Patent troll Uniloc sues Apple over AirPlay, autodialing, battery technology

Posted:
in General Discussion
In a trio of lawsuits filed in a Texas court on Friday, non-practicing entity Uniloc claims Apple infringes on three patents with technology relating to AirPlay, autodialing phone numbers from Contacts and operating portable device batteries.




Lodged in the patent holder friendly Eastern Texas District Court, Uniloc's new legal barrage alleges infringement of three patents reassigned from Hewlett-Packard and 3Com.

In its first suit, Uniloc leverages U.S. Patent No. 6,661,203 for "Battery charging and discharging system optimized for high temperature environments," an invention from HP that was first filed for in 2001. The IP details a method by which a temperature sensor is used to monitor battery heat during charge and discharge events. Current is subsequently limited to prevent overheating and extend the life of the battery.

Uniloc asserts Apple's iPhone, iPad, iPod, Apple Watch and MacBook lineups all use temperature sensors to moderate battery charge and draw, and are thus in infringement of the '203 patent.

A second case targets Apple's AirPlay technology with U.S. Patent No. 6,580,422, which covers techniques for "Remote computer display using graphics primitives sent over a wireless link." Filed for in 1995 by HP, the IP details methods of sending graphics commands to a remote computer display using wireless signals.

Debuted as AirTunes in 2004, Apple's wireless content transfer protocol was later adapted to handle still images and video in 2010 as AirPlay. The proprietary technology is used across Apple's device lineup, but the company has recently pushed AirPlay as a mobile-to-big screen solution with Apple TV.

The third case deals with U.S. Patent No.7,092,671 for a "Method and system for wirelessly autodialing a telephone number froma record stored on a personal information device." Filed for in 2000 by defunct electronics and networking hardware firm 3Com, which was acquired by HP in 2010, the patent details methods of recalling and automatically dialing a phone number from a contacts list.

Uniloc targets Apple's Contacts app with the '671 patent.

The lawsuits filed today collectively represent Uniloc's third attempt at suing Apple over what some consider to be fundamental technology. Last month, the non-practicing entity lodged a lawsuit in the same Texas court claiming Apple infringed on three patents with services like Maps, Apple ID and remote software updates. In June of 2016, Uniloc filed a complaint alleging Apple's Messages product encroaches on four patents related to instant voice messaging systems facilitated through VoIP protocols.

Uniloc is perhaps one of the most well known active patent trolls in the U.S. and has consistently set its sights on high-profile tech firms for more than a decade. Past lawsuits targeted Activision Blizzard, Aspyr, Electronic Arts, McAfee, Microsoft, Rackspace, Sega, Sony, Symantec and more.

In its latest volley of lawsuits against Apple filed today, Uniloc seeks unspecified damages, reimbursement of legal fees and other relief deemed fit by the court.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 13
    macseekermacseeker Posts: 411member
    I wonder if Uniloc is familiar with this case:

    https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/16pdf/16-341_8n59.pdf
    SpamSandwichlongpathsuperklotonnetmagejbdragon
  • Reply 2 of 13
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 30,734member
    This case may be quickly tossed, unless the new SCOTUS ruling doesn't apply to those cases filed prior to the new ruling.
    watto_cobrasuperklotonjbdragon
  • Reply 3 of 13
    bkkcanuckbkkcanuck Posts: 854member
    macseeker said:
    I wonder if Uniloc is familiar with this case:

    https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/16pdf/16-341_8n59.pdf
    They likely are BUT that case was misreported.   The lawsuit can still be filed in either the state of incorporation (Apple - Delaware) OR in a venue where Apple does business (that still has to be flushed out more).   In the court case the lawsuit was filed in a venue which was deemed not to have been doing business in.  

    The patent venue statute, 28 U. S. C. §1400(b), provides that “[a]ny civil action for patent infringement may be brought in the judicial district where the defendant resides, or where the defendant has committed acts of infringement and has a regular and established place of business.”
    edited May 2017
  • Reply 4 of 13
    wassilywabbitwassilywabbit Posts: 2unconfirmed, member
    Still, the Eastern District would be a stretch, even under that reading. Austin isn't in that district & I don't think they even have any stores there either
    watto_cobranetmagemdriftmeyer
  • Reply 5 of 13
    teejay2012teejay2012 Posts: 274member
    "..The IP details a method by which a temperature sensor is used to monitor battery heat during charge and discharge events. Current is subsequently limited to prevent overheating ..."

    I am guessing that Samsung passed on this one.
    watto_cobrabaconstangmike1napoleon_phoneapartmagman1979chiadysamoriapscooter63jbdragon
  • Reply 6 of 13
    linkmanlinkman Posts: 881member
    Still, the Eastern District would be a stretch, even under that reading. Austin isn't in that district & I don't think they even have any stores there either
    I live in Austin -- two Apple stores here.

    Who hands out US patents now, a kindergartner?
    dysamoriabaconstang
  • Reply 7 of 13
    subbiessubbies Posts: 71member
    Too bad murdering these fucktards is illegal. 
    dysamoria
  • Reply 8 of 13
    dysamoriadysamoria Posts: 1,958member
    Didn't someone else already sue Apple over all these things?

    Most patents granted these days are BS. Including those granted to Apple. Patent trolls need to be exterminated. Along with companies selling "credits" for environmental compliance.
    longpathentropysjbdragon
  • Reply 9 of 13
    Call Terminix. Call Orkin. The cockroaches are getting out of hand. Got some of the biggest, sleaziest ones cornered in Marshall, Texas.
  • Reply 10 of 13
    bigPaisebigPaise Posts: 1member
    A way to stop these patent trolls is to have a law limiting the award to non-originator patent owners to be no more than some multiple (0 to 2 ?) of the price the patent troll paid to the originator for the patent. It's only fair, the originator already settled for what they got.
    longpathbaconstangjdgaz
  • Reply 11 of 13
    netmagenetmage Posts: 258member
    Seems Ike "but wirelessly" patents need to go in the same bucket as "but on a computer" patents.
    baconstangchiatokyojimu
  • Reply 12 of 13
    mdriftmeyermdriftmeyer Posts: 7,215member
    linkman said:
    Still, the Eastern District would be a stretch, even under that reading. Austin isn't in that district & I don't think they even have any stores there either
    I live in Austin -- two Apple stores here.

    Who hands out US patents now, a kindergartner?
    I believe he was referring to stores in the Eastern  District, not Austin.
    pscooter63StrangeDaysjbdragon
  • Reply 13 of 13
    subbies said:
    Too bad murdering these fucktards is illegal. 
    Only if you get caught
Sign In or Register to comment.