is winning in the market and that has prompted Nokia to act.

There is also two frames of thought, Nokia is used to cross licensing and Apple is a rigid defender of it's intellectual property. If Apple didn't, anything they make or invent would be copied in a few short months.

So the only course I see is a long protracted battle now that it has entered the courts. If Nokia so happens to lose the roll of the jury dice, they got another 10,090 chances to even the odds.

But if Apple allows Nokia to waltz in and demand cross licensing of it's tech as soon as it hits the market, Apple wouldn't get far with it's innovation in the marketplace and it would die.

Apple has no choice but to use Nokia's tech, a lot of it is established and part of the infrastructure for all devices to use, there is no way around it. But Nokia doesn't have to use Apple's tech, they can go invent their own like they did before.

It think the jury will see the benefits to the marketplace that Apple's innovation succeed, and that it has a least a fair chance of recouping it's investment, not being immediately copied by a old and resentful Nokia who's only choice is to leverage technology everyone has to use.[/QUOTE]

Apple needs Nokia's technology to have a phone. Period. Nokia does not necessarily needs Apple's technology to survive. It is not a matter if you like or dislike Nokia phones, the fact remains that there 10's of millions of phone users that do not want an iPhone no matter how "cool" they are. These are the people that will flock to Nokia insuring their survival. On the other hand if Nokia wins against Apple, then there is a massive problem brewing.

Your argument about the the jury seeing the benefit of Apple's innovation is moot. The law is the law, is the law and if Apple violated it, the jury should rule against Apple, penalize them, and provide some sort of relief to Nokia. It is not about the phones but what goes into the phone and for the most part Apple has contributed very little while Nokia is the global leader in 3G technology.
post #59 of 86
So where do these fit in:-

Apple Licenses QUALCOMM's PureVoice Technology for QuickTime 3.0

Leading Telephony Technology Helps Deliver Speech for the Internet

http://www.apple.com/ca/press/1998/01/qualcomm.html

Specifically with the two claims below.

Prior art?

It seems that Nokia is laying claim to the Internet over any wireless connection, the Internet is the pipe what Nokia seems to be saying is that as soon as that pipe hits wireless any data infringes their patents.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dorotea View Post

I don't know that these patents really cross the boundary between phone and computer. Here is a list of the patents and their associated names. Check out the text of the patents by going to
www.patentlens.net , go to the search function and enter the patent number. (Select just US Patents). The text is technical but you can get a flavor of what each is about.

US 5862178 - Method and apparatus for speech transmission in a mobile communications system

US 5946651 - Speech synthesizer employing post-processing for enhancing the quality of the synthesized speech


Prove it!

There may be other method's besides Nokia's, Qualcomm's for example.

Nokia SAYS Apple needs their technology it's up to a court to decide.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobabyrtrns View Post


Apple needs Nokia's technology to have a phone. Period. .
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
post #60 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post


Your argument about the the jury seeing the benefit of Apple's innovation is moot. The law is the law, is the law and if Apple violated it, the jury should rule against Apple, penalize them, and provide some sort of relief to Nokia. It is not about the phones but what goes into the phone and for the most part Apple has contributed very little while Nokia is the global leader in 3G technology.

Unfortunately I have to agree. I am definitely an Apple Fan Girl, but Nokia does hold necessary patents.

I believe the main issue is "Fair, Reasonable and Non-discriminatory " royalties for the patents that were adopted as the in the "Wireless Standard". Nokia was given a monopoly in exchange for agreeing to "FRAND" royalties.

Nokia does cross-license with many parties... but the cross-licensing is within the "standard". It looks like a possibility that Nokia is trying to get Apple to cross-license outside of the "wireless standards". Apple is refusing (and I would too!).

I really wonder what the Nokia Proposed royalty actually was. Somewhere I read 15%. But 15% of retail prices of iPhone or some other number?

Just think -- 15% of $600 (iPhone with no contract) is $90 - pretty big byte of the pie. And much of the value of the iPhone is exclusive to Apple R&D. As others have said, the iPhone is more than a phone... its a handheld computer too. So I don't see why Nokia should get royalties on the value of the functionality that doesn't pertain to the wireless part of the iPhone.
post #61 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

So where do these fit in:-

Apple Licenses QUALCOMM's PureVoice Technology for QuickTime 3.0

Leading Telephony Technology Helps Deliver Speech for the Internet

http://www.apple.com/ca/press/1998/01/qualcomm.html

Specifically with the two claims below.

