I don't think it's that clear cut. You're trying to evaluate his patent on the basis of the current state of the market. All he has to show is that in 1988 when he filed that this was novel. I can't say one way or the other, but that doesn't strike me as an absurd claim.
He WILL be faced with the issue of not taking action promptly, so the awards may end up reduced dramatically because of his inaction, but at first glance, there's a chance that this patent will (and should) be found valid.
At first glance it would appear that he got a patent for displaying infomation retrieved from a data base. But I doubt that he got a patent for this. It's not novel, even back in 1988, and too general. His patent must involve a specific technique of retrieving the data. It involves a hand full of steps and specific equipment and the retrieval and displaying of data is just one of the steps. He can not enforce just one part of his patent. His patent is for a specific method of retrieving and displaying the data. And I doubt that in 1988 he knew how a digital cell phone would work. It's like the Burst suit where the company got a patent (back in the 90's) that involves compressing analog video data to send from one video player to another to save time and then try to apply it to compressing digital video data to send over the internet.
And if his patent did expired last year in May, then Apple is off the hook because the iPhone did not go on sale until the end of June. And if his patent expires this year in May then Apple will only be liable for maybe 5 million iPhones. He's not going to get much from Apple. It makes you wonder why he's not going after all the other cell phone makers who have already sold billions of cell phones since 1995. And don't give me this " Maybe the other cell phone makers are already paying him?" The only money this guy is looking for and maybe got from others is some "get lost" money.
Someone else brought this up, where has this guy been for the last 10 yrs every cell phone out there today does this exact thing. If you have someone's name and number stored in the phone and you receive a call from them the phone see the number and looks in your address book to see who it is. This way if someone blocks their name on a cell phone network cell phone still knows who it is.
There is no way to know if this guy as licensing agreements with all the cell phone companies. If he does then apple could have issues. If he does not, his lack of inaction will cause him to loose the case. The courts have been very clear on the fact that patent holder must actively enforce their patents otherwise there is not infringement.
Ask Xerox about that when they attempted to sue Apple 10 yrs after they intro the Mac OS, the courts told Xerox no luck since they did nothing for 10 yrs they essentially granted apple to freely use it.
Of course it's obvious today. The question is whether it was obvious in 1988 - when cell phones were the size of a small suitcase.
But his patent is intended for a land line telephone. I believe back when Caller ID was first introduced, it only showed the caller phone number, Not his actuall ID. He's taking the Caller ID phone number transmitted and matching it agaisnt a data base on a seperate unit (probablly also the size of a small suit case) connected to your land line telephone. Just like a Caller ID unit. Only instead of just displaying the incoming phone number it will also display the name of the caller if it finds a match in it's data base. It's a way of putting a name to the Caller ID phone number. This way you don't have to remember everybody's phone number.
they sure do. but this is the first time I've heard about a lawsuit.
frankly I think that if a company waits until a particular big company does what some 20+ others have done for years to file a suit the whole thing should be tossed out. i mean you shouldn't be able to ignore the issue for years and then just change your mind and go after only one or two folks, particularly when they are high profit companies and you keep ignoring littler guys
So is this guy gonna sue every cordless phone manufacturer too since my last 10 home phones have had caller ID and display the name of the caller of an inbound call? Where do people come up with this crap? I wish I had a nickel for every company that sued Apple. I'd be rich by now.
i think the trick is how the phone is displaying it.
it sounds like this person thought up the idea of having an internal database in the phone that provides the info.
unlike caller id which is a giant master database.
but still, every cell phone for at least 10 years has had that internal address book/display and where were the lawsuits. no where. but suddenly, after a year and proof of high profits, he goes after one company
no wonder Apple is filing patents for every tiny idea they think they might want to eventually put in the iphone.
There is no way to know if this guy as licensing agreements with all the cell phone companies. they did nothing for 10 yrs they essentially granted apple to freely use it.
if he spent the whole time actively enforcing his patent then Apple would know, ATT would know etc.
Apple might be into money but they aren't stupid. I will lay down solid funds that their legal office vets all ideas for active, applicable patents that might cause trouble later. because it would be better to pay the guy even if it was barely a fit than suffer bad pr etc.
There has to be other companies too! Out of all of them, the company who has the awesome product, have a lawsuit against them? Seems like, this person hates the iPhone, and wants to get rid of it. I wonder what the next patent someone is going to file next... like, the freedom of knowing who you're talking to before you awnser the phone, or a patent like, the freedom of communication? Geez... these companies are trying to squeeze our wallets, even to each other (and people too). UUGH!!!
