leety

About

Username
leety
Joined
Visits
0
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
12
Badges
0
Posts
2

Reactions

2Like2Informative

  • Maxell sues Apple again over FaceTime and other iPhone features

    leetyleety
    wow alot of complete nonsense posted in this thread.

    You people don't seem to know anything about how the US patent system works.

    The general point of a patent is that you disclose your new invention and get 20 years of exclusive use of that technology. It promotes innovation and protects companies  and individuals from having their technology stolen
    rob53 said:
    Does Maxell have any product similar to FaceTime? If all they have are bits and pieces of coding or “thoughts” why can they sue? It’s like building a house and being sued for using wood 2x4s. 
    Maxell doesn't need a similar product, they own the patent and therefore the rights to the technology. They patented the invention before Apple started using it. Maxell absolutely has the right to sue for damages as that technology could have be sold or licensed to another company who could have used it, but Apple ignored those rights and profited from their free use of it. If Apple did it better then Maxell or if Maxell never even used it is besides the point.
    rob53 said:
    ”It’s hard out there for a pimp . . .” Not much of a market for cassette tapes anymore, but there’s always the courts. 
    Which makes me wonder who’s patents they bought to try and stay relevant. At some point the original patent owner had to have some kind of viable product to get it through the USPTO. Or maybe not .....
    Maxell didn't buy these patents, Maxell is owned by Hitachi which is/was a massive innovator and holds more patents then Apple. You can see in the assignment history for these patents that they were originally Hitachi patents. Maxell got these patents from Hitachi, so if it wasn't Maxell litigating it would be Hitachi. and even it was some other company and the patent had been sold through a chain of 10 other companies, it doesn't effect their value. it doesn't matter who invented them, it matters only who holds them.

    Like the rights to a house, you can sell it, your building of it means nothing.

    Also, check out this list of worlds largest patent owners: https://www.ificlaims.com/rankings-global-assets-2019.htm

    You don't need a "viable product" to get through the USPTO, what rubbish.

    Also Hitachi made phones at one point, they were shit but that is besides the point. they were innovating in this area because they had products in this area.
    JinTech said:
    There needs to be a new patent stipulation where "if patent is not actively used within three years it becomes invalid" or some such text. Otherwise, it's just a way for patent trolls to continue to profit off vaporware.
    what a joke, 3 years lol, lol no one would ever file another patent, they would essentially be useless. Lets say you invent something amazing, billion dollar idea, you patent it, but cause you're a retard you can't get your business off the ground, Apple comes along and copies your idea and makes that billion dollars. what do you think of patent rights now? should you be allowed to sue Apple for crushing you?

    elijahg said:
    JinTech said:
    There needs to be a new patent stipulation where "if patent is not actively used within three years it becomes invalid" or some such text. Otherwise, it's just a way for patent trolls to continue to profit off vaporware.
    That'd invalidate 90% of Apple's patents, since they have thousands of patents they have never used and most likely have no intention of using. However I do think there should be a time limit as you say, or maybe that companies should have a demonstrable use of the patent upon application. That'd stop companies like Apple patenting every idea they get, hoarding up a patent portfolio to attack people with and blocking others from actually doing something with the idea.

    There are some situations where the patents are either so vague they're too broad, and other situations where patents are so specific that a slight variation on an existing idea becomes caught up in patent litigation, as the variation is patented whereas the original idea isn't. Some patents just shouldn't be given at all.
    There is a time limit, the built in 20 years that is the cornerstone of the patent system...

    Innovation occurs in small steps so you need specific patents. The technology in smartphones is so complex that you can't make a smartphone without using the technology of 1000s of patents, and this is just another example of that. If you don't pay for the right to use something, you will get sued.

    There is a legitimate problem with patents being granted which shouldn't be, one study found that a large proportion of active patents wouldn't survive reexamination. But that is why the patent office has IPR's and also why lawsuits can invalidate or confirm the validity of patents.

    Generally large companies don't sue other large companies without having investigated into the validity of the patents they are litigating. The buck stops with the courts, they determine what is valid and what isn't. One side will say it is and the other will say it isn't. They argue and the jury decides who is right.

