ITC to review one patent in HTC complaint against Apple

Posted:
in iPhone edited January 2014
The U.S. International Trade Commission revealed on Friday that it will reexamine the "no violation" ruling on just one of the four patents that HTC had accused Apple of infringing.



Reuters reported the commission's announcement, noting that the complaint has become a "proxy" for Apple's larger intellectual property spat with Google's Android operating system. ITC's decision to review just one of the patents in question can be seen as favorable news for Apple, since it puts to rest its competitor's claims on the other three patents.



When contacted for comment, an Apple spokeswoman simply echoed the company's earlier statement, saying "competitors should create their own original technology, not steal ours."



A judge for the commission had ruled in October that Apple was not guilty of infringing HTC's four patents, which relate to power management and phone dialing. HTC's original complaint was filed against the iPhone, iPad and iPod product lines in May 2010 as a counter to Apple's lawsuit against the handset maker.



According to late Apple co-founder Steve Jobs' biography, he took a personal interest in Apple's case against HTC last year because the Taiwanese handset maker had released a device that he felt stole his company's inventions. Jobs subsequently vowed to "destroy Android" and go "thermonuclear war" over the issue.



Friday's news comes as the final ruling on Apple's case against HTC is set to arrive next Monday. The decision was originally scheduled for this Wednesday, but it was pushed back for unspecified reasons. A judge ruled in July that HTC had infringed two of Apple's patents.



Both companies have several other outstanding complaints lodged against the other with the ITC. Apple filed another suit against HTC in July. In September, HTC filed its third lawsuit against Apple with the commission, this time using patents it had acquired from Google.



For its part, HTC has said it views Apple's complaints against it as little more than a "distraction." Chief Executive Peter Chou has remained optimistic that the suit will not affect HTC's business.



Executives at the company have also indicated interest in settling its dispute with Apple. Industry watchers believe that HTC's $300 million purchase of S3 Graphics earlier this year was an attempt by the company to gain leverage on Apple.



S3 Graphics had sued Apple over patents related to image compression, winning aninitial ITC ruling against Apple in July. But, the decision was overturned by the commission in November. HTC responded to the news by noting that it would conduct a "holistic re-evaluation" of its acquisition in light of the reversal.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 41
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,593member
    Herein lies the big problem for every one of these "IP theft" cases. A single, perhaps even vague and unknown, patent claim can result in an entire line of devices being banned from the market. None of these guys are willing to simply settle anymore, licence the tech as they traditionally have. They all are out for blood, demanding injunctions for the most minor infringement claims. With that refusal to settle, a single validated claim can see a companies fortunes turned upside-down, with perhaps no intent to have infringed on their part to begin with.
  • Reply 2 of 41
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    Herein lies the big problem for every one of these "IP theft" cases. A single, perhaps even vague and unknown, patent claim can result in an entire line of devices being banned from the market. None of these guys are willing to simply settle anymore, licence the tech as they traditionally have. They all are out for blood, demanding injunctions for the most minor infringement claims. With that refusal to settle, a single validated claim can see a companies fortunes turned upside-down, with perhaps no intent to have infringed on their part to begin with.



    The old world doesn't exist anymore. Now if you create a new technology but somewhere deep inside it has some code or function that someone drew on a napkin 7 years ago and patented they have the right to shut you down...and likely will if you compete with them.



    This is the new world. So much for progress, it's all about profits.
  • Reply 3 of 41
    shompashompa Posts: 342member
    Time for Samsung and other Android vendors to start running...



    You all used a product that violated patents. You knew it and therefore payed protection money to Microsoft (5-15 dollar per Android device).



    That didn't help you.



    And know Google owns Motorola mobile, who also violates these patents. This will be the biggest lawsuit and settlement in history.



    It is not to much to ask: Invent something own. If PALM can do it, Google and other companies can do it. But Google is the internet generation. Just pirate everything...
  • Reply 4 of 41
    shompashompa Posts: 342member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post


    The old world doesn't exist anymore. Now if you create a new technology but somewhere deep inside it has some code or function that someone drew on a napkin 7 years ago and patented they have the right to shut you down...and likely will if you compete with them.



    This is the new world. So much for progress, it's all about profits.



