Wow. I guess everyone didn't realize the ramifications of using BlueTooth as a STANDARD. What if someone actually used USB connectors -- I'm sure there is a patent on that as well.
It seems that Nokia has realized they cannot compete in the smart phone arena, so they are going towards the "Patent Troll" model.
-- not that Apple doesn't sue everyone else as well. But I'm guessing that we will find these really trivial and obvious patents. Like when you get a Radio, and you figure someone is going to need an antennae -- so now someone sues over adding an Antennae to Wireless devices.
I'm still saddened that Amazon won that "single click to purchase" patent -- like, the patents for 3, 4 and 5 blades on a razor held by different companies. Is there one for 6 blades, or would that be ostentatious?
I'd hardly call them a little company, also at this moment in time we do not actually know what the outcome of this action will be.
It is quite possible that Apple has infringed on their patents.
Nokia has been in the communication business for over 20 years, their patent portfollio is very strong.
You make that assertion, but the evidence shows otherwise. Nokia couldn't convince the ITC that Apple has infringed on their patents. I would assume those particular patents were the most relevant examples of infringement that Nokia could use, or their lawyers are terrible strategists.
And now Nokia is leveling new charges against Apple, but Apple has their own arsenal of patents. Apple may have only entered the cell phone business in the last 5 years, but that doesn't mean their patent portfolio is limited to that time frame.
Not really, you have to defend a patent if you want to keep it. If you miss one patent, it will come back to haunt you. Apple is the same, they serve anyone who infringes on patents or trade marks. You cannot even have iMac or apple or any other Apple trademark as a license plate if you are a fanboy. And, whats with the App Store? We all know the "real" App Store is the Apple App Store, but Apple is after Amazon for using it.
You are confusing patents with trademarks. Trademarks have to be defended, patents don't have to be defended. Just look at the trolls who thought that they owned a patent for gif. They waited until everybody and there brother used it on the internet before trying to gouge everyone for patent violations. It didn't matter that they did nothing to defend it for the previous decade.
As for patents, well let's just say that IP law all over the world has gone completely nuts. I mean when anyone can tell you with a straight face that copyright must exist for life + 75 years or nobody would create anything or that clicking on a virtual button to buy something is actually novel, you know it is all a joke. Unfortunately, it isn't a very funny one.
Maybe Apple should just buy Nokia and be done with it.
I'd hardly call them a little company, also at this moment in time we do not actually know what the outcome of this action will be.
It is quite possible that Apple has infringed on their patents.
Nokia has been in the communication business for over 20 years, their patent portfollio is very strong.
I'll concur that they have fallen behind Apple and others with regards to smart phones in recent years but contrary to what seem to be popular American opinion they do not make trash.
I used Nokia handsets for around 10 years before Apple released their iPhone and every single one of them gave me good solid service with no issues whatsoever both in terms of build quality and the software which they ran.
I'm happy with my iPhone and have no intention of switching back, just don't jump to conclusions with regards to this patent battle.
However, the chances of the new claims getting anywhere are slim.
Nokia first claimed that Apple had violated 5 patents. ITC shot them down. Now, they're claiming that Apple violates 7 different patents. In both cases, they claimed that virtually every Apple product was violating Nokia's patents.
Here are the possibilities:
1. Nokia did what was expected - and chose their 5 best patents for the original complaint. In that case, the odds of the next 7 getting anywhere is slim.
2. Nokia put some law school drop out on the case - and they chose bad examples for the first complaint, but now they have better examples. Aside from ITC getting upset with them for wasting their time, the fact that the lawyers handling the matter as well as the business execs who are involved all picked bad examples the first time suggests that they're too incompetent to win, anyway.
Wow. I guess everyone didn't realize the ramifications of using BlueTooth as a STANDARD. What if someone actually used USB connectors -- I'm sure there is a patent on that as well.
It seems that Nokia has realized they cannot compete in the smart phone arena, so they are going towards the "Patent Troll" model.
