Bonum Certa Men Certa

Bogus Patents Which Oughtn't Have Been Granted Make Products Deliberately Worse, Reducing Innovation and Worsening Customers' Experience

Marco Cassia patent
EP2460270 by Marco Cassia (warning: epo.org link)



Summary: How shallow patents -- or patent applications that no patent office should be accepting -- turn out to be at the core of multi-billion-dollar cases/lawsuits, with potentially a billion people impacted (their products made worse to work around such questionable patents)

IN OUR previous post we mentioned how the EPO had begun feeding patent trolls in the same way the USPTO did for a number of decades. Qualcomm is a poorly-managed aging company in a state of decadence, so it nowadays resorts to patents more than anything, even dubious European Patents (EPs), granted by the EPO.



Florian Müller has been keeping a close eye on legal filings from Qualcomm, especially earlier this year. He more or less understands the underlying issues, having spoken to some of the people involved and also glanced at the underlying patents. "Very long (by local standards) Qualcomm v. Apple patent trial just finished," he wrote some days ago. "Stuff for more than one blog post: infringement, validity, antitrust, licenses to contract manufacturers... By far their most interesting court fight to date."

The CCIA's (Computer & Communications Industry Association) Joshua Landau weighed in by saying: "The FRAND obligation means you negotiate a license with *anyone* who asks, not “anyone but your competitors.” This shouldn’t be controversial-even Qualcomm has argued that when they were in the position of wanting a license."

"Qualcomm [is] presently asserting 13 patents against Apple in Germany," Müller noted. "Until today‘s trial, „only“ 10 were known, including the one the court in Munich told me about yesterday."

Müller, Landau said, "beat me to it (and beat our press release as well), but yeah, FRAND means FRAND - you have to be willing to license anyone who asks for a license. Qualcomm even agrees with this principle—when they’re the ones who want a license."

Müller already wrote a number of posts about it -- ones that we took stock of last week. He separately took note of another FRAND case: "Huawei v. Samsung: no deal. Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Kandis A. Westmore: Case did not settle. Settlement Conference held on 9/17/2018. Total Time in Court: 4 hours 17 minutes..."

But focusing on the main case in question (one which impacts Android/Linux as well), Müller said that "[i]ndustry bodies @actonline and @ccianet support @FTC's motion to require #Qualcomm to license SEPs to rival chipset makers," basically citing a disgraced Microsoft front group which pretends to represent small businesses. He wrote a blog post about it and assured me that "I never said they represented me. I just agree selectively..."

Here's what's happening in a nutshell:

It's a busy September on the FRAND front...

As I reported on the first of the month, the Federal Trade Commission brought a motion for partial summary judgment that may open up the wireless chipset market--by reminding Qualcomm of its self-imposed obligation to license rival chipset makers--even prior to the big antitrust trial in the Northern District of California.

It's odd that a mere reminder would be a potential game-changer, but that's the way it is because of Qualcomm's refusal to live up to the FRAND promise.


Disturbing it was to then see CCIA liaising with a Microsoft AstroTurfing group:

Yesterday, CCIA and ACT filed an amicus brief in the FTC’s case against Qualcomm in the Northern District of California. As explained in the brief, the FRAND obligation which patent owners voluntarily agree to when they participate in the development of a standard requires the owners of standard-essential patents to license their patents on “fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory terms.” And the “non-discriminatory” portion of that obligation means precisely what it states—that the patent owner may not discriminate amongst willing licensees, but has to license anyone who wants a license.


Why would CCIA wish to associate with ACT? We could expect this perhaps 7 years ago when CCIA did all sorts of questionable things, but why now? Why again?

"Trolling with junk patents works best in Germany," Müller wrote later. "With respect to injunctions, worse than the Eastern District of Texas."

Something like the UPC would put that 'on steroids' if it was ever to materialise, further broadening scope of injunctions. The patent maximalists deny that a problem even exists in that regard.

As it turns out, the European Patent in question may in fact be bunk: [via]

Yesterday's Qualcomm v. Apple trial took twice as long as the average Mannheim patent trial. In fact, the ventilation system was switched off in the late afternoon, so for the last hour, two doors had to be kept open. The courtrooms at the Mannheim Regional Court, Europe's leading venue for wireless patents, are famously windowless.

