Hit with another $2B damage claim, Apple joins Google in pressing Supreme Court to curb patent abuse
As Apple prepares to defend itself against a multi-billion dollar patent infringement claim in Europe, the company has aligned with rival Google in asking the U.S. Supreme Court to allow stiffer penalties for patent trolls who bring frivolous lawsuits.
Apple will square off next week against German patent monetization firm IPCom in a $2 billion battle over a standards-essential wireless patent, according to FOSS Patents, the latest in a long line of patent-related legal skirmishes fought by the iPhone maker over the last three years. Cupertino, Calif.-based Apple has faced 92 patent suits in the U.S. alone during that time, with nearly half of those still unresolved.
The IPCom case will be litigated in Germany's Mannheim Regional Court, but the iPhone maker is hopeful that future legal actions in its home country will come with costs that may make firms like IPCom think twice before filing.
"Apple has rarely lost on the merits," the company said in a brief filed with the Supreme Court and obtained by Bloomberg. "But victory figures as small consolation because in every one of these cases, Apple has been forced to bear its legal fees."
Apple, along with Silicon Valley titans Google, Yahoo, Intel, Cisco, and Facebook, want the court to make it easier for companies that successfully defend themselves against fatuous patent claims to collect legal fees from the aggressors. Companies can incur litigation costs running into the millions of dollars for intellectual property actions.
The Court will weigh that issue in two cases it is set to hear in the coming weeks.
Currently, federal courts allow an award of fees if the suit is found to be "objectively baseless" and filed in bad faith. The case Apple has joined with its "friend of the court" brief is seeking to have that altered, allowing awards when a company "unreasonably pursues a case having an objectively low likelihood of success."
In addition to the intellectual property claims that have entered litigation, Apple says it has a backlog of over 200 more that are still pending. The company has two attorneys on staff whose sole responsibility is responding to royalty claims, it said.
Apple will square off next week against German patent monetization firm IPCom in a $2 billion battle over a standards-essential wireless patent, according to FOSS Patents, the latest in a long line of patent-related legal skirmishes fought by the iPhone maker over the last three years. Cupertino, Calif.-based Apple has faced 92 patent suits in the U.S. alone during that time, with nearly half of those still unresolved.
The IPCom case will be litigated in Germany's Mannheim Regional Court, but the iPhone maker is hopeful that future legal actions in its home country will come with costs that may make firms like IPCom think twice before filing.
"Apple has rarely lost on the merits," the company said in a brief filed with the Supreme Court and obtained by Bloomberg. "But victory figures as small consolation because in every one of these cases, Apple has been forced to bear its legal fees."
Apple, along with Silicon Valley titans Google, Yahoo, Intel, Cisco, and Facebook, want the court to make it easier for companies that successfully defend themselves against fatuous patent claims to collect legal fees from the aggressors. Companies can incur litigation costs running into the millions of dollars for intellectual property actions.
The Court will weigh that issue in two cases it is set to hear in the coming weeks.
Currently, federal courts allow an award of fees if the suit is found to be "objectively baseless" and filed in bad faith. The case Apple has joined with its "friend of the court" brief is seeking to have that altered, allowing awards when a company "unreasonably pursues a case having an objectively low likelihood of success."
In addition to the intellectual property claims that have entered litigation, Apple says it has a backlog of over 200 more that are still pending. The company has two attorneys on staff whose sole responsibility is responding to royalty claims, it said.
Comments
Another talking point bites the dust then. Neither Google nor Apple think IP is being fairly asserted in some cases.
FWIW in this particular case it wouldn't matter if the US modifies patent law to deal with so-called "trolls". The IPCom lawsuit was filed in the EU.
Hmmm. . .
Another talking point bites the dust then. Neither Google nor Apple think IP is being fairly asserted in some cases.
FWIW in this particular case it wouldn't matter if the US modifies patent law to deal with so-called "trolls". The IPCom lawsuit was filed in the EU.
