Apple earned 13% more patents in 2014, ranking No. 11 among all companies
Apple was awarded 2,003 patents in 2014 by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, making "impressive gains" and inching closer to the top 10 companies receiving credit for intellectual property inventions.
The latest rankings from IFI Claims Patent Services, published on Monday, show that Apple grew its patent counts by 12.8 percent in 2014. That was enough to put the company in 11th place, up from its No. 13 ranking in 2013.
Apple finished with 2,003 patents, just 92 short of the No. 10 company, Panasonic. The iPhone maker finished ahead of General Electric in 12th place.
Retaining a distant first place was IBM, which has held the top spot for 22 consecutive years. Big Blue was awarded 7,534 patents by the USPTO in 2014, a 10.6 percent year over year increase.
Finishing in second was Apple rival Samsung, which was awarded 4,952 patents, up 5.9 percent year over year. Rounding out the top five were Canon, Sony, and Microsoft.
And while IFI characterized Apple's gains as "impressive," the company's nearly 13 percent growth couldn't match search giant Google, which saw its awarded patents surge 38.6 percent. That helped Google enter the top 10 for the first time ever, ranking 8th behind Qualcomm.
Overall, granted U.S. patents increased 8 percent to an all-time high of 300,678.
As always, AppleInsider kept close tabs on Apple's patent filings throughout 2014, as the inventions offer hints of what future products the company may be working on. Among the more interesting concepts were a smart pen, transparent displays for augmented reality, an interactive holographic display, bone conducting EarPods, and a camera remote control.
The latest rankings from IFI Claims Patent Services, published on Monday, show that Apple grew its patent counts by 12.8 percent in 2014. That was enough to put the company in 11th place, up from its No. 13 ranking in 2013.
Apple finished with 2,003 patents, just 92 short of the No. 10 company, Panasonic. The iPhone maker finished ahead of General Electric in 12th place.
Retaining a distant first place was IBM, which has held the top spot for 22 consecutive years. Big Blue was awarded 7,534 patents by the USPTO in 2014, a 10.6 percent year over year increase.
Finishing in second was Apple rival Samsung, which was awarded 4,952 patents, up 5.9 percent year over year. Rounding out the top five were Canon, Sony, and Microsoft.
And while IFI characterized Apple's gains as "impressive," the company's nearly 13 percent growth couldn't match search giant Google, which saw its awarded patents surge 38.6 percent. That helped Google enter the top 10 for the first time ever, ranking 8th behind Qualcomm.
Overall, granted U.S. patents increased 8 percent to an all-time high of 300,678.
As always, AppleInsider kept close tabs on Apple's patent filings throughout 2014, as the inventions offer hints of what future products the company may be working on. Among the more interesting concepts were a smart pen, transparent displays for augmented reality, an interactive holographic display, bone conducting EarPods, and a camera remote control.
Comments
Sure if we see this stuff in products. Apple has over 20 patents for 'smart pens' that go back many years. But we haven't seen it materialized in a product.
"Can't innovate anymore, my ass"
Sure that is what samsung and microsoft are saying... Seeing how they in the top 5
For heaven's sake it was a joke and I thought a pretty obvious one. Lighten up.
To help ... here's my idea of one of Scamsung's ...
"# of patents received/year" isn't a totally useless metric, but by itself means relatively little in terms of what it says or augurs about a company's current or future success, product pipeline, tactical or strategic directions, etc.
The numbers game is belied by many things, e.g., one "basic" key patent can be worth more than a million that are either trivial or relate to technologies, materials, uses, etc that never get adopted. And it follows that how key a patent might be can't always be predicted at the time it's granted, or likely, even most of the time, either in terms of technical merit, vulnerability to "prior art" lawsuits down the road, fit with a company's offerings, etc. There's also the company's track record at using and exploiting its patents to consider.
It's notable that during the last three decades of generally leading all companies in new patents - and generally by a large margin - IBM has also mostly been in a period of long-term decline as a company, even as their "patent machine" keeps churning out new notions that get USPTO approval. To the point that their alliance with Apple is seen as a more likely saving grace than any of their own technologies. However, they were also the leader in earlier decades when they were the Colussus of Computing, so again, the correlations between patent activity and short-term to mid-term to even long-term success are not that useful as predictors.
In Apple's case - as the leading lightning rod for lawsuits and other such attacks in the world, and with the most copied industrial designs - it seems that much of the patent work is more defensive (against such future actions) than offensive (about improving and creating new and existing products). One of the most memorable moments of the 2007 Keynote where Steve Jobs introduced the iPhone was his blunt warning to would-be infringers that Apple had backed the roll out with over 200 patents and that they intended to fully enforce them as needed. Their participation in the "Rockstar Consortium" seems basically to also have been an action of this sort.
So patents are nice, and it's often pointed out that Apple's a leader in getting bang for its buck as it accomplishes its patenting activities by dedicating a relatively low percentage of gross revenues on R&D in general compared to a number of other leading tech companies - as part of its secret high net margins sauce which has been a huge factor in its growth. But proof's more in pudding and pads than patents per se.
You sir, are guilty of blatant alliteration !
edit: I do wish though that there would be a different mechanism to the sham of the present judicial system in dealing with cases of IP stealing/borrowing/infringement/whatever. The existing system jus ain't working.
Some sort of International court that is beholden to no one and would actively censure companies who use others IP for gain.
Old style justice - "Don't give me no bullshit. Did you do it or not ? If you did then you're going to pay."
Commonsense stuff without all the smarmy wank lawyerese crap. err, well you know what I mean
"But proof's more in pudding and pads than patents per se."
You sir, are guilty of blatant alliteration !
edit: I do wish though that there would be a different mechanism to the sham of the present judicial system in dealing with cases of IP stealing/borrowing/infringement/whatever. The existing system jus ain't working.
Some sort of International court that is beholden to no one and would actively censure companies who use others IP for gain.
Old style justice - "Don't give me no bullshit. Did you do it or not ? If you did then you're going to pay."
Commonsense stuff without all the smarmy wank lawyerese crap. err, well you know what I mean
Agreed on all counts. Especially the first...
I would add it'd be cool if all major (and, yeah, "minor") countries even had a semblance of respect for even the weak, inconsistent and conflicting mechanisms surrounding IP in the first place.
Gee, I didn't know you could get over 2000 patents for rounded corners. /S
Yeah, everyone know that Apple never invented anything, amirite?
Gee, I didn't know you could get over 2000 patents for rounded corners. /S
They're a completely different kind of 'rounded'. /s
And the bass.
Took the words right out of my mouth. I won't sue you.
The American legal system has effectively deemed all patents worthless, so there is no incentive for Apple to innovate anymore. In a way, it doesn't matter now, as the important things have been invented and are successful.
I see you've changed your name to SamTheHalfSung.
Yourenotwrong.