EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

11.11.12

Secret Patent Deals With Apple

Posted in Apple, GNU/Linux, Google at 5:56 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Cher Wang in WEF
Cher Wang, Chairwoman of HTC (source)

Summary: HTC signs a secret cross-licensing agreement with Apple, reminding us of Microsoft’s extortion of Android/Linux

TWO and a half years ago Apple officially launched its patent attack on Linux. It started with HTC, a company with few patents, and we covered it closely at the time. Well, the case has just been settled.

“The terms of the settlement are confidential and were not disclosed” as part of the signing of this deal, which is a “patent cross-licensing agreement” — a 10-year licensing deal which raises questions about the cross-licensing cartel.

Rupert Murdoch’s papers say:

Smartphone manufacturer HTC and Apple Inc. announced Saturday a settlement ending the first major battle over software patents between the technology giants.

Along with a global patent settlement, the two companies announced they’d signed a 10-year license agreement that will extend to current and future patents held by one other.

Apple and HTC had battled patents over various smartphone features since March 2010.

[...]

Most of Apple’s legal success has come in the battle against HTC as far as stymying the entry of products to the U.S. market.

In 2011 the U.S. International Trade Commission ruled that HTC infringed on one of four patents Apple had disputed and imposed a sales ban on some of the Taiwanese maker’s phones.

The main worry here, Apple might be getting money out of it and even if not, Apple might use this to extort or pressure into submission other companies. This is not about Apple walking away from litigation per se.

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

3 Comments

  1. Michael said,

    November 11, 2012 at 4:55 pm

    Gravatar

    “TWO and a half years ago Apple officially launched its patent attack on Linux.”

    Please, Roy, *stop* lying. Apple never launched any attack against Linux. You are simply lying.

  2. mcinsand said,

    November 12, 2012 at 12:48 pm

    Gravatar

    I wish I had a visit across the pond scheduled; I’d wager a pint that this is a good sign. Maybe I have some sort of Monday morning optimism, but I would bet that Apple doesn’t use this against other companies, unless it is a way to negotiate peace. Although Apple and reality are rarely on speaking terms, there is some chance that awareness might be creeping in. I can’t see the traditional Apple as ever considering any sort of compromise, especially when the deal is spun as ‘cross-licensing’… which would mean admission that another company has anything new that Apple didn’t ‘invent’ (i.e. copy from someone else and then take credit for).

    Recently, Apple has suffered a couple of setbacks, and it’s antireality distortion fields might be weakening. Even in their US win, publicity is firming up the case day-by-day that Apple’s win against Samsung depended on a biased judge and an incompetent juror… to find Apple as a winning innovator was contingent on a broken court. The UK has been more firm and decisive. Apple’s image is taking a beating daily and, since image is all Apple really has, they can’t afford to keep sliding. In fact, if I was there to bet the first pint, I’d bet the second that Apple moves in the next month to find a way to ‘cross-license’ with Samsung to end the US case… before Apple’s face is more egg covered.

    If this had been a year or two ago, I would have no doubt that this would be the first step in Apple starting a new racketeering campaign to cow other handset suppliers. Things have changed, though. Barnes and Noble did a good job of damaging MS’ use of this strategy when they published the bogus patents that MS was using. After the going over through Groklaw, I doubt any of them would survive re-examination, even by the USPTO. Apple made a huge mistake by being very public with the ‘IP’ it was using, and their patents look every bit as bogus. Although re-examinations cost money, each patent lost runs the risk of more cultmembers waking up to the fact that Apple is only image, not innovation.

    My bet would be that at least a couple of people at Apple are realizing that this is a fight they can’t win, so they’d better end it and the publicity as quietly as possible.

    Michael Reply:

    I can’t see the traditional Apple as ever considering any sort of compromise, especially when the deal is spun as ‘cross-licensing’… which would mean admission that another company has anything new that Apple didn’t ‘invent’ (i.e. copy from someone else and then take credit for).

    So you think Apple invented BSD? Apple invented CUPS in your world? Apple created WebKit by itself – without using the KTML base? You think Apple made Apache? Or maybe you just think Apple has claimed to have invented all of these things… even though they make it very clear this is *not* the case?
    No: the fact is you are just making things up about Apple. Apple does plenty wrong. Apple makes many bad choices. Why do you feel the need to invent wrong doing by Apple to try to back Roy’s cult-biases?