Prior art?

It seems that Nokia is laying claim to the Internet over any wireless connection, the Internet is the pipe what Nokia seems to be saying is that as soon as that pipe hits wireless any data infringes their patents.


Prove it!

There may be other method's besides Nokia's, Qualcomm's for example.

Nokia SAYS Apple needs their technology it's up to a court to decide.

I think it's already been proven. Nokia can make computers all day without one Apple "innovation" but Apple cannot say the same. Why haven't you brought up Ericsson, or Alcatel, or Nortel while you are naming other companies? The simple reason is because after all of the obfuscation and deflection, your arguments do not hold much water. It appears that Apple infringed and they might have to pay. It is that simple.
post #62 of 86
They are not suing Apple.

Perhaps their FRAND terms were more agreeable so Apple paid up.

You left out Siemens, Phillips, Qualcomm, Motorola and others who also have sizeable patent portfolios in these areas.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobabyrtrns View Post

Why haven't you brought up Ericsson, or Alcatel, or Nortel while you are naming other companies?

Meanwhile Nokia has launched suits against 11 LCD screen manufacturers, including Samsung, alleging price fixing.
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
post #63 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

They are not suing Apple.

Perhaps their FRAND terms were more agreeable so Apple paid up.

You left out Siemens, Phillips, Qualcomm, Motorola and others who also have sizeable patent portfolios in these areas.



Meanwhile Nokia has launched suits against 11 LCD screen manufacturers, including Samsung, alleging price fixing.

They may have a large portfolio but combined they just about equal Nokia's. The fact that Nokia chose only 10 patents is reason enough to believe that they have a strong case. I know that this is an uber-fanboy site and how dare anyone challenge "he who must not be named", but Apple is no more above infringing a patent than say Nokia. You do not have to like their phones, or the fact that a country of 5.3 million are standing up to the might Apple, but the fact remains Nokia feels they have a case and Apple will have to prove that they don't. Pretty simple. If we turn on our hypocrisy devices, if this suit have been going the other way with Apple suing Nokia or Ericsson or anyone else, you and several of the more rabid members of this site would be all for "sticking it to them", but now that Apple may be caught with its hand in the cookie jar Nokia is deemed petty, immature, unprofessional, etc...While I love all of my Apple products, and devices, I can truly see why many Apple users are hated outside of the community.
post #64 of 86
I think you need to consult a dictionary, you seem to be missing the meaning of a word.

allege |əˈlej|
verb [ reporting verb ]
claim or assert that someone has done something illegal or wrong, typically without proof that this is the case : [with clause ] he alleged that he had been assaulted | [ trans. ] the offenses are alleged to have been committed outside the woman's home | he is alleged to have assaulted five men.
(usu. be alleged) suppose or affirm to be the case : the first artifact ever alleged to be from Earhart's aircraft.
ORIGIN Middle English (in the sense [declare on oath] ): from Old French esligier, based on Latin lis, lit- lawsuit ; confused in sense with Latin allegare allege.

allege
verb
both children allege that the babysitter had left them alone for hours at a time: claim, assert, charge, accuse, declare, state, contend, argue, affirm, maintain, attest, testify, swear; formal aver.

Allegation
Not to be confused with alligation.
"Alleged" redirects here. For the champion racehorse, see Alleged (horse).
An allegation (also called adduction) is a claim of a fact by a party in a pleading, which the party claims to be able to prove. Allegations remain assertions without proof, until they can be proved.

There are also marriage allegations: marriage bonds and allegations exist for couples who applied to marry by licence. They do not exist for couples who married by banns. The marriage allegation was the document in which the couple alleged (or frequently just the groom alleged on behalf of both of them) that there were no impediments to the marriage.

Generally in a civil complaint a plaintiff alleges facts sufficient to establish all the elements of the claim and thus states a cause of action. The plaintiff must then carry the burden of proof and the burden of persuasion in order to succeed in the lawsuit.

A defendant can allege affirmative defenses in its answer to the complaint.

Other allegations are required in a pleading to establish the correct jurisdiction, personal jurisdiction and subject matter jurisdiction.


Disjunctive allegations

Disjunctive allegations are allegations in a pleading joined together by an "or". In a complaint, disjunctive allegations are usually per se defective because such a pleading does not put the party on notice of which allegations they must defend.

