For starters the Professor didn't just have an obvious idea, he had a detailed implementation of it that the courts have currently ruled as essentially similar to what CoverFlow and Time Machine are. Secondly, from what I heard, the professor doesn't get a dime even though it was his idea. The idea belongs to the company that sued.
So here we have another case where everyone trying to do original work and actually thinking up the ideas, looses, and the lawyers, and the companies that rape/buy the ideas win. The exact opposite of what copyright law is supposed to do.
On another note, do you think anyone at Apple Insider will ever notice that the previous story doesn't allow anyone to comment?
That might be why, you know, no one has commented.
Forgive me, but are the two words Loose & Lose mean the same thing? been a while since I've been in school.
I am responsible for making sure that all corporate data is backed up. The tapes are stacked by day of the week, and along with a month-end backup and a year-end backup.
Should I send a check to this guy in the event I have to go "back in time" to find a missing file from one of our historical backups? Heaven forbid I step on a patent covering this method of data retrieval.
Couldn't agree more!!! Don't these people realize that we love Steve and he and Apple should be allowed to do anything they want. Anyone who disagrees is a troll....
Like ALL of you here (and obviously you Mad Dog), I know more about the law than the courts. Apple will win in the end!! Of course, I hope Apple sues HTC out of business just like they sued Psystar out of business....
Not mentioned in the article above: the patents were sold/purchased for $5 million. One of Apple's arguments was that the infringement shouldn't be worth more than that. Honestly, that seems right. Yeah, I'm biased, but the guy who INVENTED the idea got his $$ (actually, he got $210k, because the $5m was a second sale).
I want to know what percentage of these East Texas rulings get over-turned on appeal. Hopefully it's most of them. Otherwise, they need to bulldoze over the court and make a water-park.
Yeah - on the face of it this sounds ridiculous. I wonder if there is a patent of stacking physical object on top of one another (cards., documents, whatever)?
So much money for something that isn't even owned by the creator now (the professor) and bearing a passing resemblance to something that Apple picked up from a guy who made it back in 2000 (coverflow).
There is a stunning amount of ignorance in these posts about what IP law is and how it works. First off, the article itself is misleading in several places as it references a "Tyler County Court." Which is not true -- this lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court, Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division. In other words, this is not a podunk in-bred local court with some yokel for the judge. This judge was appointed by the President of the United States and confirmed by the US Senate. This is a very big deal.
Second, Judge Davis is not some former small-town lawyer but has a BS in mathematics and an MS in IT Management, and worked as a computer programmer and systems analyst before going to law school. He was a highly respected judge in the Texas state court system and practiced in Dallas. Anyone who knows anything about IT knows that the north Dallas suburbs of Plano, Frisco, etc. have a ton of high-tech companies (i.e. Fujitsu's US headquarters).
This is why a massive number of IP / patent lawsuits are filed in the ED Tex. It has judges with deep technical skills, hires the top law school graduates (all with technical degrees and experience, some even with Ph.D.s) as clerks, and has a streamlined process whereby the cases can get heard much sooner than in other districts. (3-5 years is common in other districts; this was two years start to finish.)
Furthermore, it is completely misleading to say that this district is biased towards the holders of patents. It absolutely is not. Many claims get transferred there and licensing agreement sometimes stipulate to jurisdiction there precisely because it's not a bunch of yokels. Defendant firms like Tyler and Sherman (the other division of ED Tex) because of the sophistication of the judges and the speed in getting disputes resolved.
Right or wrong, $600m+ is the verdict. Patent law requires damages be set in reference to the money obtained by the infringer, in this case Apple. Having decided that Apple infringed the patent, the jury then listened to evidence on how profitable iTunes has been for Apple and set damages accordingly. Again, this is not some runaway, jackpot judgment and it happens all the time in IP litigation.
There is a stunning amount of ignorance in these posts about what IP law is and how it works. First off, the article itself is misleading in several places as it references a "Tyler County Court." Which is not true -- this lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court, Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division. In other words, this is not a podunk in-bred local court with some yokel for the judge. This judge was appointed by the President of the United States and confirmed by the US Senate. This is a very big deal.
Second, Judge Davis is not some former small-town lawyer but has a BS in mathematics and an MS in IT Management, and worked as a computer programmer and systems analyst before going to law school. He was a highly respected judge in the Texas state court system and practiced in Dallas. Anyone who knows anything about IT knows that the north Dallas suburbs of Plano, Frisco, etc. have a ton of high-tech companies (i.e. Fujitsu's US headquarters).