    This is what is different about Apple.

    Apple is about creating the greatest product ever, then make profit.



    All other companies is the other way. How do we most profit? What product fits in.



    BTW: You Google tag is just silly. Google did not invent Android, they bought it. Any idiot in the world with money could do the same thing. They blatantly clones iOS because they have never had an own idea in history. Not a single software o product. That is just fact.



    To admire a company that never invents anything, that data mines its customers, that have been guilty of illegal activities from modifying Linux code, illegal drugs ads, abusing its dominating position in market, that sniffed open Wifi hotspots and refuses to delete the data that they sniffed. That is strange. I guess its because of lack of IT knowledge. Bookmark this page and come back when you are 35 years+ and you will understand the world better.
  • Reply 5 of 41
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by shompa View Post


    This is what is different about Apple.

    Apple is about creating the greatest product ever, then make profit.



    All other companies is the other way. How do we most profit? What product fits in.



    BTW: You Google tag is just silly. Google did not invent Android, they bought it. Any idiot in the world with money could do the same thing. They blatantly clones iOS because they have never had an own idea in history. Not a single software o product. That is just fact.



    To admire a company that never invents anything, that data mines its customers, that have been guilty of illegal activities from modifying Linux code, illegal drugs ads, abusing its dominating position in market, that sniffed open Wifi hotspots and refuses to delete the data that they sniffed. That is strange. I guess its because of lack of IT knowledge. Bookmark this page and come back when you are 35 years+ and you will understand the world better.



    So the Android they bought is the Android that exists? no? They've actually been modifying it significantly? Oh okay then...So I guess Siri is just what Apple bought...no? it isn't? Damn...so companies CAN buy and modify something to make it better huh? Crazy.



    Also what has Apple invented? BIIIIGGG difference between invent and innovate.



    Also can I get a point by point list of what you feel Android...that is STOCK Android...Google's Android...clones blatantly from iOS? I'll be waiting.



    The two OSes are so different it's sad that there is even a real debate...just like MacOSX and Ubuntu are different...they have similarities, sure, but they are damn near night and day if you get beyond the "they have icons.........."



    http://devour.com/video/everything-is-a-remix-part-3/



    Everything is a remix...that's how it always was...from clothing, to language, to slang, to games, to cars, to computers, to operating systems...etc.



    NOTHING exists in a void...nothing.



    Not even Apple.
  • Reply 6 of 41
    majjomajjo Posts: 574member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post


    So the Android they bought is the Android that exists? no? They've actually been modifying it significantly? Oh okay then...So I guess Siri is just what Apple bought...no? it isn't? Damn...so companies CAN buy and modify something to make it better huh? Crazy.



    Also what has Apple invented? BIIIIGGG difference between invent and innovate.



    Also can I get a point by point list of what you feel Android...that is STOCK Android...Google's Android...clones blatantly from iOS? I'll be waiting.



    The two OSes are so different it's sad that there is even a real debate...just like MacOSX and Ubuntu are different...they have similarities, sure, but they are damn near night and day if you get beyond the "they have icons.........."



    http://devour.com/video/everything-is-a-remix-part-3/



    Everything is a remix...that's how it always was...from clothing, to language, to slang, to games, to cars, to computers, to operating systems...etc.



    NOTHING exists in a void...nothing.



    Not even Apple.



    there isn't much similar between iOS and Android proper. That's probably why Apple hasn't gone aganist google directly; they don't have a strong case aganist them. Now samsung, on the other hand, who modifies android to look and behave like iOS, whose hardware design of a few select phones draw "significant inspiration from the iphone" to put it politely is being attacked by Apple, and for good reason.



    I haven't looked at what Apple is using aganist HTC, but I'm betting its not design based.
  • Reply 7 of 41
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,989member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by majjo View Post


    there isn't much similar between iOS and Android proper. That's probably why Apple hasn't gone aganist google directly; they don't have a strong case aganist them. Now samsung, on the other hand, who modifies android to look and behave like iOS, whose hardware design of a few select phones draw "significant inspiration from the iphone" to put it politely is being attacked by Apple, and for good reason.



    I haven't looked at what Apple is using aganist HTC, but I'm betting its not design based.