On the other hand, defendants often plead in the alternative by listing seemingly inconsistent defenses. For example, "I did not do the crime", "if I did, I didn't know", or "even if I did know, I've got a good excuse". Such a pleading may be considered disjunctive and may be permissible.


Alleged is not proven.


Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobabyrtrns View Post

They may have a large portfolio but combined they just about equal Nokia's. The fact that Nokia chose only 10 patents is reason enough to believe that they have a strong case. I know that this is an uber-fanboy site and how dare anyone challenge "he who must not be named", but Apple is no more above infringing a patent than say Nokia. You do not have to like their phones, or the fact that a country of 5.3 million are standing up to the might Apple, but the fact remains Nokia feels they have a case and Apple will have to prove that they don't. Pretty simple. If we turn on our hypocrisy devices, if this suit have been going the other way with Apple suing Nokia or Ericsson or anyone else, you and several of the more rabid members of this site would be all for "sticking it to them", but now that Apple may be caught with its hand in the cookie jar Nokia is deemed petty, immature, unprofessional, etc...While I love all of my Apple products, and devices, I can truly see why many Apple users are hated outside of the community.
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
post #65 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

I think you need to consult a dictionary, you seem to be missing the meaning of a word.

allege |əˈlej|
verb [ reporting verb ]
claim or assert that someone has done something illegal or wrong, typically without proof that this is the case : [with clause ] he alleged that he had been assaulted | [ trans. ] the offenses are alleged to have been committed outside the woman's home | he is alleged to have assaulted five men.
• (usu. be alleged) suppose or affirm to be the case : the first artifact ever alleged to be from Earhart's aircraft.
ORIGIN Middle English (in the sense [declare on oath] ): from Old French esligier, based on Latin lis, lit- ‘lawsuit’ ; confused in sense with Latin allegare ‘allege.’

allege
verb
both children allege that the babysitter had left them alone for hours at a time: claim, assert, charge, accuse, declare, state, contend, argue, affirm, maintain, attest, testify, swear; formal aver.

Allegation
Not to be confused with alligation.
"Alleged" redirects here. For the champion racehorse, see Alleged (horse).
An allegation (also called adduction) is a claim of a fact by a party in a pleading, which the party claims to be able to prove. Allegations remain assertions without proof, until they can be proved.

There are also marriage allegations: marriage bonds and allegations exist for couples who applied to marry by licence. They do not exist for couples who married by banns. The marriage allegation was the document in which the couple alleged (or frequently just the groom alleged on behalf of both of them) that there were no impediments to the marriage.

Generally in a civil complaint a plaintiff alleges facts sufficient to establish all the elements of the claim and thus states a cause of action. The plaintiff must then carry the burden of proof and the burden of persuasion in order to succeed in the lawsuit.

A defendant can allege affirmative defenses in its answer to the complaint.

Other allegations are required in a pleading to establish the correct jurisdiction, personal jurisdiction and subject matter jurisdiction.


Disjunctive allegations

Disjunctive allegations are allegations in a pleading joined together by an "or". In a complaint, disjunctive allegations are usually per se defective because such a pleading does not put the party on notice of which allegations they must defend.

On the other hand, defendants often plead in the alternative by listing seemingly inconsistent defenses. For example, "I did not do the crime", "if I did, I didn't know", or "even if I did know, I've got a good excuse". Such a pleading may be considered disjunctive and may be permissible.


Alleged is not proven.

Snoozer alert.....

And you point being? As many of the more non-fanboyish have stated, this is an alleged case where Nokia alleges that Apple infringed on their patents. The only place where I have seen a trial take place is on this forum where the Steve Jobs pants dwellers have already decided that Nokia has no case, sour grapes, pissed because they are losing market share in the high-end market, out dated UI's, and are going after the beloved, can do no wrong, savior of humanity Apple.

Your foray onto dictionary.com was more of a benefit to you than me as I already know the meaning of the word.

You have had much better posts than the tripe you served up. Try again.
post #66 of 86
Proven where and by whom?


Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobabyrtrns View Post

I think it's already been proven. Nokia can make computers all day without one Apple "innovation" but Apple cannot say the same..

Hence the need for a court to sort this mess out which is what I have said all along.

Just because you seem to have no respect for the law or the tenets of justice it doesn't mean that others are like you, in that you make statements as if they have already been proven as fact.