Presiding Judge Dr. Holger Kircher forthcomingly stated at the outset that this case was, in my words, too close to call (unlike the one that Qualcomm agreed to stay in June), thus the court had to elaborate on all our of Apple's defenses: non-infringement, invalidity (which German district courts don't determine, but they can and often do stay cases pending a parallel nullity or revocation proceeding in another forum), abusive conduct (antitrust), and licensing (through one or more contract manufacturers). I'll address the first two--the traditional defenses to patent infringement--in this post, and the affirmative defenses (the remaining two) in a subsequent post since there's an abundance of interesting things to report and comment on.

The patent-in-suit, EP2460270 on a "switch with improved biasing" ("biasing" in this context basically meaning that one voltage gets to control another), is not standard-essential. Essentiality hasn't been alleged by any party to the German Qualcomm v. Apple cases that have been heard so far. Nor is it related to wireless baseband processors: it's a general circuity patent covering a type of switch. It was mentioned during yesterday's trial that the chip allegedly infringing on the patent is supplied to Apple by Avago/Broadcom. But all of the accused devices come with an Intel baseband chip, a fact that will be relevant to the antitrust part of the next post.


Another sore eye for patent quality at the EPO? As Landau put it: "An Expert Opinion from the Swedish Patent Office says that Qualcomm's Patent used to Sue Apple Should be Invalidated..."

It cites an Apple proponents' site, which in turn cites Müller and says: "Yesterday's Qualcomm v. Apple trial took place in the Mannheim Regional Court, Europe's leading venue for wireless patents. The trial took twice as long as the average Mannheim patent trial, reports Florian Mueller. Mueller described the Apple v. Qualcomm case the commercially biggest patent-related dispute ever and could be truly seen as the World Series of IP cases. Apple is trying to invalidate Qualcomm's patent titled "Switch with Improved Biasing" in this Mannheim case based on an expert opinion from Sweden."

Apple too has been granted bogus European Patents, based on reliable sources of ours. It's somewhat of a crisis. Another new post from Müller says: [via]

This is my second post on the Qualcomm v. Apple patent infringement trial held by the Mannheim Regional Court yesterday. In the previous post I reported on the alleged (non-)infringement and (in)validity of the patent-in-suit, EP2460270 on a "switch with improved biasing". While the case is too close to call, this patent assertion may fail on the merits just like the first one that went to trial in Mannheim. But the court might also, contrary to what the non-asserted independent claim 16 implies for claim construction purposes and despite a finding by the Swedish patent office that the patent lacks a sufficient inventive step over prior art presented by Apple, hold Apple liable for infringement and decline to stay the case pending a parallel nullity action. In that case, Apple's affirmative defenses--antitrust and licensing--will be outcome-determinative at least with respect to the availability of injunctive relief.

For a long time, it was hard to fend off even standard-essential patent injunctions in Germany on antitrust grounds (with or without a FRAND commitment, which German courts wouldn't deem enforceable by third-party beneficiaries anyway). It was arguably hardest in Presiding Judge Dr. Kircher's court. The situation improved after the Court of Justice of the EU ruling in Huawei v. ZTE; in a way, it already got a little bit better after the European Commission took action against Samsung and Motorola. But very regrettably, the thinking of German patent judges is still, by and large, that antitrust defenses are just part of a throw-in-the-kitchen-sink tactic of infringers.

The patents Qualcomm is asserting in Germany--at least the ones that have been discussed in hearings or trials--aren't standard-essential, which ups the ante for Apple's antitrust defense. However, the fact that Qualcomm's conduct has been deemed anticompetitive by competition enforcers in multiple jurisdictions ("Antitrust Grand Slam").


Last but not least is this post about Apple's workaround (around the patents):

Yesterday the Munich I Regional Court held a six-hour (including breaks, though) trial on Qualcomm's eight lawsuits asserting four different search user interface patents against Apple's Spotlight search, with two lawsuits per patents targeting a total of three different Apple entities. A first hearing had been held in early May.