This is why a massive number of IP / patent lawsuits are filed in the ED Tex. It has judges with deep technical skills, hires the top law school graduates (all with technical degrees and experience, some even with Ph.D.s) as clerks, and has a streamlined process whereby the cases can get heard much sooner than in other districts. (3-5 years is common in other districts; this was two years start to finish.)
Furthermore, it is completely misleading to say that this district is biased towards the holders of patents. It absolutely is not. Many claims get transferred there and licensing agreement sometimes stipulate to jurisdiction there precisely because it's not a bunch of yokels. Defendant firms like Tyler and Sherman (the other division of ED Tex) because of the sophistication of the judges and the speed in getting disputes resolved.
Right or wrong, $600m+ is the verdict. Patent law requires damages be set in reference to the money obtained by the infringer, in this case Apple. Having decided that Apple infringed the patent, the jury then listened to evidence on how profitable iTunes has been for Apple and set damages accordingly. Again, this is not some runaway, jackpot judgment and it happens all the time in IP litigation.
I disagree, the Tyler court has a consistent track record of finding in favour of patent holders.
This is most likely due to the demographics of the jury, rather than the credentials of the judge and lawyers.
In one trial, they'll award $100,000 and in another similar trial, a different jury could award $20,000,000.
Is awarding the 600+ million an indication that the court figures Apple benefited that much by using the coverflow interface, or is it simply a harsh penalty to punish Apple so they double check everything so they don't use patented items in the futre?
All in all, a ridiculous amount of money.
It's hard to fathom how much money is consumed by the system of patents in the states (lawyers, courts, settlements, etc.).
Comments
I don't think this is really fair.
For starters the Professor didn't just have an obvious idea, he had a detailed implementation of it that the courts have currently ruled as essentially similar to what CoverFlow and Time Machine are. Secondly, from what I heard, the professor doesn't get a dime even though it was his idea. The idea belongs to the company that sued.
So here we have another case where everyone trying to do original work and actually thinking up the ideas, looses, and the lawyers, and the companies that rape/buy the ideas win. The exact opposite of what copyright law is supposed to do.
On another note, do you think anyone at Apple Insider will ever notice that the previous story doesn't allow anyone to comment?
That might be why, you know, no one has commented.
Forgive me, but are the two words Loose & Lose mean the same thing? been a while since I've been in school.
Forgive me, but are the two words Loose & Lose mean the same thing? been a while since I've been in school.
No, they are not the same. Lots of people use loose when they really mean lose.
Should I send a check to this guy in the event I have to go "back in time" to find a missing file from one of our historical backups? Heaven forbid I step on a patent covering this method of data retrieval.
Forgive me, but are the two words Loose & Lose mean the same thing? been a while since I've been in school.
You spent all that time and effort just to criticise a spelling mistake? wow.
troll.
Couldn't agree more!!! Don't these people realize that we love Steve and he and Apple should be allowed to do anything they want. Anyone who disagrees is a troll....
Like ALL of you here (and obviously you Mad Dog), I know more about the law than the courts. Apple will win in the end!! Of course, I hope Apple sues HTC out of business just like they sued Psystar out of business....
Go Steve... Wooo Hooo!!!!!!
Not mentioned in the article above: the patents were sold/purchased for $5 million. One of Apple's arguments was that the infringement shouldn't be worth more than that. Honestly, that seems right. Yeah, I'm biased, but the guy who INVENTED the idea got his $$ (actually, he got $210k, because the $5m was a second sale).
I want to know what percentage of these East Texas rulings get over-turned on appeal. Hopefully it's most of them. Otherwise, they need to bulldoze over the court and make a water-park.
Why a water-park?
On another note, do you think anyone at Apple Insider will ever notice that the previous story doesn't allow anyone to comment?
That might be why, you know, no one has commented.
Yeah, I noticed. Not to go off-topic here, but the new AppleTV leaves a lot to be desired.....
Yeah, I noticed. Not to go off-topic here, but the new AppleTV leaves a lot to be desired.....
I have to agree, my older AppleTV is working just fine, this new one is just a bit step backwards with less storage, but same technology.
Congratulations, professor! You won the lottery for an incredibly obvious and typical application of the database sort command.
Which will be one of the reasons for it being overturned.