-- not that Apple doesn't sue everyone else as well. But I'm guessing that we will find these really trivial and obvious patents. Like when you get a Radio, and you figure someone is going to need an antennae -- so now someone sues over adding an Antennae to Wireless devices.
I'm still saddened that Amazon won that "single click to purchase" patent -- like, the patents for 3, 4 and 5 blades on a razor held by different companies. Is there one for 6 blades, or would that be ostentatious?
Especially seeing as Ericsson invented Bluetooth with no contribution from Nokia.
another day of troll messages by the ever faithful, and equally ever blind here at AI.
people expect any company (that's not apple) to give away their vault keys to each and every one of their competitors simply because IP patents and Copyrights are unfavourable ideas to consumers.
Sadly, you need to understand that the motivation for a company to research is to make technological break-throughs, and to in turn build better products to differentiate themselves in the free market from their competitors. Where is the motivation to spend all that money on research if anyone can come along and steal the ideas?
Nokia, however you view their current line-up of phones, is historically a huge innovator in the mobile market, many of the things we take for granted in mobile devices are all down to Nokia, and - as stated here - the billions of dollars it spent in research investment.
Apple does the same thing, it spends a lot of money researching, it patents ideas and techniques, and sometimes licenses those to third parties. Apple need to stop being hypocrites and be respectful to others when trying to compete, ESPECIALLY when it is so vocal and slap-happy with lawsuits.
I did not realize frivolous lawsuits were big in Europe? I thought since Microsoft took over Nokia they would not be so desperate? Nokia must realize, as does anyone with half a brain, Windows Phone is a DOA, so now they are grasping at straws and throwing everything they can at Apple to see if something sticks.
I am still amazed at how Microsoft took over Nokia and is going to run it into the ground with a crappy phone OS.
They now have a check book signed by Ballmer to pay the lawyers maybe this might get nasty? Ironic if this is what's going on since Microsoft really only exist due to IMB's might and bank balance defending their scrawny ass in the early days of their thievery.
It is quite possible that Apple has infringed on their patents.
How can you make that statement without even knowing which 7 patents they are claiming Apple violated? If there is an even stronger case of infringement for these 7 than there were for the last 5, then their lawyers are fools for not leading with their stronger case to establish infringement. Because that would make future cases easier. And it has been proven time and time again that just because you have a patent doesn't mean it's enforceable against someone else. Two similar ideas can be implemented in totally different ways.
What miracle technological implementation has Apple used in the iPhone that is so vastly different from every other smartphone (or cell phone in general) that Apple has stolen from Nokia? I'm not saying it's impossible, but I do think it's improbable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mknopp
You are confusing patents with trademarks. Trademarks have to be defended, patents don't have to be defended. Just look at the trolls who thought that they owned a patent for gif. They waited until everybody and there brother used it on the internet before trying to gouge everyone for patent violations. It didn't matter that they did nothing to defend it for the previous decade.
I'm not sure that is true. My understanding was that patents also needed to be defended. Perhaps not to the same level as trademark, but I was under the impression that you still needed to defend your patents if you knew of infringement or else risk losing your patent rights. Of course, the key is "knowing of infringement". With physical objects and devices it's relatively easy to examine a competitor's product and determine if they are infringing on your patent. But when you are talking about computer code, it's a bit harder to do that.
However, the chances of the new claims getting anywhere are slim.
Nokia first claimed that Apple had violated 5 patents. ITC shot them down. Now, they're claiming that Apple violates 7 different patents. In both cases, they claimed that virtually every Apple product was violating Nokia's patents.
Here are the possibilities:
1. Nokia did what was expected - and chose their 5 best patents for the original complaint. In that case, the odds of the next 7 getting anywhere is slim.
2. Nokia put some law school drop out on the case - and they chose bad examples for the first complaint, but now they have better examples. Aside from ITC getting upset with them for wasting their time, the fact that the lawyers handling the matter as well as the business execs who are involved all picked bad examples the first time suggests that they're too incompetent to win, anyway.
It is clear that Nokia is grasping at straws.
Correct. And when Nokia loses this second round the repercussions back at them will damage them severely.
