S3 Graphics granted partial victory in patent case against Apple
A U.S. International Trade Commission judge determined on Friday that Apple is infringing on two out of the four S3 Graphics patents the company is accused of violating, granting the graphics chipmaker an initial partial win.
ITC judge James Gildea found Apple guilty of infringing on three claims from two patents regarding "Fixed-rate block-based image compression with inferred pixel values," CNet reports. The initial decision will be reviewed by a six-member commission, with a final decision expected in November.
"S3 Graphics is pleased to win this portion of the ITC investigation," S3 Graphics CEO Dr. Ken Weng said in a statement.
The Fremont, Calif.-based company filed suit against Apple last May, accusing the company of violating four image-related patents. In January, Apple countersued with its own patent-related suit.
The four patents cited in S3's original 2010 complaint are:
U.S. Patent No. 7,043,087: Image processing system
U.S. Patent No. 6,775,417: Fixed-rate block-based image compression with inferred pixel values
U.S. Patent No. 6,683,978: Fixed-rate block-based image compression with inferred pixel values
U.S. Patent No. 6,658,146: Fixed-rate block-based image compression with inferred pixel valuesIf S3 Graphics were to win the final decision against Apple, the ITC could block imports of the company's hardware and software, though it's likely a settlement would be reached before reaching that stage. S3 licenses texture compression technology to several major companies, including Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo.
Earlier this week, the ITC issued a mixed decision in a patent case brought by Kodak against Apple. The commission found that the iPhone does not violate some of Kodak's key digital photography patents, though it did find Apple guilty of infringing two other patents. The decision also sent part of the ruling to an administrative law judge for review.
Apple has become the world's most-sued technology company in recent years and has shored up its in-house and outside legal teams to protect itself.
On Thursday, a consortium of companies including Apple, Microsoft and Research in Motion won an auction for 6,000 patents from bankrupt Canadian telecommunications company Nortel. The group paid $4.5 billion for the patents in a defensive move meant to block Google, other competitors and patent trolls from gaining leverage in a so-called intellectual property "arms race" to 4G wireless technology.
ITC judge James Gildea found Apple guilty of infringing on three claims from two patents regarding "Fixed-rate block-based image compression with inferred pixel values," CNet reports. The initial decision will be reviewed by a six-member commission, with a final decision expected in November.
"S3 Graphics is pleased to win this portion of the ITC investigation," S3 Graphics CEO Dr. Ken Weng said in a statement.
The Fremont, Calif.-based company filed suit against Apple last May, accusing the company of violating four image-related patents. In January, Apple countersued with its own patent-related suit.
The four patents cited in S3's original 2010 complaint are:
U.S. Patent No. 7,043,087: Image processing system
U.S. Patent No. 6,775,417: Fixed-rate block-based image compression with inferred pixel values
U.S. Patent No. 6,683,978: Fixed-rate block-based image compression with inferred pixel values
U.S. Patent No. 6,658,146: Fixed-rate block-based image compression with inferred pixel valuesIf S3 Graphics were to win the final decision against Apple, the ITC could block imports of the company's hardware and software, though it's likely a settlement would be reached before reaching that stage. S3 licenses texture compression technology to several major companies, including Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo.
Earlier this week, the ITC issued a mixed decision in a patent case brought by Kodak against Apple. The commission found that the iPhone does not violate some of Kodak's key digital photography patents, though it did find Apple guilty of infringing two other patents. The decision also sent part of the ruling to an administrative law judge for review.
Apple has become the world's most-sued technology company in recent years and has shored up its in-house and outside legal teams to protect itself.
On Thursday, a consortium of companies including Apple, Microsoft and Research in Motion won an auction for 6,000 patents from bankrupt Canadian telecommunications company Nortel. The group paid $4.5 billion for the patents in a defensive move meant to block Google, other competitors and patent trolls from gaining leverage in a so-called intellectual property "arms race" to 4G wireless technology.
Comments
The existence of Patents in the US wastes loads of Tax Payer's Money in Court each year on ridiculous Patent Infringement claims. Its become something of a crude fashion to sue Apple. Need/want cash? Sue Apple, big fat settlement check.
ITC would never dare ban Apple Product Import. Its not an opinion, its almost a fact. The US Army is using iPhones and iPads, there's no way they'd just let their supplier get cut off. Besides them, the mass riots from the Fan Clubs would cause the Order to be overturned anyway, which would mean ITC simply wasted a load of time and Tax Payer's Money banning them in the first place.
Anyway S3 texture compression is nearly a industry standard, Apple has no excuse to not paid. Although i wonder why this isn't something PowerVR related instead.
I think Apple should just buy S3. They do hold quite a lot of patents.
Anyway S3 texture compression is nearly a industry standard, Apple has no excuse to not paid. Although i wonder why this isn't something PowerVR related instead.
Well they managed to get half the patents preliminarily excluded, so it may well pay off for them - if these patents got included in any actual industry standards like OpenGL then S3 will have to license them under FRAND terms, so every patent Apple can avoid licensing is some money saved.