That part of the wide-ranging, earth-spanning, multifaceted Apple-Qualcomm dispute is, however, strategically so unimportant that it's not worth multiple posts or anything. That set of eight cases is a total waste of court and party resources--sort of a tempest in a teacup--as these Munich Spotlight cases have been defanged in three important ways...


This is no doubt useful for patent law firms, especially German or Germany-based ones, but who else does that serve? All these ruinous lawsuits already contribute to deliberate exacerbations in product development. And based on what? Bogus patents that should never have been granted in the first place?

Recent Techrights' Posts

The Same People Who Attacked Richard Stallman (RMS) Are Attacking Daniel Pocock to Discourage People From Listening to His Information
Pocock is being demonised for the same reasons and by the same people who attack RMS
We Are Safe in a Modern "Tech" Society, Right?
People are safer if they control their own computing
The Way Things Are Going, They May Soon Stop Saying "Web Address" and Instead Say "Chrome Address"
The Web isn't built or based around open Web standards anymore. It's centered around user-agent.
Microsoft as a Golden Cage
"I was laid off by Microsoft and can't find a job. I'm weeks away from giving up my apartment and moving across the country to live with family."
Weekend Discussion About How IBM's Bluewashing of Red Hat Will Cause "Enshittification" for Users
"I worked at a software company that was acquired by IBM so I knew it was game over for RedHat the day they were acquired"
Brett Wilson LLP Getting Sued by Its Very Own Clients, a Legal Story That Has Made the Mainstream News (Law360)
Law360 or Law.com are about as mainstream as one can get in that "sector" (litigation 'industry')
Lucas Nussbaum & Debian pregnancy cluster
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
 