Now you resort to the "fanboy" card.

There should be an addition to Godwin's law, regarding the probability of the term "fanboy" or "fanboi" entering a discussion approaching 1.


Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobabyrtrns View Post

Snoozer alert.....

And you point being? As many of the more non-fanboyish have stated, this is an alleged case where Nokia alleges that Apple infringed on their patents. The only place where I have seen a trial take place is on this forum where the Steve Jobs pants dwellers have already decided that Nokia has no case, sour grapes, pissed because they are losing market share in the high-end market, out dated UI's, and are going after the beloved, can do no wrong, savior of humanity Apple.

Your foray onto dictionary.com was more of a benefit to you than me as I already know the meaning of the word.

You have had much better posts than the tripe you served up. Try again.
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
post #67 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Proven where and by whom?




Hence the need for a court to sort this mess out which is what I have said all along.

Just because you seem to have no respect for the law or the tenets of justice it doesn't mean that others are like you, in that you make statements as if they have already been proven as fact.

Now you resort to the "fanboy" card.

There should be an addition to Godwin's law, regarding the probability of the term "fanboy" or "fanboi" entering a discussion approaching 1.

FULL STOPPPPPP !!!!!!!!!!!!

Didn't I preface my previous statements with the word opinion, or say that the lawyers are going to have to sort it out? Not once then nor do I now think it is a completely open and shut case. I think that Nokia has a pretty good leg to stand on based on the same info you are probably reading. This, however, is my opinion. In my opinion again, I do not thing this will see the light of a courthouse. Too much money on both sides at stake. Some lawyers will play golf, have lunch, send a few baseball tickets here and there, a few ski jumping tickets as well and we will have a deal with details not to be disclosed. This is what I THINK will happen.

Anyway, if the fanboy shoe does not fit, then by all means it is withdrawn, and my "disrespect" for the law as you put it is a reach and you know it. You just played the "high and might card". Anyway again, I need to crash. If you post something good, I will answer you. Cheers.
post #68 of 86
There seems to be a problem with the boards.

Posts are being quoted as me when someone else is quoting it.
The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...
Reply
The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...
Reply
post #69 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post

I can - Apple sued Microsoft over the use of a GUI for an OS:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_C...ft_Corporation

Um, yeah, that was a pretty major deal and hardly the stuff of rampant litigiousness.

Quote:
Try Googling this search term: "apple sues"

You get 57,000 hits

Try Googling any large corporation plus "sues." Nokia gets you 543,000 hits, MS gets you 901,000 , Sony gets you 1,405,00. By that criteria you've actually made my point, that Apple is not particularly litigious.

Quote:
Just a couple: "Apple Sues School For Using The Same Fruit In a Logo"

"Apple filed a lawsuit against Media Solutions Holdings for selling replacement power adapters that infringe on its patent."

and so on...

Yeah, that sound like Apple is just suing everybody willy-nilly cause that's how they roll. Or, we can agree that any large company is going to use the courts to protect their intellectual property, and then make a further distinction regarding whether they tend to be excessive. The original contention was that Apple is one of the most litigation happy companies out there, based on your Google search test that clearly isn't true.

Quote:
Apple fan-bois who think Nokia are the bad guys over wanting to charge Apple a different rate for use of their tech than other users, should have a look at this:

http://www.macblogz.com/2009/02/02/a...phone-imagery/

Where it appears Apple is being rather selective in charging for use of it's images.

Use of the "fan-boi" crutch to bolster your weak argument suggests you're a dumb fuck. You're probably not, so you should probably avoid it.

At any rate, comparing a massive lawsuit that seeks to take a cut of every iPhone sold or prevent it from being sold entirely to varying standards for the misappropriation of imagery is extremely weak, indeed.

Quote:
Kodak is now suing Apple and RIM and has asked the ITC to ban the import of iPhones.

The whole concept of patents has been broken for years.

Entirely possible. However, it doesn't change the point that Apple is not particularly litigious, outside of being pretty militant about not leaking pre-release product info and use of it's trade dress, which in the arena of hight stakes IP infringement lawsuits is pretty small potatoes.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #70 of 86
Side question: (yes, I said I was going to crash)

X-boyism's aside, is everyone or mostly everyone in agreement that this will be settled by lawyers and that up to now this is all pure speculation on everyone's part? Does anyone here have hard evidence to what is going on with the case?
post #71 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobabyrtrns View Post

Side question: (yes, I said I was going to crash)

X-boyism's aside, is everyone or mostly everyone in agreement that this will be settled by lawyers and that up to now this is all pure speculation on everyone's part? Does anyone here have hard evidence to what is going on with the case?

