Apple-backed patent consortium sues Google, major Android manufacturers

1234689

Comments

  • Reply 101 of 166
    Originally Posted by ScottWilson View Post

    Every time I hear this Apple Fan Fiction I cringe


     

    Maybe if we get you to cringe enough, your eyes will stick shut and you won’t be able to see to post.

  • Reply 102 of 166
    jkichlinejkichline Posts: 1,369member

    Let the courts decide who owns what.

     

    By the way, has it been determined if they are seeking damages and if so how much? A patent troll tends to use their patents purely for financial gain whereas the consortium may simply desire the offending intellectual property to be removed.  If a company has been using stolen property to create an unfair advantage over competitors, then it needs to be addressed.  Google had the chance to purchase this property and let it drop.  It's sounding like they should have invested their stockpile into this patent collection and not Motorola.

     

    Again, let the courts decide. If Google has prior art and/or patents that contradict the Nortel patents, then good for them and the fight is over.  If they've built a business and marketshare on stolen property, and continue to do so, then shame on them and their shareholders.

  • Reply 103 of 166
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ScottWilson View Post

     

     

    They bought a patent portfolio they didn't need to sue a competitor that's beating them in multiple markets. 


     

    They weren't beating them at the time Rockstar was awarded the patents after winning the auction that Google was bidding, also. If anything, you should be pissed at Google for not buying and owning the IP and the very patents that are core to their business....while they were up for grabs. It's not like they didn't have the money. 

  • Reply 104 of 166
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ScottWilson View Post

     

     

    Every time I hear this Apple Fan Fiction I cringe, because I know people actually believe this nonsense. 


    Explain what is fiction. History is fiction?

  • Reply 105 of 166
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Dickprinter View Post

     

    Explain what is fiction. History is fiction?


     

    HISTORY??? It's a tech fairy tale. Like the one about Apple stealing Mac OS from PARC. Just those with tiny minds want to believe it. 

  • Reply 106 of 166
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,388member
    jkichline wrote: »
    If you own intellectual property and you don't enforce it, you stand to lose it. In other words, it has less to do with if they are slime or not and more to do with the fact that they need to enforce what they own.  It's like if you own a piece of property and you neglect it and someone else comes and builds a house on it.  They can claim squatter's rights (in some countries) since the owner was not defending the property.

    You're describing trademark rights and not patents. You don't "lose" patents if you don't enforce them.
  • Reply 107 of 166
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jkichline View Post

     

    Let the courts decide who owns what.

     

    By the way, has it been determined if they are seeking damages and if so how much? A patent troll tends to use their patents purely for financial gain whereas the consortium may simply desire the offending intellectual property to be removed.  If a company has been using stolen property to create an unfair advantage over competitors, then it needs to be addressed.  Google had the chance to purchase this property and let it drop.  It's sounding like they should have invested their stockpile into this patent collection and not Motorola.

     

    Again, let the courts decide. If Google has prior art and/or patents that contradict the Nortel patents, then good for them and the fight is over.  If they've built a business and marketshare on stolen property, and continue to do so, then shame on them and their shareholders.


     

    And that would be why wallstreet didn't care. This right here. This is going to end up costing Apple and company tens of billions of dollars, and they'll lose. 

  • Reply 108 of 166
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,388member
    jkichline wrote: »

    By the way, has it been determined if they are seeking damages and if so how much? A patent troll tends to use their patents purely for financial gain whereas the consortium may simply desire the offending intellectual property to be removed.  If a company has been using stolen property to create an unfair advantage over competitors, then it needs to be addressed.  Google had the chance to purchase this property and let it drop.  It's sounding like they should have invested their stockpile into this patent collection and not Motorola.

    Again, let the courts decide. If Google has prior art and/or patents that contradict the Nortel patents, then good for them and the fight is over.  If they've built a business and marketshare on stolen property, and continue to do so, then shame on them and their shareholders.

    Rockstar exists solely to monetize patents for the maximum possible return. It does them no good to hold them back from the market. They don't have any products to protect. This is all about money while negatively impacting Apple/Microsoft competitors if they can.
  • Reply 109 of 166
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ScottWilson View Post

     

     

    HISTORY??? It's a tech fairy tale. Like the one about Apple stealing Mac OS from PARC. Just those with tiny minds want to believe it. 


    I'm glad we agree that Apple didn't steal from PARC. 

     

    This is not fairy tale...

     

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Computer,_Inc._v._Microsoft_Corporation

     

    Correct me if I'm wrong but in the mid-80s Apple loaned a few Macs to Microsoft so they could write software for the Macintosh OS. Soon after, Microsoft released a very similar looking GUI OS called........Windows 3.

     

    From Wikipedia:

     

    Windows 2.0 was released in December 1987 and was more popular than its predecessor. It features several improvements to the user interface and memory management.[citation needed] Windows 2.03 changed the OS from tiled windows to overlapping windows. The result of this change led to Apple Computer filing a suit against Microsoft alleging infringement on Apple's copyrights.[7][8] Windows 2.0 also introduced more sophisticated keyboard shortcuts and could make use of expanded memory.