Vincent Danjean (not INTERPOL), Claire Bardel & Debian pregnancy cluster
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
Christmas lynchings: Martin Krafft (madduck), Penny Leach (mjollnir) & Debian pregnancy cluster
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
Gemini Links 13/10/2025: Birthdays and "Committee Unable to Contact Nobel Prize Winner"
Links for the day
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Sunday, October 12, 2025
IRC logs for Sunday, October 12, 2025
Your Typical Anti-Richard Stallman (RMS) Cancellist
"About the RMS cancellation"
Richard Stallman (RMS) Has Announced His Talk in Rome Less Than 20 Hours in Advance (and on a Sunday)
Why did he wait until the night before?
GNU Tools Cauldron Event in Portugal: Videos Now Available via Invidious
Go have a look
Slopwatch: GNU/Linux Sites That Became Slopfarms and Spamfarms
The Web is a mess and "Linux" or "Ubuntu" sites became part of the problem
Richard Stallman's Talk 25 Hours Away, Aula Magna Palazzo del Rettorato (CU001), Sapienza Università di Roma (Piazzale Aldo Moro, 5)
The talk is 25 hours away and we see some QR code for it
Gemini Links 12/10/2025: Watches, the Depression of 2026, Gamboling with Odds
Links for the day
Links 12/10/2025: 'False' DMCA Claims and Slop Facing Perils Again (the Hype Wears Off)
Links for the day
Microsoft Has Just Lost Privacy Case in Austria and Its Latest Moves Make a Complete Ban Seem Imperative
Microsoft is not a software company, it's a spying agency that uses software to collect data
The Register MS: Microsoft is the Security Expert, Not the Prime Culprit, So Buy More Microsoft
This front page feature is devoid of any actual substance, it's just Microsoft copypasta
Paris 'Love Nest' & Debian Outreachy: from Lycée Lakanal to ENS Cachan, Cr@ns, nepotism
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
Stefano Zacchiroli (Zack) & Debian pregnancy cluster
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
Gemini Links 12/10/2025: "Palm Computering", Further Exploration of Slide Rules, and Key Takeaways from The Well-Grounded Rubyist
Links for the day
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Saturday, October 11, 2025
IRC logs for Saturday, October 11, 2025
Tomorrow: Founder of the Free Software Foundation and of GNU/Linux, Richard Stallman, Speaks in Roma (Rome), Italy at 4PM
GNU/Linux is more important than ever in this dystopian world
Microsoft and Apple Are Rare Topics in Geminispace
in Geminispace it's rather safe to assume everyone is into BSD, GNU/Linux, and sometimes retro
Qualcomm and Manchester United Appear to Have Dumped Microsoft (Qualcomm Now Invests More in Linux, Apparently)
It's a relief to no longer see Microsoft logos and brands on a local football club's gear (I'm not a Manchester United fan, but not a foe either)
As Guest of Honour in Rome, Founder of the Free Software Foundation to Speak ("Distinguished Lecture") After Introduction by Leonardo Querzoni
Happy hacking...
All Things Open is Proprietary
The OSI has become a front group of proprietary software openwashers, led and sponsored by proprietary giants
When Microsoft Lays Off Lots of Workers They Say It "Invests in AI" (a Lie), Now It's "Reshuffles" or "Microsoft Tightens"
Microsoft "news" by bots
"I saw Richard Stallman give a talk in the mid 80s, which began my fear and loathing of software patents" and "Richard Stallman was always right."
"By betraying the legacy of our ancestors, we’ve set ourselves on a path toward self-destruction — moral, intellectual, economic, and ultimately biological."
There Were Several Waves of Microsoft Shanghai Layoffs in 2025, Western Media Continues to Turn a Blind Eye to Chinese Layoffs of an Epic Scale
Sometimes select Taiwanese news sites (published in English) or automated translations are all we have
Brett Wilson LLP Spreads Trumpism to the United Kingdom, Looking to Profit From 'Legal Colonialism' (Overriding Sovereignty)
There's growing recognition of this conundrum worldwide
The Demise of Shopping in Person
In a world like this, how valued is the customer?
This Past Friday, "Nearly 700 People Came to Listen to RMS!" (Richard Stallman)
"Nearly 700 people came to listen to RMS!"
Distinguished Lecture by Richard Stallman This Coming Monday in Rome
After "Free software, Crucial for Freedom in a Digital World"
Slopwatch: UbuntuPIT Churning Out Plagiarism and the Slopfarm LinuxSecurity Turns to Pseudonyms
Our hunch is, UbuntuPIT will sooner or later realise that this toxic approach is just harming UbuntuPIT and tainting the reputation of past articles
The Lawsuit by Clients of Brett Wilson LLP Against Brett Wilson LLP is Officially On, It is Progressing, The 'Experts' Pick Outside Law Firms (RPC and Mills & Reeve) to Spare Them From Litigants in Person
So it is probably quite potent
Gemini Links 11/10/2025: Nyctography, Gerrymandering, and Lurking
Links for the day
The 'Culture Wars' in Free Software Have Gone Out of Control
Social control media amplifies such utterly infantile discourse
Teaser: To Compensate for the Fact Our Clients Are Terrible Human Beings Who Strangle Women (While on Microsoft's Payroll) and We Get Paid by Mystery Parties We Bombard You and Your Wife With Almost 10 Kilograms of Legal Papers
If you can't win an argument, then drown the other side with papers?
Links 11/10/2025: World Mental Health Day 2025, Another European Legal Defeat for Microsoft 360
Links for the day
MIT Technology Review is Part-Time SPAMfarm of Billionaires and Mega-Corporations
Does MIT operate its own "b2b" SPAMfarm?
Open Source Initiative Executive Director Leaves, Replacement Sought by Monopolists, Not the Community or OSI Members
Serves to show who runs this show...
Links 11/10/2025: China-US Tensions Grow Again, "Hey Hi" More Widely Recognised as Bubble Made of Capital That Doesn't Exist
Links for the day
Now Confirmed in Western Media: Microsoft Azure Layoffs This Month
Affirmed by more sources moments ago
Peter O'Callaghan QC represented grandparents, Westernport Hotel, at Liquor Royal Commission
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
Either The Register MS Divests From FOSS Coverage or Liam Proven is on Long Holiday
Publishers perish when their audience loses trust in them
Microsoft Cancelling Another Datacentre is a Sign of Financial Trouble and Lack of Growth
The debt continues to grow
Gemini Links 11/10/2025: An Evening at the Fair and Fast Fourier Friday
Links for the day
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Friday, October 10, 2025
IRC logs for Friday, October 10, 2025