How can you make that statement without even knowing which 7 patents they are claiming Apple violated? If there is an even stronger case of infringement for these 7 than there were for the last 5, then their lawyers are fools for not leading with their stronger case to establish infringement. Because that would make future cases easier. And it has been proven time and time again that just because you have a patent doesn't mean it's enforceable against someone else. Two similar ideas can be implemented in totally different ways.
I made the statement because it's true. It's entirely possible that Apple has infringed on Nokia's patents, it's also entirely possible that Nokia is in the wrong and does not have a foot to stand on.
My point was quite simply that most people here in the forum have already decided that either Apple or Nokia are right without and facts being laid out.
another day of troll messages by the ever faithful, and equally ever blind here at AI.
people expect any company (that's not apple) to give away their vault keys to each and every one of their competitors simply because IP patents and Copyrights are unfavourable ideas to consumers.
Sadly, you need to understand that the motivation for a company to research is to make technological break-throughs, and to in turn build better products to differentiate themselves in the free market from their competitors. Where is the motivation to spend all that money on research if anyone can come along and steal the ideas?
Nokia, however you view their current line-up of phones, is historically a huge innovator in the mobile market, many of the things we take for granted in mobile devices are all down to Nokia, and - as stated here - the billions of dollars it spent in research investment.
Apple does the same thing, it spends a lot of money researching, it patents ideas and techniques, and sometimes licenses those to third parties. Apple need to stop being hypocrites and be respectful to others when trying to compete, ESPECIALLY when it is so vocal and slap-happy with lawsuits.
So, which one of these posts made you write this? I don't see anyone that expects "any company (that's not apple) to give away their vault keys to each and every one of their competitors simply because IP patents and Copyrights are unfavourable ideas to consumers."
another day of troll messages by the ever faithful, and equally ever blind here at AI.
people expect any company (that's not apple) to give away their vault keys to each and every one of their competitors simply because IP patents and Copyrights are unfavourable ideas to consumers.
Sadly, you need to understand that the motivation for a company to research is to make technological break-throughs, and to in turn build better products to differentiate themselves in the free market from their competitors. Where is the motivation to spend all that money on research if anyone can come along and steal the ideas?
Nokia, however you view their current line-up of phones, is historically a huge innovator in the mobile market, many of the things we take for granted in mobile devices are all down to Nokia, and - as stated here - the billions of dollars it spent in research investment.
Apple does the same thing, it spends a lot of money researching, it patents ideas and techniques, and sometimes licenses those to third parties. Apple need to stop being hypocrites and be respectful to others when trying to compete, ESPECIALLY when it is so vocal and slap-happy with lawsuits.
But in this particular case, your claim that Apple is "slap-happy with lawsuits" isn't demonstrably true. Nokia brought the initial action against Apple, Apple then responded with their own patent infringement claims, and now Nokia is back for round 2.
In fact, I'm hard pressed to find more than a few examples where Apple initiated litigation against another technology firm (HTC, Psystar, and Amazon come to mind). They are much more likely to be on the receiving end of a lawsuit (Motorola, Elan, Kodak, or Nokia).
I'd hardly call them a little company, also at this moment in time we do not actually know what the outcome of this action will be.
Technically you are correct. But these patents aren't ones Nokia has brought to the dance until now, and they lost with the first string patents they thought were slam dunk wins. How likely is it that the third string of a defensive patent portfolio is successful in an offensive role? My bet is not very.
Quote:
It is quite possible that Apple has infringed on their patents.
And due to the recent rulung by the ITC that Nokias first and best case against Apple was a total loss, this looks not to be the case.
Quote:
Nokia has been in the communication business for over 20 years, their patent portfollio is very strong.
I'll concur that they have fallen behind Apple and others with regards to smart phones in recent years but contrary to what seem to be popular American opinion they do not make trash.
I used Nokia handsets for around 10 years before Apple released their iPhone and every single one of them gave me good solid service with no issues whatsoever both in terms of build quality and the software which they ran.
I'm happy with my iPhone and have no intention of switching back, just don't jump to conclusions with regards to this patent battle.