  • Reply 110 of 166
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ScottWilson View Post

     

     

    And that would be why wallstreet didn't care. This right here. This is going to end up costing Apple and company tens of billions of dollars, and they'll lose. 


    So if you know they'll lose, why are you arguing? Just go away and allow us to relish in our Apple Fan Fiction. According to you we will eventually be licking our wounds once Rockstar loses sooooo....bye.

     

    (How's that, TS?)

  • Reply 111 of 166
    dysamoriadysamoria Posts: 3,430member
    I'm so sick of this waste of resources. The whole patent system needs to be utterly wiped out and started fresh with some really strict limitations on what's patentable.
  • Reply 112 of 166
    Originally Posted by Dickprinter View Post

    So if you know they'll lose, why are you arguing? Just go away and allow us to relish in our Apple Fan Fiction. According to you we will eventually be licking our wounds once Rockstar loses sooooo....bye.

     

    (How's that, TS?)


     

    I like it; it’s not often they have a comeback to the “if you know you’re right, why are you arguing” bit.

  • Reply 113 of 166
    sennensennen Posts: 1,472member
    The more some people post, the more desperate they look.
  • Reply 114 of 166
    Looks like Scott Forstall in the picture :D
  • Reply 115 of 166
    davidwdavidw Posts: 2,081member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ScottWilson View Post



    Wow. So Apple and Microsoft are just pathetic patent trolls now. They actually set up a Patent Holding Company to Patent Troll Google. That wreaks of desperation. I remember when Apple had ethics.

    Well, at least you can remember a time when Apple had ethics. I can't remember a time when you can say that about Google. And I can remember back when Yahoo was the biggest search engine.  

  • Reply 116 of 166
    akqiesakqies Posts: 768member
    gatorguy wrote: »
    How is Rockstar Consortium any different except for a couple of the players?

    Are the patents Rockstar are trying to prevent on behalf of their clients in use by any of their clients? What does Lodsys or MOSAID produce or defensd on behalf of any client's products?
  • Reply 117 of 166
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,992member

    And if you bought that IP specifically to patent troll a competitor beating you in multiple markets, you are a patent troll. 

    Well you know what they say, "fight fire with fire".
  • Reply 118 of 166
    rayzrayz Posts: 814member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post



    It looks as tho at least one of the patents Rockstar is asserting against HTC, Samsung and others could be Standard-Essential, #6,128,298. So much for some of the the "fair licensing" arguments made here if it is.

    http://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/653/



    The Standard (re: RFC-3022) that Nortel's document points to is this one:

    http://www.itu.int/ITU-T/workprog/wp_a5_out.aspx?isn=1425

     

    Er, nothing you have said disproves anything about the 'fair licensing' argument.  An SEP must be licensed under fair and equitable terms and must not be used to blackmail the competition into letting you steal their stuff – which is what Samsung attempted to do.

     

    Now, is the RockStar consortium refusing to license the patents under fair and equitable terms?

     

    Quote:


     Fast forward to Halloween 2013. Apparently the Rockstar Consortium's efforts to subsequently negotiate patent license deals with Google and the wider Android ecosystem have been unsuccessful because at least eight Rockstar lawsuits were filed in the Eastern District of Texas: separate actions against Google, Samsung, Huawei, ZTE, LG, HTC, Pantech, and ASUSTeK. I don't know what happened in those negotiations, but maybe Google was a sore loser and tried to defy logic


     

    http://www.fosspatents.com/2013/11/failed-44-billion-bid-for-nortel.html

     

    Having watched Samsung having its head handed back to it in courts across the world, I'd be surprised if the Rockstar consortium would try the same tactic. It looks like Samsung, Google et al were offered terms, but refused them.

  • Reply 119 of 166
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jkichline View Post



    Thermonuclear Baby!

     

    Yes, this looks very serious indeed folks...  

    A very nice revenue stream for the RockStar members...

    This makes BlackBerry more valuable too.

     

    Boom There it is !

  • Reply 120 of 166
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,388member
    Yes, this looks very serious indeed folks...  
    A very nice revenue stream for the RockStar members...
    This makes BlackBerry more valuable too.

    There's some indication that Blackberry has also chosen not to be involved with Rockstar Consortium. The investors may be down to four and gone even deeper into patent privatization, partnering with another NPE named Spherix. I hope Apple hasn't decided sleeping with Microsoft and attacking other businesses via trollish proxies is a good new business model for them, a "force for good in the world". Maybe the group will pare down to three with Apple dropping out, satisfied with ownership of 1000+ Nortel patents and licensee to all of them.

    One other curious note. Rockstar's '298 patent that's being asserted against Samsung, HTC, Asus and others is listed as available to purchase outright, stated to be perhaps more valuable to others more so than Rockstar. :???:
    http://www.ip-rockstar.com/documents/Rockstar_Winter_2012_Catalogue.pdf
Sign In or Register to comment.