Apple appeals $625.5 million ruling in Cover Flow patent dispute

13»

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 51
    chris_cachris_ca Posts: 2,543member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by g3pro View Post


    Apple can dish it out, but it can't take it.



    So they should simply bend over and say, "Please sir? Can I 'ave some more?"
  • Reply 42 of 51
    chris_cachris_ca Posts: 2,543member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by trevc View Post


    Is awarding the 600+ million an indication that the court figures Apple benefited that much by using the coverflow interface, or is it simply a harsh penalty to punish Apple so they double check everything so they don't use patented items in the futre?



    That would be spelled out in the decision.
  • Reply 43 of 51
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by trevc View Post




    Is it like this in any other countries???



    No. We're pretty unique here in the US of A.
  • Reply 44 of 51
    realisticrealistic Posts: 1,154member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post


    You spent all that time and effort just to criticise a spelling mistake? wow.



    That is what the looser losers do.
  • Reply 45 of 51
    "lifesreaming."



    Yes, that is exactly what the court is doing.

    reaming the life :-)



    oy~
  • Reply 46 of 51
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mark212 View Post


    This judge was appointed by the President of the United States and confirmed by the US Senate. This is a very big deal.



    Second, Judge Davis is not some former small-town lawyer but has a BS in mathematics and an MS in IT Management, and worked as a computer programmer and systems analyst before going to law school. He was a highly respected judge in the Texas state court system and practiced in Dallas. Anyone who knows anything about IT knows that the north Dallas suburbs of Plano, Frisco, etc. have a ton of high-tech companies (i.e. Fujitsu's US headquarters).



    This is why a massive number of IP / patent lawsuits are filed in the ED Tex. It has judges with deep technical skills, hires the top law school graduates (all with technical degrees and experience, some even with Ph.D.s) as clerks, and has a streamlined process whereby the cases can get heard much sooner than in other districts. (3-5 years is common in other districts; this was two years start to finish.)



    ...misleading to say that this district is biased towards the holders of patents. It absolutely is not. Many claims get transferred there and licensing agreement sometimes stipulate to jurisdiction there precisely because it's not a bunch of yokels. ...sophistication of the judges and the speed in getting disputes resolved.



    I have testified as an expert witness in these very sophisticated courts you speak of and I can tell you that most of the judges I have dealt with are just part of the good ole boy group. Some can be respected - we had one that it took many years to get rid of even after they had solid evidence of his philandering and abuse of female employees. Mr. S. Kent tried to stonewall them since he was the senior judge in the courthouse but now sits in prison just like any other yokel would be that tried the same thing. He to was a Fed Judge for life.



  • Reply 47 of 51
    cycomikocycomiko Posts: 716member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by LTMP View Post


    I disagree, the Tyler court has a consistent track record of finding in favour of patent holders.



    can you provide a ratio of cases awarded to the patent holders vs. those won by the claimed infringers?
  • Reply 48 of 51
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ronbo View Post


    I noticed that the lawsuit Microsoft filed against the Android phone was NOT in East Texas. I think I might have to grudgingly respect them for that.



    And the problem with the East Texas court isn't inbreeding. It's just that they clearly have a prejudice. It's apparent in their decisions. There should be provisions for redistributing cases when a court shows such obvious prejudices.



    Legitimate claims are probably never filed in this court since almost all end in appeal. Saves time & money for both parties to file in a serious court when the matter is valid, more likely to work out an actual settlement than waste time in appeals.



    I don't think patents should be granted unless those filing present a prototype within 3 years of filing, should be part of the review process. You might have to extend that for certain things that require more development time but in the least it would stop these law-firms from snatching them up & making money off of them. No law-firm is going to go to the trouble of developing prototypes on patents they buy so people who come up with ideas & then sell them would only be selling them to companies with resources to develop them.
  • Reply 49 of 51
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Wurm5150 View Post


    Software patent violation for $625M.. I think that is really excessive. Two of these patents are on how something is displayed, is questionable, and something not worth 9 figures. Apple will probably end up paying 100-200..



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ronbo View Post


    Not mentioned in the article above: the patents were sold/purchased for $5 million. One of Apple's arguments was that the infringement shouldn't be worth more than that. Honestly, that seems right. Yeah, I'm biased, but the guy who INVENTED the idea got his $$ (actually, he got $210k, because the $5m was a second sale).



    I want to know what percentage of these East Texas rulings get over-turned on appeal. Hopefully it's most of them. Otherwise, they need to bulldoze over the court and make a water-park.



    I don't think it's that excessive. We all know Apple has $40 billion in the bank, all there products have coverflow built into them. Apple has gone on about coverflow as a feature for years and just because an idea was sold for $5million doesn't mean that's all Apple should pay if they've been deemed to have earned $600million from it as to them it's therefore worth $600million.



    Just to add I don't really think it's fair, I don't see how Apple could have actually known about this patent. I think if someone owns a patent and they think someone has breached it you should only be able to sue for the amount earned after you've notified that company of the patent or prove that they have known all along about it.
  • Reply 50 of 51
    nofeernofeer Posts: 2,427member
    So is it now reversed or apple sues them

    http://macdailynews.com/index.php/we...omments/26965/
Sign In or Register to comment.