In ITC reversal, Apple found not to infringe HTC's S3 patents

Posted:
in iPhone edited January 2014
The US International Trade Commission has dismissed the first complaint by graphics firm S3 against Apple, stating that "no violation" was shown and that its investigation into the complaint against Macs has been terminated.



The finding, reported by FOSS Patents blogger Florian Mueller, overturns a July ruling by ITC judge James Gildea, which determined that none of the S3 patents were relevant to Apple's iOS products, but that Mac OS X did infringe upon of one of the four S3 patents involved in the complaint. That patent involved a image compression technique.



Judge Gildea noted at the time that Macs using Nvidia graphics have an implied license to use the patent. His ruling required a six member ITC committee to uphold his decision in order for any action to be taken, including the potential of blocking of imports of affected Macs into the US.



Instead, the committee found no infringements by Apple at all, a clear setback for S3. The decision was likely influenced by AMD, which filed a motion in September to intervene and terminate the investigation on the basis that it, not S3, actually owned rights to the patent.



S3 was recently acquired by Taiwanese smartphone maker HTC, which hoped to use S3's patents as leverage in negating its way out of Apple's own patent infringement complaints targeting its use of Android.



A different judge ruled that HTC's own smartphones and Flyer tablet were infringing two Apple patents, and Apple has since brought a second suit against HTC, while HTC and S3 have both raised a second complaint of their own against Apple.



While HTC's S3 patents targeted technologies implemented within third party chips Apple uses in its Macs, Apple's patent complaints against HTC involve technical infringement core to the implementation of Android itself, meaning that if the patents are upheld by the ITC's committee, the finding could also be used against other Android makers, including Motorola and Samsung.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 31
    I'm getting really tired of hearing about patents.



    I have an idea. I think all AI posters should donate money to me. I'll sign us up for some vague patents and profit for us. I'll need your paypal please...
  • Reply 2 of 31
    Now it's time to go nuclear on manufacturers using Android. LOL
  • Reply 3 of 31
    dgnr8dgnr8 Posts: 196member
    Apple spends years of R&D in their products which includes legal issues that could arise.



    How many times have we heard that there is a product in R&D that we don't see for 2 or 3 years later.



    Sometimes it is waiting for some particular component that is required to be ready for everyday use.



    Sometimes it is waiting to file patents and research of any said patent does not conflict.



    Sometimes it is lawyers giving the go ahead to release to manufacturing.



    It is like that in most honest and ethical companies looking to launch new products.



    With all that being said the reason Apple (Mr. Jobs) didn't blink is because they knew they had the industry dead to rights.



    Other MFG's trying to copy Apple products got cocky thinking they could do what they wanted.



    When Apple started litigation with these companies they thought they could scare Apple but now with courts siding more and more with Apple you see the rest of the industry is getting very nervous if not a little scared.



    Case in point, Samsung redesigned tablet.



    I believe when all is said and done Apple will be standing on the top industry with several companies, shells of there former selves (including Google with Android).



    I can see a day when Google could possibly be shunned by mfg's incorporating any services or products in new products and equipment like Logitech has just done.
  • Reply 4 of 31
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,164member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DGNR8 View Post


    Apple spends years of R&D in their products which includes legal issues that could arise.



    How many times have we heard that there is a product in R&D that we don't see for 2 or 3 years later.



    Sometimes it is waiting for some particular component that is required to be ready for everyday use.



    Sometimes it is waiting to file patents and research of any said patent does not conflict.



    Sometimes it is lawyers giving the go ahead to release to manufacturing.



    It is like that in most honest and ethical companies looking to launch new products.



    With all that being said the reason Apple (Mr. Jobs) didn't blink is because they knew they had the industry dead to rights.



    Other MFG's trying to copy Apple products got cocky thinking they could do what they wanted.



    When Apple started litigation with these companies they thought they could scare Apple but now with courts siding more and more with Apple you see the rest of the industry is getting very nervous if not a little scared.



    Case in point, Samsung redesigned tablet.



    I believe when all is said and done Apple will be standing on the top industry with several companies, shells of there former selves (including Google with Android).



    I can see a day when Google could possibly be shunned by mfg's incorporating any services or products in new products and equipment like Logitech has just done.



    I agree about Apple's due diligence, I believe based on past experience with Microsoft SJ didn't intend Apple to get ripped off again. I hope you are right on your future vision.
  • Reply 5 of 31
    jd_in_sbjd_in_sb Posts: 1,484member
    Sounds like another nail was just pounded into the HTC Android coffin. I bet they regret spending tens of millions for the S3 patents.
  • Reply 6 of 31
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jd_in_sb View Post


    Sounds like another nail was just pounded into the HTC Android coffin. I bet they regret spending tens of millions for the S3 patents.



    I hate HTC.So overated.
  • Reply 7 of 31
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 4,537member
    R E J E C T E D !!!



    This stuff just cracks me up. I'll bet HTC will scream, kick, and whine then pull a Samsung out of its soiled shorts and then demand Apple show them their source code just for giggles.



    Apple's hammer is getting louder boys. Best run for cover in them thar' mountains!