No conclusions, but when you lose your initial case trumpeted as 'rock solid, no way to lose' by the Nokia CEO it doesn't bode well for the lawyers that are running the case. It gives the distinct impression Nokia sat on it's laurels and patented defensively rather than aggressively and with a flair of innovation. Defensive patents lose in offensive actions regularly because the Patent Office has too big a task to differentiate everything. So the courts and ITC hash it out for the Patent Office, and the defensive patents are often either too narrow to win offensive actions or get tossed as non-original.
After losing their first ITC case against Apple, Nokia is in some trouble and in a holding action to see if they lose against Apple's counter-offensive with the iPhone patent portfolio. I really think they are hoping to bully Apple int a settlement where Nokia doesn't lose it's shirt. But I think Apple is pissed and willing to stand on Nokia's throat a bit in the courtroom, just to make them an example while looking at Google and Microsoft and saying "you don't want to mess with us in the courtroom folks."
I made the statement because it's true. It's entirely possible that Apple has infringed on Nokia's patents, it's also entirely possible that Nokia is in the wrong and does not have a foot to stand on.
My point was quite simply that most people here in the forum have already decided that either Apple or Nokia are right without and facts being laid out.
well, we do have the fact that the ITC ruled against them in their last attempt. And there's the seeming absurdity that they include Macs in their dispute this time and point to multitasking as an infringement when multitasking predates cell phones.
Perhaps their strategy is to accuse Apple of violating ALL of their patents so that they can use the legal process to determine which of their patents Apple is in fact NOT violating so they can figure out which ideas were mistakes and they can then focus on the ones that Apple is actually using.
A game of 'toss the pasta on the wall and see what sticks' is not going to win them points with the courts or the ITC when it becomes clear that that is the game.
They will possibly get things tossed for being too broad etc.
And this is before the ones that Apple gets shot down with the point that X was based of their own patent A and so on
Quote:
Originally Posted by mknopp
You are confusing patents with trademarks. Trademarks have to be defended, patents don't have to be defended.
While this is true, I'm more and more thinking it should be the other way. That companies should have to speak up during a limited time (say 2 years) once another company potentially infringes or it will be deemed as 'you don't care about it' and is allowed to continue as they were. Or at the least, reduce the amount of damages. So like if you let someone clearly go for 5+ years infringing on your patent you should only be allowed actual damages for licensing fees not received (at a fair rate) and no additional damages 'just cause'
Not to mention the dumping of all 'only an idea' patents out of the books. Sorry but they never should have been allowed. Or say allow someone to patent an idea but for a short time. If during that time they can develop the tech then they get a full patent on it. So like 3 years for a mere idea, 20 for their actual tech. But after that 3 years, the idea is in the open. Anyone can try to develop a different tech for the same notion.
And as much as I hate to say it, I think we need more 3rd party oversight on patent uses and licensing. It could be as simple as forcing companies to publish licensing rates to insure that all companies are being asked for the same amount. This was the crux of Apple's issues. They claim that Nokia tried to ask for way more than they do from any other company. Even double dipping on patents they jointly own that Apple licensed from the collective. Perhaps something like requiring copies of all licensing deals be filled with the ITC when signed to be opened and reviewed during any disputes (along with appropriate other deal papers depending on the nature of the complaint) would be enough. Perhaps also requiring some kind of usage notes fillings to show linkage between patents and later art wouldn't be out of order. Say Apple has a patent on their 'dock' in Mac OS (very likely) and decides to use it in iOS where it appears as the 'multi task bar'. Depending on the system it could be a use note on the original patent or a second patent where it clearly states that they are expanding their own 'prior art' in Patent XYZ as a basis for this new patent. Paper trail created as they go instead of trying to show it later where folks will try to twist things around to suit their needs. And so on
Comments
Wow. I guess everyone didn't realize the ramifications of using BlueTooth as a STANDARD. What if someone actually used USB connectors -- I'm sure there is a patent on that as well.