This makes the whole different. Google is the one that is going rogue, offering billions for patents against consortiums, buying companies just for patents, trading patents with OEMs, etc.
Apple only wants worthy opponents and respect. No copying, no willful infringement.
Actually Apple is the major player behind Rockstar NPE.
Actually Apple is the major player behind Rockstar NPE.
That exists for obvious reasons, Google was going rogue to have those patents, remember? They were willing to pay more than everybody else COMBINED. So those companies formed a consortium, just like in WW2.
Now they are eager to know why google was willing to pay so much for them. ahahah
That exists for obvious reasons, Google was going rogue to have those patents, remember? They were willing to pay more than everybody else COMBINED. So those companies formed a consortium, just like in WW2.
Now they are eager to know why google was willing to pay so much for them. ahahah
German law is different from US law. Mixing all IP infringement lawsuits together does nothing for the clarity of this story.
I was going to make this post if nobody else did. The article's a mess. Nothing the Supreme Court does will have the slightest effect upon Apple's fate in the European suits.
Chumming the water for a bite I see.
Perhaps to keep them from being broken up and distributed among a half dozen different
trollsNPE's for privateering, just what's happening with Rockstar. That includes even standard-essential IP according to legal claims.There's not a chance in Hades that Google would have fractured the portfolio between various
trollsPatent Assertion Entities for patent infringement lawsuits. IMO it's unfortunate the way the Nortel auction has turned out. I think the word used by some frequent posters was "disingenuous" when Google began pressing for patent reforms. Apple has finally seen it's the wise move too, so they're joining up with Google in efforts to change the laws. Smart.Germany is a strange forum for a trial about standards-essential patents:
We'll see how this turns out.
The patent system works fine. It's the courts that are a mess. A "patent disputes Supreme Court" might be something worth looking into. In other words, a court of full-time experts who are well-versed in the minutia of patent law taking up these cases, as it seems juries staffed with average people are unsuited to the technical expertise needed to make sound judgments.
How about courts only deal with patent holders if they can prove that the patent in question is being used in a product that they manufacture and because of that they are being infringed on.
Then these greedy none innovative trolls with be left with worthless paper.
No one objects to a manufacture be it Apple/HP or Google defending its products.
Yes I can here the cry "its much more complex than that" all I say is "is it?"
If I spent years developing a unique device and sell it I will be pi""ed off if some company that just collected patents found in their collection a patent that with a legal twist of words looks similar to my product and sues in the hopes of a quick buck (or pound in my case).
If the patent in question was that good then why did the patent holder themselves innovate and make money the honest way.
This patent trolling could hold innovation back.
[VIDEO]
The vast majority, although not all, of these cases could be solved and done away with if the US, and world, would get back to the heart of patents. The simple fact is that software never should have been allowed to be patented, and now the system is breaking under the stupidity of allowing the patenting of what is at its basic core algorithms and language, neither of which are patentable in any form other than software.
Who determines what is and is not frivolous?
LOL.
Nice to see Apple at the receiving end of some silly patent lawsuit for once.
And, as usual, if something goes not their way, they run to the US government for help -- after all "we are Apple! We are exceptional! We are magical!"
Luckily, this case is in Germany, where Americans are not all that popular, so maybe IPcom has a chance...
Go IPcom!! Let's give Apple some of their own medicine!!!
-- Those Who Can't Innovate, Litigate (goes for Apple and IPcom) --
* Has Apple ever invented anything?
*
* In a word, no.
More trouble for Gates
LOL.
Nice to see Apple at the receiving end of some silly patent lawsuit for once.
And, as usual, if something goes not their way, they run to the US government for help -- after all "we are Apple! We are exceptional! We are magical!"
Luckily, this case is in Germany, where Americans are not all that popular, so maybe IPcom has a chance...
Go IPcom!! Let's give Apple some of their own medicine!!!
-- Those Who Can't Innovate, Litigate (goes for Apple and IPcom) --
* Has Apple ever invented anything?
*
* In a word, no.
EDITED: Nevermind. User is gone.