Be a lot cheaper in the long run.
Congratulations, professor! You won the lottery...
Why? The professor is not part of the lawsuit.
Yeah - on the face of it this sounds ridiculous. I wonder if there is a patent of stacking physical object on top of one another (cards., documents, whatever)?
There's a society devoted specifically to that...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1f-kfRREA8M
So much money for something that isn't even owned by the creator now (the professor) and bearing a passing resemblance to something that Apple picked up from a guy who made it back in 2000 (coverflow).
Made in 2005 and Apple purchased in 2006.
There's a society devoted specifically to that...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1f-kfRREA8M
DOH!!
(That's one very funny video)
Second, Judge Davis is not some former small-town lawyer but has a BS in mathematics and an MS in IT Management, and worked as a computer programmer and systems analyst before going to law school. He was a highly respected judge in the Texas state court system and practiced in Dallas. Anyone who knows anything about IT knows that the north Dallas suburbs of Plano, Frisco, etc. have a ton of high-tech companies (i.e. Fujitsu's US headquarters).
This is why a massive number of IP / patent lawsuits are filed in the ED Tex. It has judges with deep technical skills, hires the top law school graduates (all with technical degrees and experience, some even with Ph.D.s) as clerks, and has a streamlined process whereby the cases can get heard much sooner than in other districts. (3-5 years is common in other districts; this was two years start to finish.)
Furthermore, it is completely misleading to say that this district is biased towards the holders of patents. It absolutely is not. Many claims get transferred there and licensing agreement sometimes stipulate to jurisdiction there precisely because it's not a bunch of yokels. Defendant firms like Tyler and Sherman (the other division of ED Tex) because of the sophistication of the judges and the speed in getting disputes resolved.
Right or wrong, $600m+ is the verdict. Patent law requires damages be set in reference to the money obtained by the infringer, in this case Apple. Having decided that Apple infringed the patent, the jury then listened to evidence on how profitable iTunes has been for Apple and set damages accordingly. Again, this is not some runaway, jackpot judgment and it happens all the time in IP litigation.
There is a stunning amount of ignorance in these posts about what IP law is and how it works. First off, the article itself is misleading in several places as it references a "Tyler County Court." Which is not true -- this lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court, Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division. In other words, this is not a podunk in-bred local court with some yokel for the judge. This judge was appointed by the President of the United States and confirmed by the US Senate. This is a very big deal.
Second, Judge Davis is not some former small-town lawyer but has a BS in mathematics and an MS in IT Management, and worked as a computer programmer and systems analyst before going to law school. He was a highly respected judge in the Texas state court system and practiced in Dallas. Anyone who knows anything about IT knows that the north Dallas suburbs of Plano, Frisco, etc. have a ton of high-tech companies (i.e. Fujitsu's US headquarters).
This is why a massive number of IP / patent lawsuits are filed in the ED Tex. It has judges with deep technical skills, hires the top law school graduates (all with technical degrees and experience, some even with Ph.D.s) as clerks, and has a streamlined process whereby the cases can get heard much sooner than in other districts. (3-5 years is common in other districts; this was two years start to finish.)
Furthermore, it is completely misleading to say that this district is biased towards the holders of patents. It absolutely is not. Many claims get transferred there and licensing agreement sometimes stipulate to jurisdiction there precisely because it's not a bunch of yokels. Defendant firms like Tyler and Sherman (the other division of ED Tex) because of the sophistication of the judges and the speed in getting disputes resolved.
Right or wrong, $600m+ is the verdict. Patent law requires damages be set in reference to the money obtained by the infringer, in this case Apple. Having decided that Apple infringed the patent, the jury then listened to evidence on how profitable iTunes has been for Apple and set damages accordingly. Again, this is not some runaway, jackpot judgment and it happens all the time in IP litigation.
I disagree, the Tyler court has a consistent track record of finding in favour of patent holders.
This is most likely due to the demographics of the jury, rather than the credentials of the judge and lawyers.
In one trial, they'll award $100,000 and in another similar trial, a different jury could award $20,000,000.
Is awarding the 600+ million an indication that the court figures Apple benefited that much by using the coverflow interface, or is it simply a harsh penalty to punish Apple so they double check everything so they don't use patented items in the futre?
All in all, a ridiculous amount of money.
It's hard to fathom how much money is consumed by the system of patents in the states (lawyers, courts, settlements, etc.).
Is it like this in any other countries???