Jury finds Apple did not infringe on 'patent troll' WiLAN's wireless tech
A Texas jury on Wednesday found Apple, the lone holdout in a patent infringement case asserted by WiLAN, to not have infringed on a wireless technology property owned by the patent holdings company, capping off a two-year trial.
WiLAN first brought its case against Apple and a number of other large tech firms in 2011, claiming infringement of U.S Patents No. RE37,802 and No. 5,282,222 relating cellular wireless technologies.
As noted by AllThingsD, aside from Apple, all defendants signed license and settlement agreements to resolve the dispute, including Alcatel-Lucent, Dell, Hewlett Packard and HTC, among others.
With Apple being the only company standing, WiLAN proceeded with a jury trial in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas in Tyler, which has a history of siding with plaintiffs in patent cases.
Just over one week after WiLAN's trial against Apple began on Oct. 15, the jury found no infringement and invalidated two claims from the '802 patent. WiLAN was seeking $248 million in damages.
"WiLAN is disappointed with the jury's decision and is currently reviewing its options with trial counsel, McKool Smith," WiLAN said in a litigation update posted to its website. "WiLAN does not believe previous license agreements signed related to the patents are negatively impacted by this decision."
WiLAN was founded in 1992 as a company rooted in developing and commercializing wireless technology. In 2006, after "realizing the value that its intellectual property brought to industry," the firm transformed into a patent holdings entity and holds a large number of properties which are used in litigation against big-name corporations.
In 2007, Wi-LAN sued Apple over its use of Wi-Fi in certain product. The so-called "patent troll" again brought claims against Apple in 2010, claiming infringement of patented Bluetooth technology.
WiLAN first brought its case against Apple and a number of other large tech firms in 2011, claiming infringement of U.S Patents No. RE37,802 and No. 5,282,222 relating cellular wireless technologies.
As noted by AllThingsD, aside from Apple, all defendants signed license and settlement agreements to resolve the dispute, including Alcatel-Lucent, Dell, Hewlett Packard and HTC, among others.
With Apple being the only company standing, WiLAN proceeded with a jury trial in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas in Tyler, which has a history of siding with plaintiffs in patent cases.
Just over one week after WiLAN's trial against Apple began on Oct. 15, the jury found no infringement and invalidated two claims from the '802 patent. WiLAN was seeking $248 million in damages.
"WiLAN is disappointed with the jury's decision and is currently reviewing its options with trial counsel, McKool Smith," WiLAN said in a litigation update posted to its website. "WiLAN does not believe previous license agreements signed related to the patents are negatively impacted by this decision."
WiLAN was founded in 1992 as a company rooted in developing and commercializing wireless technology. In 2006, after "realizing the value that its intellectual property brought to industry," the firm transformed into a patent holdings entity and holds a large number of properties which are used in litigation against big-name corporations.
In 2007, Wi-LAN sued Apple over its use of Wi-Fi in certain product. The so-called "patent troll" again brought claims against Apple in 2010, claiming infringement of patented Bluetooth technology.
Comments
Right, so… WiLAN now has to pay Apple $248 million in reparations, right? RIGHT?!
Oh my gosh! An East Texas jury _didn't_ give an award to a patent troll?
Is this the apocalypse? Is the sky on fire?
HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA!!!!!!!!!
Correction:
HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
There really should be repercussions for these type of actions so trolls think twice. Meanwhile some one should do something about certain jurisdictions that seem to be incapable of following the law as often as they fail to do. It doesn't pass the smell test.
Good timing on the comment...
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/10/its-finally-here-a-bill-to-end-patent-trolling/
I hadn't got to Ars today yet, thanks for the link. It's my bed time read of choice. No mention of Texas though, you got me excited there for a minute. I have a mental picture of Clint rounding up a bunch of East Texas judges with a rope and dragging through the dust with Sergio Leone's film track music playing ...
Nelson is so much more succinct ...
Now the good thing here is that their claims where apparently so thin that even a liberal interpretation of the laws with respect to patents didn't cover their game. This is really a huge win for Apple as there must have been big holes in these patents to have WiLan so soundly defeated in a trial jury like this. Either that or there are a lot of Apple users in east Texas.
Now the real problem, how much did this cost Apple? Chump change for Apple but it would have also been chump change for many of the other companies that caved. In the end you have to praise Apple for sticking with it.
I know this might surprise some but a lot of corporations are not so respectable or ethical when it comes to where they get their technology from. When you are a little guy on the playing field and your competition is a bunch of over grown line backers it is easy to get ran over and abused. You assume here that the law and more so the patents are clear and non conflicting. Many of the decisions handed down in Texas are the result of doing exactly what patents are suppose to do, that is protect the owner of the patent. If the patents are valid (often a big IF) then it is the duty of the Jury or court to protect the legal patent holder. That is the whole reason for the patent system, to protect the patent owner not the user of the product. Well I can't say cleanly what your post smells like but you should be happy that Apple won this one. At least for now, I'm sure appeals are on the way.
I'm sorry you felt the need to resort to that last line. The idiom is a commonly used in the way i used it, the way you did... no so much.
Still I am glad to read the bi partisan reaction seems to be positive to the new bill being prosed (which i didn't know about when I wrote my comments) that Gatorguy linked above . Perhaps you need to take up your points with them as you obviously disagree with most of the bill.
Their lawyer's first name is McKool? Really?
Nelson is so much more succinct ...
Wait, I'm not done!
HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Ok you win
At that time they decided to continue as a patent licensing entity. Perhaps a troll, perhaps not.
Just because East Texas jurors invalidate a patent, doesn't mean it is no longer valid, nor does it make their decision any more reasonable than any other decision from that court, even if this time it is good for Apple.
Time will tell, but Wi-Lan's founders developed technology and registered some seminal patents in the field.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WiLAN
Disclosure: Hold Wi-LAN shares that haven't been worth the cost of dumping them since the company stopped producing hardware. Long, long time Apple fan, holding many more Apple shares that have added substantially to my financial health!