Owner of location-based advertising patent targets Apple's iAds
Apple and its fledgling iAds mobile advertising service are the target of a new lawsuit from a company that owns a patent related to location-based ads.
Apple was named along with a host of other wireless advertising companies in the lawsuit from StreetSpace, including Quattro Wireless, which was purchased by Apple earlier this year and is now being phased out in favor of iAds. Other defendants include Google, AdMob, Nokia, Navteq, Millenial Media and Jumptap.
StreetSpace is headquartered in Malaysia, and the company is the creator of a remote Internet terminal known as the Web Station. Users can walk up to one of these terminals to access the Internet, and are delivered targeted advertisements in the process.
Related to that invention is U.S. Patent No. 6,847,969, which StreetSpace has alleged Apple and others are in violation of. Named "Method and System for Providing Personalized Online Services and Advertisements in Public Spaces," it was granted on Jan. 25, 2005.
The lawsuit notes that StreetSpace's mobile terminal products were available in the late '90s at bookstores, retail stores, cafes and restaurants in Berkley Calif., and had more than 30,000 registered users. The "Street Line" terminal, as it was then known, was also used during in the Olympic Village at Salt Lake City, Utah, during the 2002 Winter Olympics.
Now known as the Web station, the product is said to be used by a number of leading banks in Malaysia, including Maybank, CIMB Bank and AFFIN Bank.
The suit alleges that Apple's iAds service, launched in iPhone applications on July 1, is in violation of its patent because it delivers personalized advertisements based on a user's location, profile and usage history. The delivery of ads on the iPhone, iPod touch and (eventually) the iPad is infringing on the '969 patent owned by StreetSpace, the company claims.
The complaint was filed last week in a U.S. District Court in the Southern District of California.
Apple was named along with a host of other wireless advertising companies in the lawsuit from StreetSpace, including Quattro Wireless, which was purchased by Apple earlier this year and is now being phased out in favor of iAds. Other defendants include Google, AdMob, Nokia, Navteq, Millenial Media and Jumptap.
StreetSpace is headquartered in Malaysia, and the company is the creator of a remote Internet terminal known as the Web Station. Users can walk up to one of these terminals to access the Internet, and are delivered targeted advertisements in the process.
Related to that invention is U.S. Patent No. 6,847,969, which StreetSpace has alleged Apple and others are in violation of. Named "Method and System for Providing Personalized Online Services and Advertisements in Public Spaces," it was granted on Jan. 25, 2005.
The lawsuit notes that StreetSpace's mobile terminal products were available in the late '90s at bookstores, retail stores, cafes and restaurants in Berkley Calif., and had more than 30,000 registered users. The "Street Line" terminal, as it was then known, was also used during in the Olympic Village at Salt Lake City, Utah, during the 2002 Winter Olympics.
Now known as the Web station, the product is said to be used by a number of leading banks in Malaysia, including Maybank, CIMB Bank and AFFIN Bank.
The suit alleges that Apple's iAds service, launched in iPhone applications on July 1, is in violation of its patent because it delivers personalized advertisements based on a user's location, profile and usage history. The delivery of ads on the iPhone, iPod touch and (eventually) the iPad is infringing on the '969 patent owned by StreetSpace, the company claims.
The complaint was filed last week in a U.S. District Court in the Southern District of California.
Comments
That said, this does seem to be a spectacularly broad patent, which irritates me as well.
Does Apple ever sue to protect its patents? God knows they file a lot of them. Seems like the only time they sue is a countersuit in response to someone else. Just wondering.
Um...yes. HTC (or, the "Google phone maker" according to most media outlets so that it appears that Apple sued Google) comes to mind. Psystar as well.
Does Apple ever sue to protect its patents? God knows they file a lot of them. Seems like the only time they sue is a countersuit in response to someone else. Just wondering.
In addition to the aforementioned HTC and Psystar suits, Apple has recently filed a number of design-related suits against various accessory manufacturers.
Their lawyers probably send a lot of cease-and-desist letters which presumably are complied with.
You can see a select list of litigation right here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_lawsuits
When Apple is listed first, they are the plaintiff.