It seems that Nokia has realized they cannot compete in the smart phone arena, so they are going towards the "Patent Troll" model.
-- not that Apple doesn't sue everyone else as well. But I'm guessing that we will find these really trivial and obvious patents. Like when you get a Radio, and you figure someone is going to need an antennae -- so now someone sues over adding an Antennae to Wireless devices.
I'm still saddened that Amazon won that "single click to purchase" patent -- like, the patents for 3, 4 and 5 blades on a razor held by different companies. Is there one for 6 blades, or would that be ostentatious?
I'd hardly call them a little company, also at this moment in time we do not actually know what the outcome of this action will be.
It is quite possible that Apple has infringed on their patents.
Nokia has been in the communication business for over 20 years, their patent portfollio is very strong.
You make that assertion, but the evidence shows otherwise. Nokia couldn't convince the ITC that Apple has infringed on their patents. I would assume those particular patents were the most relevant examples of infringement that Nokia could use, or their lawyers are terrible strategists.
And now Nokia is leveling new charges against Apple, but Apple has their own arsenal of patents. Apple may have only entered the cell phone business in the last 5 years, but that doesn't mean their patent portfolio is limited to that time frame.
Not really, you have to defend a patent if you want to keep it. If you miss one patent, it will come back to haunt you. Apple is the same, they serve anyone who infringes on patents or trade marks. You cannot even have iMac or apple or any other Apple trademark as a license plate if you are a fanboy. And, whats with the App Store? We all know the "real" App Store is the Apple App Store, but Apple is after Amazon for using it.
You are confusing patents with trademarks. Trademarks have to be defended, patents don't have to be defended. Just look at the trolls who thought that they owned a patent for gif. They waited until everybody and there brother used it on the internet before trying to gouge everyone for patent violations. It didn't matter that they did nothing to defend it for the previous decade.
As for patents, well let's just say that IP law all over the world has gone completely nuts. I mean when anyone can tell you with a straight face that copyright must exist for life + 75 years or nobody would create anything or that clicking on a virtual button to buy something is actually novel, you know it is all a joke. Unfortunately, it isn't a very funny one.
Maybe Apple should just buy Nokia and be done with it.
I'd hardly call them a little company, also at this moment in time we do not actually know what the outcome of this action will be.
It is quite possible that Apple has infringed on their patents.
Nokia has been in the communication business for over 20 years, their patent portfollio is very strong.
I'll concur that they have fallen behind Apple and others with regards to smart phones in recent years but contrary to what seem to be popular American opinion they do not make trash.
I used Nokia handsets for around 10 years before Apple released their iPhone and every single one of them gave me good solid service with no issues whatsoever both in terms of build quality and the software which they ran.
I'm happy with my iPhone and have no intention of switching back, just don't jump to conclusions with regards to this patent battle.
However, the chances of the new claims getting anywhere are slim.
Nokia first claimed that Apple had violated 5 patents. ITC shot them down. Now, they're claiming that Apple violates 7 different patents. In both cases, they claimed that virtually every Apple product was violating Nokia's patents.
Here are the possibilities:
1. Nokia did what was expected - and chose their 5 best patents for the original complaint. In that case, the odds of the next 7 getting anywhere is slim.
2. Nokia put some law school drop out on the case - and they chose bad examples for the first complaint, but now they have better examples. Aside from ITC getting upset with them for wasting their time, the fact that the lawyers handling the matter as well as the business execs who are involved all picked bad examples the first time suggests that they're too incompetent to win, anyway.
It is clear that Nokia is grasping at straws.
and the use of Bluetooth accessories.
Wow. I guess everyone didn't realize the ramifications of using BlueTooth as a STANDARD. What if someone actually used USB connectors -- I'm sure there is a patent on that as well.
It seems that Nokia has realized they cannot compete in the smart phone arena, so they are going towards the "Patent Troll" model.
-- not that Apple doesn't sue everyone else as well. But I'm guessing that we will find these really trivial and obvious patents. Like when you get a Radio, and you figure someone is going to need an antennae -- so now someone sues over adding an Antennae to Wireless devices.