    If this had been a year or two ago, I would have no doubt that this would be the first step in Apple starting a new racketeering campaign to cow other handset suppliers.

    Ah, the old evidence by "I do not doubt it" method. Useless and meaningless. Apple tried to work things out with Samsung before the lawsuits got silly. Samsung refused. Samsung is the one who insisted they had some right to Apple’s designs and work… but you want to twist it so that Apple is the bad guy for *defending* themselves against Samsung’s aggression. This is not honest of you.

    My bet would be that at least a couple of people at Apple are realizing that this is a fight they can’t win, so they’d better end it and the publicity as quietly as possible.

    The deal Apple recently made is private – but most sources are saying it is likely a win for Apple. Really, though, since we do not know the details, we do not know.

What Else is New


  1. Software Patents Trickle in After § 101/Alice, But Courts Would Not Honour Them Anyway

    The dawn of § 101/Alice, which in principle eliminates almost every software patent, means that applicants find themselves having to utilise loopholes to fool examiners, but that's unlikely to impress judges (if they ever come to assessing these patents)



  2. In Aatrix v Green Shades the Court is Not Tolerating Software Patents But Merely Inquires/Wonders Whether the Patents at Hand Are Abstract

    Aatrix alleges patent infringement by Green Shades, but whether the patents at hand are abstract or not remains to be seen; this is not what patent maximalists claim it to be ("A Valentine for Software Patent Owners" or "valentine for patentee")



  3. An Indoctrinated Minority is Maintaining the Illusion That Patent Policy is to Blame for All or Most Problems of the United States

    The zealots who want to patent everything under the Sun and sue everyone under the Sun blame nations in the east (where the Sun rises) for all their misfortunes; this has reached somewhat ludicrous levels



  4. Berkheimer Decision is Still Being Spun by the Anti-Section 101/Alice Lobby

    12 days after Berkheimer v HP Inc. the patent maximalists continue to paint this decision as a game changer with regards to patent scope; the reality, however, is that this decision will soon be forgotten about and will have no substantial effect on either PTAB or Alice (because it's about neither of these)



  5. Academic Patent Immunity is Laughable and Academics Are Influenced by Corporate Money (for Steering Patent Agenda)

    Universities appear to have become battlegrounds in the war between practicing entities and a bunch of parasites who make a living out of litigation and patent bubbles



  6. UPC Optimism Languishes Even Among Paid UPC Propagandists Such as IAM

    Even voices which are attempting to give UPC momentum that it clearly lacks admit that things aren't looking well; the UK is not ratifying and Germany make take years to look into constitutional barriers



  7. Bejin Bieneman Props Up the Disgraced Randall Rader for Litigation Agenda

    Randall Rader keeps hanging out with the litigation 'industry' -- the very same 'industry' which he served in a closeted fashion when he was Chief Judge of the Federal Circuit (and vocal proponent of software patents, patent trolls and so on)



  8. With Stambler v Mastercard, Patent Maximalists Are Hoping to Prop Up Software Patents and Damage PTAB

    The patent 'industry' is hoping to persuade the highest US court to weaken the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), for PTAB is making patent lawsuits a lot harder and raises the threshold for patent eligibility



  9. Apple Discovers That Its Patent Disputes Are a Losing Battle Which Only Lawyers Win (Profit From)

    By pouring a lot of money and energy into the 'litigation card' Apple lost focus and it's also losing some key cases, as its patents are simply not strong enough



  10. The Patent Microcosm Takes Berkheimer v HP Out of Context to Pretend PTAB Disregards Fact-Finding Process

    In view or in light of a recent decision (excerpt above), patent maximalists who are afraid of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) try to paint it as inherently unjust and uncaring for facts



  11. Microsoft Has Left RPX, But RPX Now Pays a Microsoft Patent Troll, Intellectual Ventures

    The patent/litigation arms race keeps getting a little more complicated, as the 'arms' are being passed around to new and old entities that do nothing but shake-downs



  12. UPC Has Done Nothing for Europe Except Destruction of the EPO and Imminent Layoffs Due to Lack of Applications and Lowered Value of European Patents

    The Unified Patent Court (UPC) is merely a distant dream or a fantasy for litigators; to everyone else the UPC lobby has done nothing but damage, including potentially irreparable damage to the European Patent Office, which is declining very sharply