    This seems silly, but it looks like they also sued Huawei, Asustek and ZTE, and,

    “The prior case against and ZTE (USA) Inc., Maxell Ltd. v. ZTE (USA) Inc., Case  No. 5:16-cv-00179-RWS, culminated in a ten day jury trial resulting in a verdict in favor of Maxell.“

    They don’t mention the results of the other cases, which are also finished, so I assume they lost those. 

    even a short google search shows those cases were either won or settled in Maxells favor. clearly they had a legitimate case for bringing the lawsuit.
    rob53 said:
    Does Maxell have any product similar to FaceTime? If all they have are bits and pieces of coding or “thoughts” why can they sue? It’s like building a house and being sued for using wood 2x4s. 
    Maybe more like Star Trek set designers suing Apple for a computing device in a glass (or maybe transparent crystalline) slab.

    With the recordable media market rapidly dwindling, Maxell is probably having problems finding something relevant to produce (outside of lawsuits).

    Expect this sort of behavior from all the buggy whip manufacturers.

    wow. As mentioned above, Maxell is owned by Hitachi, Hitachi made phones. these patents relate to FaceTime, white balance and face recognition when taking photos and unlocking a mobile device. They are clearly related to Apple and also predate the use of the technology in all instances.



    The patents for the latest lawsuit include:
    • 10,911,719 - "Communication Apparatus for Transmitting and Receiving Digital Information To and From Another Communication Apparatus"
    • 10,389,978 - "Communication apparatus for transmitting and receiving digital information to and from another communication apparatus"
    • 8,736,729 - "Electric Camera"
    • 6,816,491 - "Multiplexed audio data decoding apparatus and receiver apparatus"
    • 8,098,695 - "Multiplexed audio data decoding apparatus and receiver apparatus"
    • 7,551,209 - "Imaging apparatus and method for controlling white balance"
    • 8,130,284 - "Imaging apparatus and method for controlling white balance"
    • 10,264,456 - "Mobile terminal and control method thereof"
    • 10,418,069 - "Recording and reproducing apparatus and method thereof"
    • 7,072,673 - "Radio handset and position location system"
    • 10,592,372 - "Digital information recording apparatus, reproducing apparatus and transmitting apparatus"
    • 6,484,034 - "Radio handset and position location system"
    Be nice if AppleInsider would provide links to these so we could see if they're patents with some meat to them or are just speculative musings that should properly be adjudicated in the Eastern District of Texas's troll patent corridor.

    It's kinda sad to see previously reputable manufacturers going after the money like that, but even Koss Headphones got into the game ...
    Again google bro, these patent are very very easy to find. or use the USPTO website or any other of the dozens of free patent search sites around.



    Final thoughts, patents have value. They can be bought and sold and transferred. Jjust because someone isn't the original owner of the patent doesn't mean they can't sue for infringment of that patent, or that they shouldn't, because to get those patents money was exchanged. If you invent something, you should be allowed to sell the invention if you couldn't get the business to work. That person can now sue anyone else who tries to copy that invenetion because they paid for and now own the patent.

    Even if Maxell didn't orginally invent this technology (they did as part of Hitachi), they should still be allowed to sue from patent infringement.



    jibFileMakerFellerelijahg

  • Maxell sues Apple again over FaceTime and other iPhone features

    leetyleety
    Quote directly from the complaint, for those who are still stuck on the idea that this is "patent trolling":

    As more fully described below, in 2009 Hitachi, Ltd. assigned much of its consumer product-facing intellectual property to Hitachi Consumer Electronics Co., Ltd. Then, in 2013, Hitachi Consumer Electronics Co., Ltd. assigned the intellectual property, including the patents in this case, to Hitachi Maxell, Ltd., which later assigned the patents to Maxell as a result of a reorganization and name change. This reorganization was an effort to align its intellectual property with the licensing, business development, and research and development efforts of Maxell, including in the mobile and mobile-media device market (Hitachi, Ltd. and Hitachi Consumer Electronics Co., Ltd. are referred to herein collectively as “Hitachi”).

    These patents are Hitachi patents, assigned to Maxell for reorganizational reasons.



    elijahg