HTC sues Apple over everything
gigaom.com
gigaom.com
Yes, they have lots of fish to fry right now, but if they can spend time arguing about incandescent light bulbs [1], surely there must be some time on the legislature to sort this mess out? The whole thing has turned from skirmish into full-on war in less than a couple of years. I can't imagine how much worse it's going to get.
Why doesn't Google take responsibility of all these lawsuits? Afterall HTC, Samsung, LG and all other device makers are having to cough up money because they adopted android.
Google should lead the charge here and not leave it to its partners to fight it out.
Which of these you say are related to hardware look and feel?
If they want patent indemnity, let them go to Microsoft, which provides patent indemnification to WP7 in exchange of $15 or so of licensing fees. (Same with desktop Windows vs. Linux).
Of course going with Microsoft is an option but all these partners have been there done that. So they know better. :)
I don't see anything dishonest about it. It was given away for free after all and the OEMs software usually sucks as a universal rule. They leveraged the Android marketplace and ecosystem, Maps etc.
>Of course going with Microsoft is an option but all these partners have been there done that. So they know better. :)
I don't know what that snark means, but the meme keeps getting repeated. OEMs have been making rich profits all along selling PCs (and from crippling them with useless software that makes them even more money, causing people to blame Windows for their faults). It's not as if Microsoft bought Dell and then clobbered the other OEMs(like Google seems to be in real danger of doing with Motorola).
WP7 looks much more competitive though. I have Focus. Love it.
Placing the blame on Congress generally spreads the incorrect belief that all legislators and both parties are responsible for criminally stupid stuff like this. They're not.
That's the way Congress loves to roll: they won't explicitly ban something they don't like (so they can save face with their constituents), but they'll do everything they can to make it untenable.
There are many, many things in the DMCA that I disagree with, but it also has huge benefits and is responsible for making possible many sites you use every day, such as Youtube. The safe harbor exemptions in the DMCA make it possible for a service provider to host user content without worrying about being crushed under copyright claims; if you deal with DMCA takedowns when they come in, you're A-OK. Likewise, the DMCA made clear many elements of fair-use around reverse-engineering, but we don't ever hear about this because the same clauses also make many other things illegal.
The DMCA is really a mixed bag. I'd love to see most of it go away, as it's personally impacted me on many occasions, but it also has good -- essential, many would say -- parts.
From a non-techy perspective, nothing's really happening. Barring any Samsung Galaxy fans in Europe who saw the Tab delayed a few weeks. The practical impact of these sorts of things isn't immediate or obvious at all.
And from the perspective of an IP professional, or someone who regularly follows IP happenings, nothing notably new is happening. These lawsuits have been lobbed back and forth from tech companies in hot industry segments for decades now. It heats up in highly competitive markets, particularly those enjoying rapid innovation simply because the IP concerns aren't well settled. Consider the earlier days of the web or the biopharma industry not so long ago. There was no shortage of IP gamesmanship then.
The only thing particularly new here, is the level of coverage the tech press is giving the issue. Not least of all because "Apple", "Google" and "patent" are some of the most effective traffic generating keywords.
None of this is to say the state of affairs is good, or healthy. I'm just saying that if you're not a tech enthusiast with little context for IP actions, there's really no reason you'd see the current smartphone situation as being particularly new, different or dangerous.
Look at how much Taiwanese money will be spent on U.S. lawyers. Yeah, Apple has to spend money too, but it's not leaving the country. HTC's money is new money to the country.
Joking aside, it would be a stupid and counterproductive policy, but probably better than what's happening. At least it would be a plan instead of a slow decline.
You find it unfathomable that Congress, a body largely composed of lawyers, is not reacting to one of the greatest stimulus packages for lawyers?
I would find it unfathomable if they changed the status quo.
However, maybe the patent wars (like this HTC v. Apple one) will climb to such heights of absurdity that the economy actually will be affected. Then Congress (or someone) might have to take notice.
1. Large companies, as a whole, like them. So Republicans like them;
2. Trial lawyers definitely like them (software patents are the Lawyer Full Employment Act in all but name). Many Congressmen are lawyers. The Democratic Party is basically the political wing of the American Bar Association (eg it's Democrats who oppose tort reform of any kind) so Democrats like patents too;
3. They're currently being wielded by largely American companies. If American companies were seen as being victimized by foreign companies it would be a totally different political landscape; and
4. America is such a large market that it affects both local and foreign companies anyway so there is limited benefit to setting up shop elsewhere.