  13. Links 17/2/2018: Mesa 17.3.4, Wine 3.2, Go 1.10

    Links for the day



  14. Patent Trolls Are Thwarted by Judges, But Patent Lawyers View Them as a 'Business' Opportunity

    Patent lawyers are salivating over the idea that trolls may be coming to their state/s; owing to courts and the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) other trolls' software patents get invalidated



  15. Microsoft's Patent Moves: Dominion Harbor, Intellectual Ventures, Intellectual Discovery, NEC and Uber

    A look at some of the latest moves and twists, as patents change hands and there are still signs of Microsoft's 'hidden hand'



  16. Links 15/2/2018: GNOME 3.28 Beta, Rust 1.24

    Links for the day



  17. Bavarian State Parliament Has Upcoming Debate About Issues Which Can Thwart UPC for Good

    An upcoming debate about Battistelli's attacks on the EPO Boards of Appeal will open an old can of worms, which serves to show why UPC is a non-starter



  18. The EPO is Being Destroyed and There's Nothing Left to Replace It Except National Patent Offices

    It looks like Battistelli is setting up the European Patent Office (EPO) for mass layoffs; in fact, it looks as though he is so certain that the UPC will materialise that he obsesses over "validation" for mass litigation worldwide, departing from a "model office" that used to lead the world in terms of patent quality and workers' welfare/conditions



  19. IBM is Getting Desperate and Now Suing Microsoft Over Lost Staff, Not Just Suing Everyone Using Patents

    IBM's policy when it comes to patents, not to mention its alignment with patent extremists, gives room for thought if not deep concern; the company rapidly becomes more and more like a troll



  20. In Microsoft's Lawsuit Against Corel the Only Winner is the Lawyers

    The outcome of the old Microsoft v Corel lawsuit reaffirms a trend; companies with deep pockets harass their competitors, knowing that the legal bills are more cumbersome to the defendants; there's a similar example today in Cisco v Arista Networks



  21. The Latest Lies About Unitary Patent (UPC) and the EPO

    Lobbying defies facts; we are once again seeing some easily-debunked talking points from those who stand to benefit from the UPC and mass litigation



  22. Speech Deficit and No Freedom of Association at the EPO

    True information cannot be disseminated at the EPO and justice too is beyond elusive; this poses a threat to the EPO's future, not only to its already-damaged reputation



  23. No, Britain is Not Ratifying 'Unitary' Anything, But Team UPC Insinuates It Will (Desperate Effort to Affect Tomorrow's Outcome)

    Contrary to several misleading headlines from Bristows (in its blog and others'), the UPC isn't happening and isn't coming to the UK; it all amounts to lobbying (by setting false expectations)



  24. The EPO's Paid Promotion of Software Patents Gets Patent Maximalists All Excited and Emboldened

    The software patents advocacy from Battistelli (and his cohorts) isn't just a spit in the face of European Parliament but also the EPC; but patent scope seems to no longer exist or matter under his watch, as all he cares about is granting as many patents as possible, irrespective of real quality/legitimacy/merit



  25. Andrei Iancu Begins His USPTO Career While Former USPTO Director (and Now Paid Lobbyist) Keeps Meddling in Office Affairs

    The USPTO, which is supposed to be a government branch (loosely speaking) is being lobbied by former officials, who are now being paid by private corporations to help influence and shape policies; this damages the image of the Office and harms its independence from corporate influence



  26. Links 14/2/2018: Atom 1.24, OSI Joins UNESCO

    Links for the day



  27. The EPO Now Censors the Central Staff Committee Like It Used to Censor SUEPO

    The EPO's Central Staff Committee (CSC) is now being treated as poorly as SUEPO several years ago (when it was threatened to remove publications from its site or face severe action)



  28. Microsoft-Connected Patent Trolls, Xerox, and Andrei Iancu

    A roundup of news pertaining to Microsoft-connected entities and their patent activity this month; Director Iancu is only loosely connected to one of them (he fought against it)



  29. The Campaign to Subvert the US Patent Office by Misrepresenting Its Successes

    Figureheads of the patent microcosm (firms that profit from patent chaos) are still meddling in affairs which they intentionally mis-portray, conflating innovation with number of patents and so on



  30. Almost All Patent Lawsuits in China Are Filed by the Chinese, But IAM (Cherry) Picks the Exception

    China's patent office (SIPO) is a pretty one-sided office where Mandarin patents get filed primarily by local firms and lawsuits too are filed by local firms; IAM, however, found a "man bites dog" slant


CoPilotCo

RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

CoPilotCo

Recent Posts