I'm still saddened that Amazon won that "single click to purchase" patent -- like, the patents for 3, 4 and 5 blades on a razor held by different companies. Is there one for 6 blades, or would that be ostentatious?
Especially seeing as Ericsson invented Bluetooth with no contribution from Nokia.
people expect any company (that's not apple) to give away their vault keys to each and every one of their competitors simply because IP patents and Copyrights are unfavourable ideas to consumers.
Sadly, you need to understand that the motivation for a company to research is to make technological break-throughs, and to in turn build better products to differentiate themselves in the free market from their competitors. Where is the motivation to spend all that money on research if anyone can come along and steal the ideas?
Nokia, however you view their current line-up of phones, is historically a huge innovator in the mobile market, many of the things we take for granted in mobile devices are all down to Nokia, and - as stated here - the billions of dollars it spent in research investment.
Apple does the same thing, it spends a lot of money researching, it patents ideas and techniques, and sometimes licenses those to third parties. Apple need to stop being hypocrites and be respectful to others when trying to compete, ESPECIALLY when it is so vocal and slap-happy with lawsuits.
Especially seeing as Ericsson invented Bluetooth with no contribution from Nokia.
Good observation there.
I did not realize frivolous lawsuits were big in Europe? I thought since Microsoft took over Nokia they would not be so desperate? Nokia must realize, as does anyone with half a brain, Windows Phone is a DOA, so now they are grasping at straws and throwing everything they can at Apple to see if something sticks.
I am still amazed at how Microsoft took over Nokia and is going to run it into the ground with a crappy phone OS.
They now have a check book signed by Ballmer to pay the lawyers maybe this might get nasty? Ironic if this is what's going on since Microsoft really only exist due to IMB's might and bank balance defending their scrawny ass in the early days of their thievery.
It is quite possible that Apple has infringed on their patents.
How can you make that statement without even knowing which 7 patents they are claiming Apple violated? If there is an even stronger case of infringement for these 7 than there were for the last 5, then their lawyers are fools for not leading with their stronger case to establish infringement. Because that would make future cases easier. And it has been proven time and time again that just because you have a patent doesn't mean it's enforceable against someone else. Two similar ideas can be implemented in totally different ways.
What miracle technological implementation has Apple used in the iPhone that is so vastly different from every other smartphone (or cell phone in general) that Apple has stolen from Nokia? I'm not saying it's impossible, but I do think it's improbable.
You are confusing patents with trademarks. Trademarks have to be defended, patents don't have to be defended. Just look at the trolls who thought that they owned a patent for gif. They waited until everybody and there brother used it on the internet before trying to gouge everyone for patent violations. It didn't matter that they did nothing to defend it for the previous decade.
I'm not sure that is true. My understanding was that patents also needed to be defended. Perhaps not to the same level as trademark, but I was under the impression that you still needed to defend your patents if you knew of infringement or else risk losing your patent rights. Of course, the key is "knowing of infringement". With physical objects and devices it's relatively easy to examine a competitor's product and determine if they are infringing on your patent. But when you are talking about computer code, it's a bit harder to do that.
You would think spending 43B euros that they could build something more than the cr@p they build
They didn't spend $43 Billion Euros. They didn't have $43 Billion Euros to spend.
However, the chances of the new claims getting anywhere are slim.
Nokia first claimed that Apple had violated 5 patents. ITC shot them down. Now, they're claiming that Apple violates 7 different patents. In both cases, they claimed that virtually every Apple product was violating Nokia's patents.
Here are the possibilities:
1. Nokia did what was expected - and chose their 5 best patents for the original complaint. In that case, the odds of the next 7 getting anywhere is slim.
2. Nokia put some law school drop out on the case - and they chose bad examples for the first complaint, but now they have better examples. Aside from ITC getting upset with them for wasting their time, the fact that the lawyers handling the matter as well as the business execs who are involved all picked bad examples the first time suggests that they're too incompetent to win, anyway.
It is clear that Nokia is grasping at straws.
Correct. And when Nokia loses this second round the repercussions back at them will damage them severely.