Personally I think (3) and (4) are the key to getting Congress to do something but I suspect that by the time either or both happen, it'll be far too late to fix.
America, as a whole, seems beholden to "old world thinking" when it comes to intellectual property. Just look at the mess of lawsuits by the RIAA/MPAA (being tantamount to legalized extortion), copyright treaties negotiated in secret that want to put copyright infringement on the same level as terrorism, the Obama administration infested with ex-RIAA lawyers and so on.
The collective ignorance with respect to IP by the courts, the executive branch, the legislature and most people as a whole is staggering and until that changes don't expect much to change.
On the other hand, if America's growth stays anemic while Asia (and to a lesser extent South America) keep growing (which seems likely), (4) will take care of itself.
Nobody is going to 'win' this war. Everyone who participates will be a loser, and at this point, nobody can afford not to participate.
If there aren't some serious cease-fires real soon, this is going to be a bloody battle.
In case anyone isn't following along: Imagine a scenario where every major piece of electronics equipment has been banned from sale in the United States.
This is an existential crisis for the smaller companies, but it's simply raising the stakes a little bit for Apple, who are making enough profit to afford endless litigation.
The whole contest has numerous immediate benefits for Apple. Since they're making the lion's share of the money in smartphones, they win simply by raising the table stakes (i.e. litigation costs and court awards), which eat up a disproportionate share of their competitors' profits. It's not outrageous to think that their lawsuits pressured unprofitable Motorola to first threaten to sue other licencees and then sell to Google under extortionist conditions. I wouldn't be surprised if other struggling Android handset makers (LG?) moved to the fixed cost of Windows Phone 7 over the headache of Android-related litigation. Of course, the Motorola purchase incentivises profitable Android makers to hedge their bets on WP7, too.
In the end, I think that Apple will be pleased if the product of their litigation is not to drive Android out of the market, but to create a phone market much like the tablet market - the iPhone and then a mish-mash of odd looking (to the average consumer) competitors.
No, Apple cannot overlook the possibility that the import and sale of some of their own products is banned in the US. If that happened as a result of their litigious adventuring, they'd have some real explaining to do to big investors.
Look at what happened with Blackberry and NTP. The actual service (used heavily by the US Government and no doubt patent judges) came very close to being shut down. Probably someone gave the parties a good talking-to and forced the settlement. But in this case, a suspension on the sale of these particular shiny devices is not an existential issue for anyone except Apple's executives.
If anyone had the patent position to keep Apple out of the market, rest assured that they would have regardless of Apple's lawsuits.
No, I don't agree with that at all. The vast majority of all patents are never litigated and it's very rare that any large-budget manufacturer is actually kept out of a market as general as mobile touch-screen phones.
Normally patents are ignored, occasionally they're pooled or cross-licensed. Usually only trolls end up going as far as actually obtaining a suspension of sales and imports, but even then their goal is payment.
This is what makes Apple's decision to start a "real" patent war with HTC (and all Android makers by extension) so exceptional. Apple has as much to lose as anyone.
The court cases are usually just a way of changing the bargaining position.
What do you mean by this exactly?
Of course you can start a business. You just need to find a way to charge US customers from whereever you are (assuming that the credit card companies will block you if you ignore US lawsuits).
Or you just ignore the US market and target the rest of the world. Actually that's what already has partially happened in the banking/broker sector: Try to open a broker account at one of the European brokers and they'll very likely tell you that they don't want to have you as a customer because you are US citizen or resident (just happened to me some weeks ago). Of course the reason for the brokers aren't patents, but US regulations that would be too much of a hassle.
I just read these threads because of morbid fascination. I truly don't understand the american psyche, its sooo foreign to me, it almost appears blood thirsty.
What we need is someone with deep pockets to form a patent troll and actually block shipping products rather settle. This will force big companies to lobby congress to fix software patents.
If you tried this, you would probably fail!
The government (lobbied by big companies) will convince the courts to block your injunction and force you to settle. You know, "risking national security by ruining the economy" or something.
and previous disputes http://www.sparknotes.com/biography/edison/section4.rhtml
I for one welcome our new gadget-less future.
But when companies fight over patents, does't that mean that they are putting money on R&D that will eventually drive all the field forward in the middle term? even if at some cost on the short term... Apple and HTC are not /just/ patent trolls.
...I find my own argument hard to swallow, but i just thought i had to offer ONE counter point to one patent posts on HN :)