Displaying items by tag: Patent Law

We have talked about Apple’s business model and their corporate ethics before so when we found out that they are suing Eastman Kodak while they are in the midst of declaring bankruptcy we were not shocked or surprised. In fact if you look at Apple’s history they spend more time in court accusing other companies of breaking the laws than AMD did trying to fight Intel.

The patent war between Apple and the rest of the world has become old news. To most people the continuous fighting back and forth over patents, designs, and copyright is boring and is causing the products offered by the companies in question to put our little more than refreshes of existing technology. We have stopped reporting on much of it simply because it is the same news with different countries attached to it. However, something new and unusual is happening in the suit between Motorola and Apple in Germany…

Over the course of the next few weeks you will read dozens of articles on the web and in print talking about the top technology and how this or that product shaped the market. However, no matter how impressive the technology was there was one thing that shaped the world of consumer electronics more than anything else. The lawsuit; it is a simple and unfortunate fact that patent and copyright lawsuits had a bigger impact on the consumer electronic market than any 5 products put together.

There is no doubt that Apple under the hand of Steve Jobs was a force to be reckoned with. It seemed they were almost untouchable in court and had the freedom to do what they wanted to in the market and in their business dealings. However, in the short weeks since the unfortunate passing of Steve Jobs, Apple has been handed down two very unusual judgments. The first one we told you about a couple of days ago where a Spanish court ruled against Apple in their attempt to label the Spanish corporation Nuevas Tecnologías y Energías Catalá as a product pirate.

This loss has now turned into a counter suit for loss of revenue and for damage to the company’s reputation as well as an Anti-Trust complaint against Apple. These two cases have not even started yet so we do not have any new information, but it is significant in the fact that the original indictment filed by Apple used the same argument that Apple has successfully used against Samsung in the EU and in Australia (the product does look like a stretched iPad).

Although this is localized to Spain the ruling does set precedence as now other courts will look to the decisions made in other countries when ruling on similar matters. It is also important to remember that the ban in Australia is not permanent just yet. Although there is a preliminary ban in place the final ruling will not happen for a bit yet. This loss could factor into it. It may also help Samsung in the EU with their appeals there.

Our next unusual loss for Apple comes in the form of a default judgment handed down by a German court which bans the delivery or sale of Apple mobile products in Germany. This judgment was put into effect due to the fact that Apple did not respond in time to the charge that they are infringing on two of Motorola’s patents. The reason Apple chose not to respond is not clear as the have plenty of legal staff to cover this kind of thing. Other sites have reported that Apple does not care about this because they are only the parent company (which the original suit was against) and their local subsidiary (Apple GmbH) is free to continue to sell Apple products as long as they like.   There are two flaws in this thought, the first is obvious; although Apple GmbH is the local subsidiary there are still run by the global parent. If they continue to sell Motorola can argue this and work to get the sales stopped.  The second is the wording of the judgment. It prohibits Apple from “delivering” mobile products into Germany. This means that once Apple GmbH and others run out, well they are out.

There is more to this though. Apple’s German website is nothing more than a redirection to Apple’s US site. Both names are owned by the parent company Apple, Inc. This means that Motorola can have that site taken down in Germany and prevent Apple from selling any mobile product through the web (regardless of where it ships from).

Now we have to remember that this is a default judgment and is by no means final. Apple still has the right to have the case heard and judged on its merits. There is a chance they could win this one yet, but it is odd that they did not answer the first response. We simply do not know why they have chosen not to answer, but it could have something to do with an upcoming hearing into Samsung’s use of FRAND (Fair Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory) patents against Apple. Apple is claiming that the patents that Samsung are attempting to use against it fall under this guideline and that upholding those against Apple alone would be anti-competitive (hello pot). If the EU investigates this and finds against Samsung then Apple can use FRAND as a defense in this case. One of the patents that Motorola is using is essential to the operation of GSM, UTMS, 3G. If Apple attempted to use this now and the EU commission rules in favor of Samsung then that defense is out the window.

So we see some things are changing for Apple since the death of Steve Jobs, the question now is; “are the two related?” Most people would like to think they are not, but we tend to think of big companies as their public persona. When you think of Microsoft you think Bill Gates or Steve Ballmer (and his goofy photos). When you think of Apple you think of Steve Jobs. This is an important sub conscious issue that could lead many to look at Apple differently even in court.

We are going to keep an eye on both the EU investigation into the use of FRAND patents and the German case against Apple by Motorola. We will update you of any major changes in either.

Source for information on the Motorola judgment FossPatents

Discuss in our Forum

Apple has been having a blast dropping patents for vague concepts and even an entire device type (with their pending Pico Projector patent) regardless of prior art and at times regardless of if the patent is actual technology or not (the look and feel of something). Then they take these patents and wave them in the face of judges that have no real idea of what the patent is (or is not) covering asking for injunctions and outright bans on products from companies that are relatively underfunded in the legal department. If you ask Apple about this they will stand and say that they are protecting their Intellectual Property (which in many cases was “borrowed” from another company that cannot afford a legal fight with Apple like S3). This abuse of the patent and copyright system is detestable, but is an article for another day.

The question I am wondering is, why has Apple not gone after Microsoft? Windows 7 on a tablet has Pinch to Zoom, finger gestures and even the same “look and feel” when you scroll with your finger. Now, I could be wrong, but if Apple is trying to protect their IP you would think they would be going after Microsoft in a big way. I am also pretty sure they would be adding Asus (who has one of the best-selling Windows Based Tablets on the market right now) to their legal wish list as well. So, why do they leave these two obvious copy cats out of the litigation arena?

Well, here are a few reasons that we were able to come up with based on research. Microsoft is safe simply because they have bailed out Apple multiple times in the past and also have several patents and items that Apple needs to survive (Office for Mac is still a huge seller). Whether the Apple faithful and Steve Jobs want to admit it or not Apple owes it very existence to their rival; without Bill Gates and Microsoft we would be talking about Apple in the past tense. Right now Adobe is wishing they had dropped money into that bailout instead of just spending time and money making their products work on Apple’s RISC (Reduced Instruction Set Computer) based systems (the PowerPC days). If they had, they perhaps they would have some leverage in the whole HTML5 Vs. Flash competition. This also applies to Microsoft’s net generation operating system Windows 8. In fact is applies even more as Microsoft is writing it to work on ARM based CPUs. The previews that we have seen also make it very tablet friendly and an obvious threat to Apple’s weakening hold on the tablet market. Yet, we have heard no call to arms from the Apple legal team over this.  

So, what about Asus and their tablets? Asus is also untouchable right now because they also have something that Apple wants; A manufacturing facility. Apple has been looking for alternatives to Foxconn due to the bad press surrounding the company’s many suicides. The world now knows that the iPhone, iPod and many other Apple products are assembled there and with the many deaths over working conditions at these plants the eyes are turning to look at Apple. The question has already been raised by many humanitarian groups “why has Apple done nothing about this?” You would think that a company that claims to be so “Green” and Earth Friendly would be appalled by what is happening over there. However, other than a few press releases (which usually tame the faithful) Apple has done nothing. At least on the surface, we have heard rumors that Apple is courting Pegatron as an alternative manufacturing site for the next generation of iToys. If this is true (and as of now we have no evidence to the contrary) then Apple would not want to get Asus upset. After all Asus owns Pegatron. It is their manufacturing company.

So then next time you hear an Apple press representative standing on the soapbox and loudly declaiming how they are protecting their Intellectual Property from the masses of thieves and copy-cats out there, just remember that they are only throwing this around at the companies they feel they can bully into submission. In the end no one likes a bully, and bullies usually reap what they sow in the long run.