    In all seriousness though, what did Steve Jobs say after all the ooh-ing and aaah-ing when he introduced the iPhone back in 2007?? Oh yeah, "and boy did we patent it!"



    Why did he say that?? Because no one back then re-imagined the mobile phone back then. Phone manufacturers were essentially stillborn. Hell, even RIM's CEO disputed the authenticity of the iPhone as saying there was no way it could do what it did without "an insanely power hungry processor, it must have terrible battery life".



    Even Google with their Android garbage was essentially creating a Blackberry clone.



    Now wait... Apple once again does the R&D for everyone else and suddenly, everything looks and acts like an iPhone. What... a... surprise....



    Apple didn't invent the phone. They re-imagined it just like the tablet, and pretty soon hopefully they'll do the same with the television.



    Even with HTC & Samsung getting slapped around in the courts, they are still patiently waiting and warming up their copy-machines in preparation for Apple's next go-around.



    Shame on them.
  • Reply 8 of 31
    neosumneosum Posts: 111member
    It's been said time and time again. These lawsuits have been happening for as long as there were patents and patent lawyers. We're just hearing more about about them ever since Apple initiated their lawsuits.



    I really don't see android going anywhere. It can and will coexist with ios. Steve mentioned that Microsoft doesn't have to fail for Apple to succeed. The same applies here and both platforms can be successful without the other having to fail.



    At the end of the day, what matters most is money in their bank and all of them have plenty of it.
  • Reply 9 of 31
    Adam and Eve should totally sue Apple. They saw it first!
  • Reply 10 of 31
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by linkgx1 View Post


    Adam and Eve should totally sue Apple. They saw it first!



    Nothing like fiction to draw upon as prior art, right?
  • Reply 11 of 31
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 6,939member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jd_in_sb View Post


    Sounds like another nail was just pounded into the HTC Android coffin. I bet they regret spending tens of millions for the S3 patents.



    According to BusinessWeek it was $300 million. And the loss may put pressure on HTC's stock price.
  • Reply 12 of 31
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post


    nothing like fiction to draw upon as prior art, right?



    it's fictionally true!



    fiction and art are on in the same!
  • Reply 13 of 31
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 6,939member
    I do hope that Tim Cook decides to go "thermonuclear" like Jobs wanted to.
  • Reply 14 of 31
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jd_in_sb View Post


    Sounds like another nail was just pounded into the HTC Android coffin. I bet they regret spending tens of millions for the S3 patents.



    Yeah, but they still got Dr. Dre. That's bound to pay off someday
  • Reply 15 of 31
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post


    According to BusinessWeek it was $300 million. And the loss may put pressure on HTC's stock price.



    Pennies compared to what one company supposedly paid for Motorola just to get some patents...
  • Reply 16 of 31
    One thing that all the bloggers and news rags seem to be skipping on this news is that the reason the panel overturned the Judge was not because the patents were invalid on their own, or that Apple was in the right, but that S3 didn't own the patents... AMD did.



    AMD lobbied to get the lawsuit dismissed.

    ( no doubt they would prefer to have it for leverage in future negotiations with Apple and the ATI relationship )



    The original notice spells AMD's intervention out pretty obviously on the 2nd page:



    http://usitc.gov/secretary/fed_reg_n...1212011sgl.pdf
  • Reply 17 of 31
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by huntercr View Post


    one thing that all the bloggers and news rags seem to be skipping on this news is that the reason the panel overturned the judge was not because the patents were invalid on their own, or that apple was in the right, but that s3 didn't own the patents... Amd did.



    Amd lobbied to get the lawsuit dismissed.

    ( no doubt they would prefer to have it for leverage in future negotiations with apple and the ati relationship )



    the original notice spells amd's intervention out pretty obviously on the 2nd page:



    http://usitc.gov/secretary/fed_reg_n...1212011sgl.pdf



    you sir win the internets for life
  • Reply 18 of 31
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post


    Pennies compared to what one company supposedly paid for Motorola just to get some patents...



    That company paid pennies too....























    At least 900000000000 of them!
  • Reply 19 of 31
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post


    Yeah, but they still got Dr. Dre. That's bound to pay off someday



    Expensive headphones. BUT he's one of the only rappers I think that has invested money into creating their own electronics company. Oh wait, fiddy's coming out with one too. The Dr. should sue.\
  • Reply 20 of 31
    londorlondor Posts: 256member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by huntercr View Post


    One thing that all the bloggers and news rags seem to be skipping on this news is that the reason the panel overturned the Judge was not because the patents were invalid on their own, or that Apple was in the right, but that S3 didn't own the patents... AMD did.



    AMD lobbied to get the lawsuit dismissed.

    ( no doubt they would prefer to have it for leverage in future negotiations with Apple and the ATI relationship )



    The original notice spells AMD's intervention out pretty obviously on the 2nd page:



    http://usitc.gov/secretary/fed_reg_n...1212011sgl.pdf



    Did you just read AMD and jump to conclusions? Because it spells out pretty obviously that "the Commission has determined to deny AMD?s motion to intervene and terminate"
Sign In or Register to comment.