    One very big thing is one of the patents HTC is facing on Monday, you see wa-ay back in the nineties when Andy Ruben (the "inventor" of Android) was a mere intern at Apple, they thought it would be pretty cool if software could decipher the context of a line of text and decide on how other software would relate to it based on that context and then perform various actions based on that.



    No-one had done it before so they set about inventing it, using the people they pay to come up with such things.



    Now having invented it they patented it, Apple did the work so they deserved to reap the benefits.



    This is being decided on Monday and as ALL Android devices use this it's a pretty big deal, license or work around, that's what's at stake.
  • Reply 8 of 41
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,593member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hill60 View Post


    One very big thing is one of the patents HTC is facing on Monday, you see wa-ay back in the nineties when Andy Ruben (the "inventor" of Android) was a mere intern at Apple, they thought it would be pretty cool if software could decipher the context of a line of text and decide on how other software would relate to it based on that context and then perform various actions based on that.



    No-one had done it before so they set about inventing it, using the people they pay to come up with such things.



    Now having invented it they patented it, Apple did the work so they deserved to reap the benefits.



    This is being decided on Monday and as ALL Android devices use this it's a pretty big deal, license or work around, that's what's at stake.



    Which makes my point exactly.



    Consider too that somewhere in someones bag of IP may a stray patent that could have the potential to block the entire line of iPhones from the market if used with malice by the holder. Is that really what you or anyone else would want to see? It's a two-way street.
  • Reply 9 of 41
    wingswings Posts: 261member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post


    So much for progress, it's all about profits.



    Progress, I would think, is when one company does something novel, not when it relies on copying something already patented by another (and without a license no less). Having a patent on something is what drives progress, giving a company the motivation to come up with something new and unique (and presumably better).
  • Reply 10 of 41
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,593member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Wings View Post


    Progress, I would think, is when one company does something novel, not when it relies on copying something already patented by another (and without a license no less). Having a patent on something is what drives progress, giving a company the motivation to come up with something new and unique (and presumably better).



    They can also be weilded improperly, used as roadblocks to markets. That's the reason the European Union is looking into both Apple and Samsung's legal attacks on each other. There's concerns IP is being used in an overtly aggressive manner by one or both in courtroom claims.
  • Reply 11 of 41
    radjinradjin Posts: 165member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by majjo View Post


    there isn't much similar between iOS and Android proper. That's probably why Apple hasn't gone aganist google directly; they don't have a strong case aganist them. Now samsung, on the other hand, who modifies android to look and behave like iOS, whose hardware design of a few select phones draw "significant inspiration from the iphone" to put it politely is being attacked by Apple, and for good reason.



    I haven't looked at what Apple is using aganist HTC, but I'm betting its not design based.







    Apple would go after Google if they sold the software, but they give it away. Android was bought and modified to compete with the iPhone. It copies almost every part of the iOS.
  • Reply 12 of 41
    galbigalbi Posts: 968member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by shompa View Post


    Time for Samsung and other Android vendors to start running...



    You all used a product that violated patents. You knew it and therefore payed protection money to Microsoft (5-15 dollar per Android device).



    That didn't help you.



    And know Google owns Motorola mobile, who also violates these patents. This will be the biggest lawsuit and settlement in history.



    It is not to much to ask: Invent something own. If PALM can do it, Google and other companies can do it. But Google is the internet generation. Just pirate everything...



    Apple didnt "invent" anything. All of the ideas they've used were already on the market or as prior art.



    Dont be so full of yourself.
  • Reply 13 of 41
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Galbi View Post


    Apple didnt "invent" anything. All of the ideas they've used were already on the market or as prior art.



    Dont be so full of yourself.



    Thanks for clearing that up. Genius.



    /sarcasm.
  • Reply 14 of 41
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hill60 View Post


    One very big thing is one of the patents HTC is facing on Monday, you see wa-ay back in the nineties when Andy Ruben (the "inventor" of Android) was a mere intern at Apple, they thought it would be pretty cool if software could decipher the context of a line of text and decide on how other software would relate to it based on that context and then perform various actions based on that.



    No-one had done it before so they set about inventing it, using the people they pay to come up with such things.



    Now having invented it they patented it, Apple did the work so they deserved to reap the benefits.