How can you make that statement without even knowing which 7 patents they are claiming Apple violated? If there is an even stronger case of infringement for these 7 than there were for the last 5, then their lawyers are fools for not leading with their stronger case to establish infringement. Because that would make future cases easier. And it has been proven time and time again that just because you have a patent doesn't mean it's enforceable against someone else. Two similar ideas can be implemented in totally different ways.
I made the statement because it's true. It's entirely possible that Apple has infringed on Nokia's patents, it's also entirely possible that Nokia is in the wrong and does not have a foot to stand on.
My point was quite simply that most people here in the forum have already decided that either Apple or Nokia are right without and facts being laid out.
I'm not sure that is true. My understanding was that patents also needed to be defended.
Your understanding was very wrong.
another day of troll messages by the ever faithful, and equally ever blind here at AI.
people expect any company (that's not apple) to give away their vault keys to each and every one of their competitors simply because IP patents and Copyrights are unfavourable ideas to consumers.
Sadly, you need to understand that the motivation for a company to research is to make technological break-throughs, and to in turn build better products to differentiate themselves in the free market from their competitors. Where is the motivation to spend all that money on research if anyone can come along and steal the ideas?
Nokia, however you view their current line-up of phones, is historically a huge innovator in the mobile market, many of the things we take for granted in mobile devices are all down to Nokia, and - as stated here - the billions of dollars it spent in research investment.
Apple does the same thing, it spends a lot of money researching, it patents ideas and techniques, and sometimes licenses those to third parties. Apple need to stop being hypocrites and be respectful to others when trying to compete, ESPECIALLY when it is so vocal and slap-happy with lawsuits.
So, which one of these posts made you write this? I don't see anyone that expects "any company (that's not apple) to give away their vault keys to each and every one of their competitors simply because IP patents and Copyrights are unfavourable ideas to consumers."
another day of troll messages by the ever faithful, and equally ever blind here at AI.
people expect any company (that's not apple) to give away their vault keys to each and every one of their competitors simply because IP patents and Copyrights are unfavourable ideas to consumers.
Sadly, you need to understand that the motivation for a company to research is to make technological break-throughs, and to in turn build better products to differentiate themselves in the free market from their competitors. Where is the motivation to spend all that money on research if anyone can come along and steal the ideas?
Nokia, however you view their current line-up of phones, is historically a huge innovator in the mobile market, many of the things we take for granted in mobile devices are all down to Nokia, and - as stated here - the billions of dollars it spent in research investment.
Apple does the same thing, it spends a lot of money researching, it patents ideas and techniques, and sometimes licenses those to third parties. Apple need to stop being hypocrites and be respectful to others when trying to compete, ESPECIALLY when it is so vocal and slap-happy with lawsuits.
But in this particular case, your claim that Apple is "slap-happy with lawsuits" isn't demonstrably true. Nokia brought the initial action against Apple, Apple then responded with their own patent infringement claims, and now Nokia is back for round 2.
In fact, I'm hard pressed to find more than a few examples where Apple initiated litigation against another technology firm (HTC, Psystar, and Amazon come to mind). They are much more likely to be on the receiving end of a lawsuit (Motorola, Elan, Kodak, or Nokia).
They now have a check book signed by Ballmer to pay the lawyers maybe this might get nasty?
next time, please understand the MS / Nokia deal before you open your mouth and look like an slightly retarded child.
I'd hardly call them a little company, also at this moment in time we do not actually know what the outcome of this action will be.
Technically you are correct. But these patents aren't ones Nokia has brought to the dance until now, and they lost with the first string patents they thought were slam dunk wins. How likely is it that the third string of a defensive patent portfolio is successful in an offensive role? My bet is not very.
It is quite possible that Apple has infringed on their patents.
And due to the recent rulung by the ITC that Nokias first and best case against Apple was a total loss, this looks not to be the case.
Nokia has been in the communication business for over 20 years, their patent portfollio is very strong.
I'll concur that they have fallen behind Apple and others with regards to smart phones in recent years but contrary to what seem to be popular American opinion they do not make trash.