How the hell is that even a Patent? Seriously the Patent Office really needs to thin down, and a lot. I'm not saying this because I'm a fan-boy, I'm saying it because its true. Last year Microsoft filed Patent Infringement over the Search Function. They have/had a Patent on the SEARCH Function. Purely the fact that there exists today a Patent on the Search Function is simply ridiculous.
The existence of Patents in the US wastes loads of Tax Payer's Money in Court each year on ridiculous Patent Infringement claims. Its become something of a crude fashion to sue Apple. Need/want cash? Sue Apple, big fat settlement check.
ITC would never dare ban Apple Product Import. Its not an opinion, its almost a fact. The US Army is using iPhones and iPads, there's no way they'd just let their supplier get cut off. Besides them, the mass riots from the Fan Clubs would cause the Order to be overturned anyway, which would mean ITC simply wasted a load of time and Tax Payer's Money banning them in the first place.
Laws were created to be impartial (or try to be as best it can). It is designed to be fair for everyone (theoretically). Whether a company is affiliated with the US govt or not is besides the point.
This is the ITC that we are talking about. It doesnt factor in its use of iPads and iPod in its decision making process. That would make it biased.
If you think back in history, had people not invented ( and later ) patented obvious things like "Search" or blue ball or napkin or candy wrapper, this world would not be the same as it is today. There are patents for shades of colors..even Apple's patent ("trade dress" to be more exact which is an extension of a patent) for "rounded corner edges" in a mobile device.
The "appropriateness" of a patent is besides the point here.
Laws were created to be impartial (or try to be as best it can). It is designed to be fair for everyone (theoretically). Whether a company is affiliated with the US govt or not is besides the point.
This is the ITC ( the US branch) that we are talking about. It has no affiliation with the government's use of iPad and iPod.
*iPhone.
Nobody would be able to prove the Judge being impartial or not. If they accused him/her, he/she could just say "I figured banning Apple products would result in an overturn of the sentence later on once the public began to complain about it, so I saved us a lot of time and effort." Simple as, case dismissed.
Even if the ITC has no affiliation with the Government, you don't think some CongressMan, some Army General or whoever will pull some Strings with someone they know in the ITC? Politics and Strings go hand in hand, and Apple has created a lot of Strings within the US Government with its products. Even before the US Army started using iPads and iPhones, the US Government has been using Mac Pros for a while now. They're partial to this case, just as they are to many others, and their influence can/will weigh in heavily with the ITC, even if we don't see it.
The Search Function today is like a standard thing to expect to find in any App in some way or another. Either with the "Help" Function that Applications include, either in File Searching with Operating Systems, or in a Search Engine Search. The existence of such a Patent is ridiculous because the person who owns it could basically bankrupt any company they pleased. Apple has a "Help" Function in just about every Application they've created. Google has it's Search Engine. The Search Patent is too powerful to exist, because Microsoft could simply file Patent Infringement on every single Apple Application and gain huge cash payments for damages from all of them. They could get Cease and Desist orders for anything they wanted until the "Search" Function was removed from everything. Safari, OS X, iWork, iOS, Android, anything.
The existence of a Search Function Patent is like having the World's only Cyber Nuclear Bomb which it's owner could choose to drop on anyone at any moment. Its too dangerous to exist. And that's just one example. A lot of the Patents the Patent Office includes are ridiculous. The entire "Patent" idea has gotten entirely out of hand. All Patents need to be reviewed and trimmed down by today's standards. I question whether a lot of those Patents are even valid anymore today due to Technological Advancements etc. Some of those Technologies have most likely become an Industry Standard, meaning the Patent should be invalidated by default.
If you design an iPhone and you don't want all your competitors to simply copy/paste the design and sell it as their own, there a Patent is useful (Apple vs. Samsung, Samsung's products are nearly identical to Apple's on the surface). When you're filing Patents for stuff like a few lines of code which you invented, that's just desperate.
People are trying to get their hands on as many 4G Network Patents as possible. 4G is going to become a standard in a few years time, these Patents are also simply over the top. Analysts put out a lot of BS, that's a fact, but even they could tell you that 4G is going to become the new Industry Standard soon. When you look at the past, in this case, 3G, then by default the Patent Office should know that 4G is going to become an Industry Standard, just like any Analyst with more than 2 brain cells to rub together. Approving 4G Patents will simply lead to Lawsuits and waste of Tax Payer's Money in Court (and possibly a waste of the ITC's time figuring out whether or not to ban more product imports, which will most likely end up being Android products this time, since Google just lost a bid on a bunch of 4G Patents to Apple and a couple of other Companies) until some Judge overturns the Patent claiming its an Industry Standard.
If S3 Graphics were to win the final decision against Apple, the ITC could block imports of the company's hardware and software, though it's likely a settlement would be reached before reaching that stage. S3 licenses texture compression technology to several major companies, including Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo.