    This is being decided on Monday and as ALL Android devices use this it's a pretty big deal, license or work around, that's what's at stake.



    This is one thing people always seem to forget about, and it only came to light when court documents in the HTC case became public. I wonder why the Apple haters/fandroids never want to talk about this specific point?



    Andy Rubin didn't just work at Apple, he worked as a junior engineer under the supervision of the two senior engineers who invented this patent. Further, they developed it at the exact same time Andy worked there. There's no way it's a coincidence that ideas developed at Apple made it into Android.



    Anyone who develops software will get this. When you switch from one company to work at another, and then encounter the same types of problems, it's very tempting to simply re-use the same solutions you figured out at your previous employer instead of coming up with new solutions.



    As a software engineer I've come across this situation many times. I find it extrememly hard to believe Andy Rubin didn't realize he was "re-using" ideas.



    Couple this with the "Lindholm" e-mails Google is trying desperately (what is it, 5 or 6 filings to squash it now?) and it's not hard to see Google as wilfully infringing on others ideas.
  • Reply 15 of 41
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post


    This is one thing people always seem to forget about, and it only came to light when court documents in the HTC case became public. I wonder why the Apple haters/fandroids never want to talk about this specific point?



    Andy Rubin didn't just work at Apple, he worked as a junior engineer under the supervision of the two senior engineers who invented this patent. Further, they developed it at the exact same time Andy worked there. There's no way it's a coincidence that ideas developed at Apple made it into Android.



    Anyone who develops software will get this. When you switch from one company to work at another, and then encounter the same types of problems, it's very tempting to simply re-use the same solutions you figured out at your previous employer instead of coming up with new solutions.



    As a software engineer I've come across this situation many times. I find it extrememly hard to believe Andy Rubin didn't realize he was "re-using" ideas.



    Couple this with the "Lindholm" e-mails Google is trying desperately (what is it, 5 or 6 filings to squash it now?) and it's not hard to see Google as wilfully infringing on others ideas.



    www.thisispatented.com (not a real website)



    was the coder of vBulletin working at Apple?
  • Reply 16 of 41
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Radjin View Post


    Apple would go after Google if they sold the software, but they give it away. Android was bought and modified to compete with the iPhone. It copies almost every part of the iOS.



    like?
  • Reply 17 of 41
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Radjin View Post


    Apple would go after Google if they sold the software, but they give it away. Android was bought and modified to compete with the iPhone. It copies almost every part of the iOS.





    In the Oracle v Google case the Judge has already ruled that the fact that Google gave away Android for free was no Defence and has thrown out that Defence argument.



    If you think about the Google Defence argument was ridiculous because they were benefitting from Android whether they charged for it or gave it away in order to profit from Android search/ advertising.



    In any event, if you steal something but don't sell it that is no Defence.



    It is the act of theft which is the offence.
  • Reply 18 of 41
    galbigalbi Posts: 968member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    Thanks for clearing that up. Genius.



    /sarcasm.



    It's difficult to accept the truth so people like yourself likes to spin it around or deny it.



    I'm just showing you what the reality is.



    And thanks for the compliment. Graduating from UT Austin has its merits.
  • Reply 19 of 41
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Galbi View Post


    Apple didnt "invent" anything. All of the ideas they've used were already on the market or as prior art.



    Dont be so full of yourself.



    People who talk in absolutes (like you) are the ones who are full of yourself.



    Seriously? Did you think before you typed that reply? Apple didn't invent anything? So their portfolio of thousands of patents are all about to be invalidated since every single one of them was already on the market or was prior art?
  • Reply 20 of 41
    elrothelroth Posts: 1,201member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    Which makes my point exactly.



    Consider too that somewhere in someones bag of IP may a stray patent that could have the potential to block the entire line of iPhones from the market if used with malice by the holder. Is that really what you or anyone else would want to see? It's a two-way street.



    No, that's not your point at all. Apple developed that system, patented it and is using it. Rubin, though he knew it was patented and developed by Apple, used it for Android anyway. He knowingly used a patented process that he had no right to. That's much different than developing something on your own and finding out later that someone had patented some small part of it, which is your original point.
Sign In or Register to comment.