I used Nokia handsets for around 10 years before Apple released their iPhone and every single one of them gave me good solid service with no issues whatsoever both in terms of build quality and the software which they ran.
I'm happy with my iPhone and have no intention of switching back, just don't jump to conclusions with regards to this patent battle.
No conclusions, but when you lose your initial case trumpeted as 'rock solid, no way to lose' by the Nokia CEO it doesn't bode well for the lawyers that are running the case. It gives the distinct impression Nokia sat on it's laurels and patented defensively rather than aggressively and with a flair of innovation. Defensive patents lose in offensive actions regularly because the Patent Office has too big a task to differentiate everything. So the courts and ITC hash it out for the Patent Office, and the defensive patents are often either too narrow to win offensive actions or get tossed as non-original.
After losing their first ITC case against Apple, Nokia is in some trouble and in a holding action to see if they lose against Apple's counter-offensive with the iPhone patent portfolio. I really think they are hoping to bully Apple int a settlement where Nokia doesn't lose it's shirt. But I think Apple is pissed and willing to stand on Nokia's throat a bit in the courtroom, just to make them an example while looking at Google and Microsoft and saying "you don't want to mess with us in the courtroom folks."
I made the statement because it's true. It's entirely possible that Apple has infringed on Nokia's patents, it's also entirely possible that Nokia is in the wrong and does not have a foot to stand on.
My point was quite simply that most people here in the forum have already decided that either Apple or Nokia are right without and facts being laid out.
well, we do have the fact that the ITC ruled against them in their last attempt. And there's the seeming absurdity that they include Macs in their dispute this time and point to multitasking as an infringement when multitasking predates cell phones.
Perhaps their strategy is to accuse Apple of violating ALL of their patents so that they can use the legal process to determine which of their patents Apple is in fact NOT violating so they can figure out which ideas were mistakes and they can then focus on the ones that Apple is actually using.
A game of 'toss the pasta on the wall and see what sticks' is not going to win them points with the courts or the ITC when it becomes clear that that is the game.
They will possibly get things tossed for being too broad etc.
And this is before the ones that Apple gets shot down with the point that X was based of their own patent A and so on
You are confusing patents with trademarks. Trademarks have to be defended, patents don't have to be defended.
While this is true, I'm more and more thinking it should be the other way. That companies should have to speak up during a limited time (say 2 years) once another company potentially infringes or it will be deemed as 'you don't care about it' and is allowed to continue as they were. Or at the least, reduce the amount of damages. So like if you let someone clearly go for 5+ years infringing on your patent you should only be allowed actual damages for licensing fees not received (at a fair rate) and no additional damages 'just cause'
Not to mention the dumping of all 'only an idea' patents out of the books. Sorry but they never should have been allowed. Or say allow someone to patent an idea but for a short time. If during that time they can develop the tech then they get a full patent on it. So like 3 years for a mere idea, 20 for their actual tech. But after that 3 years, the idea is in the open. Anyone can try to develop a different tech for the same notion.
And as much as I hate to say it, I think we need more 3rd party oversight on patent uses and licensing. It could be as simple as forcing companies to publish licensing rates to insure that all companies are being asked for the same amount. This was the crux of Apple's issues. They claim that Nokia tried to ask for way more than they do from any other company. Even double dipping on patents they jointly own that Apple licensed from the collective. Perhaps something like requiring copies of all licensing deals be filled with the ITC when signed to be opened and reviewed during any disputes (along with appropriate other deal papers depending on the nature of the complaint) would be enough. Perhaps also requiring some kind of usage notes fillings to show linkage between patents and later art wouldn't be out of order. Say Apple has a patent on their 'dock' in Mac OS (very likely) and decides to use it in iOS where it appears as the 'multi task bar'. Depending on the system it could be a use note on the original patent or a second patent where it clearly states that they are expanding their own 'prior art' in Patent XYZ as a basis for this new patent. Paper trail created as they go instead of trying to show it later where folks will try to twist things around to suit their needs. And so on