Comments
I don't think it's that clear cut. You're trying to evaluate his patent on the basis of the current state of the market. All he has to show is that in 1988 when he filed that this was novel. I can't say one way or the other, but that doesn't strike me as an absurd claim.
He WILL be faced with the issue of not taking action promptly, so the awards may end up reduced dramatically because of his inaction, but at first glance, there's a chance that this patent will (and should) be found valid.
At first glance it would appear that he got a patent for displaying infomation retrieved from a data base. But I doubt that he got a patent for this. It's not novel, even back in 1988, and too general. His patent must involve a specific technique of retrieving the data. It involves a hand full of steps and specific equipment and the retrieval and displaying of data is just one of the steps. He can not enforce just one part of his patent. His patent is for a specific method of retrieving and displaying the data. And I doubt that in 1988 he knew how a digital cell phone would work. It's like the Burst suit where the company got a patent (back in the 90's) that involves compressing analog video data to send from one video player to another to save time and then try to apply it to compressing digital video data to send over the internet.
And if his patent did expired last year in May, then Apple is off the hook because the iPhone did not go on sale until the end of June. And if his patent expires this year in May then Apple will only be liable for maybe 5 million iPhones. He's not going to get much from Apple. It makes you wonder why he's not going after all the other cell phone makers who have already sold billions of cell phones since 1995. And don't give me this " Maybe the other cell phone makers are already paying him?" The only money this guy is looking for and maybe got from others is some "get lost" money.
There is no way to know if this guy as licensing agreements with all the cell phone companies. If he does then apple could have issues. If he does not, his lack of inaction will cause him to loose the case. The courts have been very clear on the fact that patent holder must actively enforce their patents otherwise there is not infringement.
Ask Xerox about that when they attempted to sue Apple 10 yrs after they intro the Mac OS, the courts told Xerox no luck since they did nothing for 10 yrs they essentially granted apple to freely use it.
I expected my iPhone to tell me who's calling if their name was in my list? Doesn't that make it "obvious"?
Of course it's obvious today. The question is whether it was obvious in 1988 - when cell phones were the size of a small suitcase.
Of course it's obvious today. The question is whether it was obvious in 1988 - when cell phones were the size of a small suitcase.
But his patent is intended for a land line telephone. I believe back when Caller ID was first introduced, it only showed the caller phone number, Not his actuall ID. He's taking the Caller ID phone number transmitted and matching it agaisnt a data base on a seperate unit (probablly also the size of a small suit case) connected to your land line telephone. Just like a Caller ID unit. Only instead of just displaying the incoming phone number it will also display the name of the caller if it finds a match in it's data base. It's a way of putting a name to the Caller ID phone number. This way you don't have to remember everybody's phone number.
Don't all phones do that?
they sure do. but this is the first time I've heard about a lawsuit.
frankly I think that if a company waits until a particular big company does what some 20+ others have done for years to file a suit the whole thing should be tossed out. i mean you shouldn't be able to ignore the issue for years and then just change your mind and go after only one or two folks, particularly when they are high profit companies and you keep ignoring littler guys
So is this guy gonna sue every cordless phone manufacturer too since my last 10 home phones have had caller ID and display the name of the caller of an inbound call? Where do people come up with this crap? I wish I had a nickel for every company that sued Apple. I'd be rich by now.
i think the trick is how the phone is displaying it.
it sounds like this person thought up the idea of having an internal database in the phone that provides the info.
unlike caller id which is a giant master database.
but still, every cell phone for at least 10 years has had that internal address book/display and where were the lawsuits. no where. but suddenly, after a year and proof of high profits, he goes after one company
no wonder Apple is filing patents for every tiny idea they think they might want to eventually put in the iphone.
Furthermore, and unlike Apple, other phone-companies who used his patent, probably returned his calls and paid the royalty fees.
i wouldn't make that assumption. you could be wrong.
There is no way to know if this guy as licensing agreements with all the cell phone companies. they did nothing for 10 yrs they essentially granted apple to freely use it.
if he spent the whole time actively enforcing his patent then Apple would know, ATT would know etc.
Apple might be into money but they aren't stupid. I will lay down solid funds that their legal office vets all ideas for active, applicable patents that might cause trouble later. because it would be better to pay the guy even if it was barely a fit than suffer bad pr etc.