Um...yes. HTC (or, the "Google phone maker" according to most media outlets so that it appears that Apple sued Google) comes to mind. Psystar as well.
Yeah not very often. It doesn't mean that they are not protecting their patents through closed door negotiations. There is no doubt that is how the HTC thing started. Unlike most of these companies that start lawsuits, Apple isn't in the business to sue other companies so it doesn't happen very often.
Personally, I hope this is thrown out. Apple isn't in the Internet Kiosk business. Not to mention that this is an overly broad patent.
Edit: If you wish to point out that you can patent the method of delivering targeted advertising, others have already done so. Refer to post #14.
i'm looking forward to wednesday when we have some mac hardware [and software?] news
How can you patent location based advertising in the first place? Posting an ad in a local newspaper is effectively the same thing as the people who read the newspaper are likely from the area. What about a bulletin board? The only people that it targets are the ones standing in front of it.
i agree with you, and i'm sure every lawyer will too, but here's the issue: "Method and System for Providing Personalized Online Services and Advertisements in Public Spaces"
Um...yes. HTC (or, the "Google phone maker" according to most media outlets so that it appears that Apple sued Google) comes to mind. Psystar as well.
It appears that you're/the media are unaware that HTC also manufactures numerous handsets than run other (than Android) mobile operating systems.
i agree with you, and i'm sure every lawyer will too, but here's the issue: "Method and System for Providing Personalized Online Services and Advertisements in Public Spaces"
I'm no lawyer, but I just looked (briefly) into their method and I fail to see how it applies to today's internet advertising at all. They identify users by a different means (smart card), and they determine location through a different means (kiosk identification number). The only thing remotely similar is that they maintain a database of a customers usage history. I'm not sure how they could claim ownership to that (some stores have been asking for personal information for ages). They also limit the patent to public spaces and specifically exclude the home. Their focus is on things like kiosks and bank machines.
I do wish that AI would link the patents in question.
How can you patent location based advertising in the first place? Posting an ad in a local newspaper is effectively the same thing as the people who read the newspaper are likely from the area. What about a bulletin board? The only people that it targets are the ones standing in front of it.
As has been stated many times before in patent suits, you do not get a patent for the idea. You get a patent for a specific implementation of an idea. So, this company patented a specific way of doing location based advertising or something similar.
The company is suing Apple because they believe that Apple is using their specific method (or parts of their method) in iAds.
Studies show that the person claiming to be the 'patentor' wins less than 25% of the time (i.e., the supposed infringer wins 75% of the time) in such suits.
Moreover, the odds of the patentor win are correlated with the plaintiff's size and whether they are a corporation: large corporations such as Apple are more likely to win than smaller corporations or an individual.
Here's a cite: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.c...ract_id=960633
As has been stated many times before in patent suits, you do not get a patent for the idea. You get a patent for a specific implementation of an idea. So, this company patented a specific way of doing location based advertising or something similar.
The company is suing Apple because they believe that Apple is using their specific method (or parts of their method) in iAds.
I briefly outlined their methods in my previous post. They seem unrelated to how the companies they sued deal out location based advertising. Given that they sued so many companies, I can't help but think that this is anything but patent trolling. They must have hit some rough financial waters. Maybe they do have case, I only skimmed their patent and I'm not an expert, but it certainly doesn't look like they do.
The complaint was filed last week in a U.S. District Court in the Southern District of California.
Wonder what took so long to file?
I briefly outlined their methods in my previous post. They seem unrelated to how the companies they sued deal out location based advertising. Given that they sued so many companies, I can't help but think that this is anything but patent trolling. They must have hit some rough financial waters. Maybe they do have case, I only skimmed their patent and I'm not an expert, but it certainly doesn't look like they do.
We must have posted at about the same time, as yours about the patent was not there when I posted.
It appears that you're/the media are unaware that HTC also manufactures numerous handsets than run other (than Android) mobile operating systems.
Appearances can be deceiving. I am fully aware that HTC produces handsets that run WinMo and the like. If you search for Apple sues HTC, several of the "headlines" read Apple sues Google phone maker...
Apple sues Google apparently gets more clicks than Apple sues HTC.