Does anyone here truly understand the ITC? Clearly it seems the reporting needs to do some historical research.
How about we report after the following finding has been resolved:
The Fremont, Calif.-based company filed suit against Apple last May, accusing the company of violating four image-related patents. In January, Apple countersued with its own patent-related suit.
S3 Original Complaint in PDF: http://www.itcblog.com/wp-content/up...3complaint.pdf
Does anyone here truly understand the ITC? Clearly it seems the reporting needs to do some historical research.
What exactly is your point here? If you disagree with the reporting then what exactly do you disagree with? What do you think the ITC can and can't do?
I thought they changed there name to SONICBlue or something and went belly up a decade ago, how is there still a CEO of S3 Graphics?
According to wiki they sold S3 graphics to VIA before they became SONICBlue and went belly up - so I guess the question is, is this actually VIA doing the suing?
People are trying to get their hands on as many 4G Network Patents as possible. 4G is going to become a standard in a few years time, these Patents are also simply over the top. Analysts put out a lot of BS, that's a fact, but even they could tell you that 4G is going to become the new Industry Standard soon. When you look at the past, in this case, 3G, then by default the Patent Office should know that 4G is going to become an Industry Standard, just like any Analyst with more than 2 brain cells to rub together. Approving 4G Patents will simply lead to Lawsuits and waste of Tax Payer's Money in Court (and possibly a waste of the ITC's time figuring out whether or not to ban more product imports, which will most likely end up being Android products this time, since Google just lost a bid on a bunch of 4G Patents to Apple and a couple of other Companies) until some Judge overturns the Patent claiming its an Industry Standard.
You think other companies dont have 4G related patents?
Samsung, for instance because it seems like Apple fans best example right now, has multiple patents related to this field. They were one of the initial proponents of 4G related tech. In fact, they are a manufacturer of LTE telco system provider to networks like Verizon and Sprint. Samsung is the worlds #2 patent holder after IBM. Except for a few years, they were consistently on the top 10 list of companies with the most patents for over a decade.
Also, there are other companies like Lucent, Siemens, 3COM, and many others who have vast storage of IP properties available.
The recent bidding was about gaining patents for a discount price since Nortel is bankrupt.
It's really a desperate measure by Apple to win in the courts since winning in the marketplace is becoming much more difficult.
Also, Apple wants to protect its percentage of royalty payments and keep its bottom line at good standing by acquiring patents related to LTE. The greater the number of patents they hold regarding LTE, the less likely they will have to pay other companies royalties, thus keeping their profit margins high to satisfy their shareholders.
How the hell is that even a Patent? Seriously the Patent Office really needs to thin down, and a lot. I'm not saying this because I'm a fan-boy, I'm saying it because its true. Last year Microsoft filed Patent Infringement over the Search Function. They have/had a Patent on the SEARCH Function. Purely the fact that there exists today a Patent on the Search Function is simply ridiculous.
The existence of Patents in the US wastes loads of Tax Payer's Money in Court each year on ridiculous Patent Infringement claims. Its become something of a crude fashion to sue Apple. Need/want cash? Sue Apple, big fat settlement check.
ITC would never dare ban Apple Product Import. Its not an opinion, its almost a fact. The US Army is using iPhones and iPads, there's no way they'd just let their supplier get cut off. Besides them, the mass riots from the Fan Clubs would cause the Order to be overturned anyway, which would mean ITC simply wasted a load of time and Tax Payer's Money banning them in the first place.
What does "thin down" mean? You apparently don't realize how hard it is to get a patent. My brother is a former U.S. Patent Examiner and now an IP Lawyer. It's much harder than you think, with applications often taking several revisions to be approved. And many get denied forever, because of the nature of the patent itself.
Laws were created to be impartial (or try to be as best it can). It is designed to be fair for everyone (theoretically). Whether a company is affiliated with the US govt or not is besides the point.
Time comes to every company that they need it. Even Apple, no-one stays on top for ever, just ask MS or Sony.
Why does Apple just not pay like everyone else, always the same shit game of trying to save a few pennies, hoping to get a few quid off for a patent thrown out. Just pay it and gain back some good karma from other companies.
Time comes to every company that they need it. Even Apple, no-one stays on top for ever, just ask MS or Sony.
Didn't you get banned a while back for trolling? Maybe try to make more sensible posts from now on rather than talking about 'some sort of good karma' and other obvious idiocy.
Why does Apple just not pay like everyone else, always the same shit game of trying to save a few pennies, hoping to get a few quid off for a patent thrown out. Just pay it and gain back some good karma from other companies.
Time comes to every company that they need it. Even Apple, no-one stays on top for ever, just ask MS or Sony.
I am glad you don't run a company I invested in. If you don't fight for the pennies you don't make the dollars.
I am glad you don't run a company I invested in. If you don't fight for the pennies you don't make the dollars.
Indeed. The big things are really just a lot of little things grouped together.