Just finished reading an Ars Technica article on this which offered some additional information. Lodsys claims to have held private discussions with Apple prior to filing these infringement claims,something I hadn't yet seen mentioned.
In addition "Lodsys noted that relying on the information in Apple's letter could be detrimental. According to a copy of Apple's own iOS developer agreement, Apple's limit of liability to any developer is a maximum of $50, so Apple is not under any contractual obligation to assist developers or assure that their use of Apple APIs doesn't infringe third-party patents or other IP.
The developers involved may end up forced to settle with Lodsys unless Apple or Google decide to step in. Paying for a license will be far cheaper than very lengthy patent litigation. Unfortunately, those settlements would likely give Lodsys confidence to target other small developers that can't afford to defend themselves. The companies targeted by Lodsys have so far declined to comment on the suit or their strategies in fighting it.
. . . Ars discovered that Lodsys filed a similar patent infringement lawsuit earlier this year. That lawsuit targets a host of large tech companies, including Brother, Canon, HP, Hulu, Lenovo, Lexmark, Motorola, Novell, Samsung, and Trend Micro. . . "
Not eyes closed. Why would they sign patent licensing agreements that didn't cover or indemnify developers using the features they were licensing? I don't think they would, at least not Apple.
No, but by the same token I wouldn't expect them to sign a deal that did not clearly cover their developers under the same license. In most cases the developers are actually end users as the technology and support service (code frameworks, servers, storage, payment processing, etc..) are all owned by Apple and licensed to the developer for use under specific terms. This would be like suing every Ford car owner for using intermittent wiper blades even though Ford licensed (eventually) the patent for use in their cars.
Comments
In addition "Lodsys noted that relying on the information in Apple's letter could be detrimental. According to a copy of Apple's own iOS developer agreement, Apple's limit of liability to any developer is a maximum of $50, so Apple is not under any contractual obligation to assist developers or assure that their use of Apple APIs doesn't infringe third-party patents or other IP.
The developers involved may end up forced to settle with Lodsys unless Apple or Google decide to step in. Paying for a license will be far cheaper than very lengthy patent litigation. Unfortunately, those settlements would likely give Lodsys confidence to target other small developers that can't afford to defend themselves. The companies targeted by Lodsys have so far declined to comment on the suit or their strategies in fighting it.
. . . Ars discovered that Lodsys filed a similar patent infringement lawsuit earlier this year. That lawsuit targets a host of large tech companies, including Brother, Canon, HP, Hulu, Lenovo, Lexmark, Motorola, Novell, Samsung, and Trend Micro. . . "
http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/20...m_campaign=rss
Not eyes closed. Why would they sign patent licensing agreements that didn't cover or indemnify developers using the features they were licensing? I don't think they would, at least not Apple.
No, but by the same token I wouldn't expect them to sign a deal that did not clearly cover their developers under the same license. In most cases the developers are actually end users as the technology and support service (code frameworks, servers, storage, payment processing, etc..) are all owned by Apple and licensed to the developer for use under specific terms. This would be like suing every Ford car owner for using intermittent wiper blades even though Ford licensed (eventually) the patent for use in their cars.