...As noted above, most of these probably have prior art or other problems that will get them invalidated. Seven Networks is pretty obviously hoping for a settlement.
d. Man I hate to break it to Seven Networks, but Android has pretty much every one of these features and ... oh, you only want to sue the company with the deep pockets? All righty then!
Hate to break it to YOU but really, couldn't you spend just 5 minutes looking into it before making assumptive comments? You're not the only one, there's several others confident in what they're posting. Many posters are too quick to assume stuff. Slow down and take a few minutes to check stuff out before putting it in writing.
I'll fill in some of the blanks.
Long before Apple Seven Networks had already sued Google, the company infamous for challenging patent validity and exceedingly successful at it.
Yet Google agreed to a license with Seven Networks in January, apparently fairly confident at least some of patents would survive challenge and settling was the best course. Apple is next up. Personally I'd put my money on Apple settling rather than going to trial.
The case against Google would have been a biggie, ongoing since 2017. Google attempted patent claims invalidation without much success, asked for a move of venue to California where they're based but was denied. Appealed to the Federal circuit and denied again because they have servers in Texas (!).
Seven seems to have a strong case. Google demanded a jury trial rather than bench, even in the patent friendly Eastern District. Seven didn't flinch. Google filed motions to dismiss on a number of different grounds. All dismissed. Change of venue. Dismissed. Appeal. Dismissed. Challenged patent claims. Ruled in favor os Seven. Challenged the terms in the claims, and the claim construction. Ruled in Seven's favor.
Finally in the two weeks preceding the trial Google petitioned the Federal Circuit for an en banc hearing. Denied again. Google waited until the eve of the trial to settle with them, apparently out of options and believing they would likely be found guilty of infringement if it went to trial. https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6257171/seven-networks-llc-v-google-llc/
This is NOT the typical patent troll filing.
The righteousness is strong in this one. Yeah sorry, most of us have better things to do than search the web for litigation involving our employers google. It’s completely fine for people to read the story and comment on it as written.
Why are you getting on his case for bringing FACTS into the discussion? And no, it's not fine to read the story and comment as written if you know nothing about the case and just parrot the usual fanboy nonsense about trolls, the Eastern District, etc.
...As noted above, most of these probably have prior art or other problems that will get them invalidated. Seven Networks is pretty obviously hoping for a settlement.
d. Man I hate to break it to Seven Networks, but Android has pretty much every one of these features and ... oh, you only want to sue the company with the deep pockets? All righty then!
Hate to break it to YOU but really, couldn't you spend just 5 minutes looking into it before making assumptive comments? You're not the only one, there's several others confident in what they're posting. Many posters are too quick to assume stuff. Slow down and take a few minutes to check stuff out before putting it in writing.
I'll fill in some of the blanks.
Long before Apple Seven Networks had already sued Google, the company infamous for challenging patent validity and exceedingly successful at it.
Yet Google agreed to a license with Seven Networks in January, apparently fairly confident at least some of patents would survive challenge and settling was the best course. Apple is next up. Personally I'd put my money on Apple settling rather than going to trial.
The case against Google would have been a biggie, ongoing since 2017. Google attempted patent claims invalidation without much success, asked for a move of venue to California where they're based but was denied. Appealed to the Federal circuit and denied again because they have servers in Texas (!).
Seven seems to have a strong case. Google demanded a jury trial rather than bench, even in the patent friendly Eastern District. Seven didn't flinch. Google filed motions to dismiss on a number of different grounds. All dismissed. Change of venue. Dismissed. Appeal. Dismissed. Challenged patent claims. Ruled in favor os Seven. Challenged the terms in the claims, and the claim construction. Ruled in Seven's favor.
Finally in the two weeks preceding the trial Google petitioned the Federal Circuit for an en banc hearing. Denied again. Google waited until the eve of the trial to settle with them, apparently out of options and believing they would likely be found guilty of infringement if it went to trial. https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6257171/seven-networks-llc-v-google-llc/
This is NOT the typical patent troll filing.
The righteousness is strong in this one. Yeah sorry, most of us have better things to do than search the web for litigation involving our employers google. It’s completely fine for people to read the story and comment on it as written.
Why are you getting on his case for bringing FACTS into the discussion? And no, it's not fine to read the story and comment as written if you know nothing about the case and just parrot the usual fanboy nonsense about trolls, the Eastern District, etc.
I'm pretty sure that opinions and gut reactions are valid postings. Are they the most interesting and informative? No, but they aren't "not fine."
I found gatorguy's post (and the follow up post by some other guy) very informative. Both were sparked by this "not fine" comment, so it's all good.
The patent system is a disaster, at least in context to software and the computer industry. At this point, it’s mostly just a system for making lawyers money. It’s a tremendous waste of resources. It was never meant to be this way, but computer industry lobbyists saw to it otherwise and created this disaster for us.
...As noted above, most of these probably have prior art or other problems that will get them invalidated. Seven Networks is pretty obviously hoping for a settlement.
d. Man I hate to break it to Seven Networks, but Android has pretty much every one of these features and ... oh, you only want to sue the company with the deep pockets? All righty then!
Hate to break it to YOU but really, couldn't you spend just 5 minutes looking into it before making assumptive comments? You're not the only one, there's several others confident in what they're posting. Many posters are too quick to assume stuff. Slow down and take a few minutes to check stuff out before putting it in writing.
I'll fill in some of the blanks.
Long before Apple Seven Networks had already sued Google, the company infamous for challenging patent validity and exceedingly successful at it.
Yet Google agreed to a license with Seven Networks in January, apparently fairly confident at least some of patents would survive challenge and settling was the best course. Apple is next up. Personally I'd put my money on Apple settling rather than going to trial.
The case against Google would have been a biggie, ongoing since 2017. Google attempted patent claims invalidation without much success, asked for a move of venue to California where they're based but was denied. Appealed to the Federal circuit and denied again because they have servers in Texas (!).
Seven seems to have a strong case. Google demanded a jury trial rather than bench, even in the patent friendly Eastern District. Seven didn't flinch. Google filed motions to dismiss on a number of different grounds. All dismissed. Change of venue. Dismissed. Appeal. Dismissed. Challenged patent claims. Ruled in favor os Seven. Challenged the terms in the claims, and the claim construction. Ruled in Seven's favor.
Finally in the two weeks preceding the trial Google petitioned the Federal Circuit for an en banc hearing. Denied again. Google waited until the eve of the trial to settle with them, apparently out of options and believing they would likely be found guilty of infringement if it went to trial. https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6257171/seven-networks-llc-v-google-llc/
This is NOT the typical patent troll filing.
Great heads up for Apple from Google. Thanks.
No doubt Apple had their eye on this case months ago and was rooting hard for Google.
Can you mention anything about the settlement or is this still being decided?
? Did you read the links at all? Those should cover any general questions about the case... unless you were actually just trolling again and had no honest question. That was actually funny then.
Comments
I found gatorguy's post (and the follow up post by some other guy) very informative. Both were sparked by this "not fine" comment, so it's all good.