I have no problem with that characterization. As I've said, it appears to me that the entire thing hinges on what a customary and reasonable licensing fee would be, but subsequent reading suggests that even that is pretty malleable, what equivalent in-kind cross licensing and such.

So much so that my guess would be that whatever the courts decide won't look like "justice" so much as an extremely difficult to follow financial document with highly technical provisions. I will say that it seems pretty unlikely that any of this will result in phones not being sold.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #72 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Meanwhile Nokia has launched suits against 11 LCD screen manufacturers, including Samsung, alleging price fixing.

Why didn't you include the bit about how the LCD manufactures have admitted they were price fixing?
post #73 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dorotea View Post

I don't know that these patents really cross the boundary between phone and computer. Here is a list of the patents and their associated names. Check out the text of the patents by going to
www.patentlens.net , go to the search function and enter the patent number. (Select just US Patents). The text is technical but you can get a flavor of what each is about.
<list>

Thanks for the detailed list.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #74 of 86
Sharp, LG, and Chunghwa admitted price fixing there are eight more manufacturers named in Nokia's complaint.

So are Nokia going to give rebates to those who bought their phone's at an inflated cost, due to the alleged price fixing they suffered?

Haven't they already made profits on the handsets they sold?

Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

Why didn't you include the bit about how the LCD manufactures have admitted they were price fixing?
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
post #75 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Haven't they already made profits on the handsets they sold?

And what is your point? They are a business, the number one goal is to make money.
post #76 of 86
So are Nokia going to refund the extra production costs that they stand to recoup from any legal actions, to the people who bought phone's containing the LCD's off them?

Or do they just stick it in their kitty and increase the profits made on handsets that have already been paid for by consumers?

There may be a chance of a class action against Nokia if they don't pass on to consumers any damages they are awarded because after all they are the ones who paid any additional costs as a result of any price fixing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

And what is your point? They are a business, the number one goal is to make money.
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
post #77 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

So are Nokia going to refund the extra production costs that they stand to recoup from any legal actions, to the people who bought phone's containing the LCD's off them?

Or do they just stick it in their kitty and increase the profits made on handsets that have already been paid for by consumers?

There may be a chance of a class action against Nokia if they don't pass on to consumers any damages they are awarded because after all they are the ones who paid any additional costs as a result of any price fixing.

Maybe there will be, but the question you should be asking, and I noticed you failed to ask it, Nokia is following AT&T's lead, they produce a similar lawsuit a month prior to Nokia. What will AT&T do if they win?
post #78 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

Maybe there will be, but the question you should be asking, and I noticed you failed to ask it, Nokia is following AT&T's lead, they produce a similar lawsuit a month prior to Nokia. What will AT&T do if they win?

Some references to the ATT lawsuit would be good.
post #79 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dorotea View Post

Some references to the ATT lawsuit would be good.

It would have been quicker for you to search for it, but here it is

http://arstechnica.com/hardware/news...violations.ars

Quote:
Nokia is actually the second company to sue for over these violations, following AT&T, so the risk is anything but hypothetical.
post #80 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobabyrtrns View Post

Regardless, this has been posted in the past and it is just as relevant today. The key point being that Nokia chose only 10 patents to contest. They have plenty more but they chose only ten. This should set off alarms that they are pretty damn confident that they can make this poop stick to the wall. There is not one mobile that you can pick up that does not have Nokia technology in it somewhere. The same can't be said about Apple. Apple needs Nokia's technology more than Nokia needs Apple's. The issue is not who makes a better phone with more bells and whistles but who is stealing (opppsss, sorry for being politically incorrect) infringing, on the others IPR.

The winners will be the lawyers.

Nokia just grabbed the only ten that had an outside chance of sticking... and don't forget the assertion that Apple tried to negotiate in good faith, but Nokia tried to extort more license fees and/or IP from Apple than everyone else. If the last assertion is true, then Apple will likely win the right to just pay Nokia a fair royalty.

You are correct about the real winners: the lawyers. As usual.

Thompson
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple hits back at Nokia, asks ITC to ban handset imports