Macworld Forums: Apple sued in California over touch patent - Macworld Forums

Post your comments for Apple sued in California over touch patent here

THIS is whats wrong with our patent system. Is it truely impossible for more than one person to have similar ideas at one point or another? Seems to me that these guys are another Proview looking to cash in on apples success. And is they in fact did start working on a gesture based system for computers, wouldn't that have to use mac or pc APIs to make it to wrk. Seems like their product requires a computer to even be of value.

How can a company that formed in 2007 file for "Touch" patents that apply to trackpads and laptops that were using it BEFORE 2007? Why wait five years to drop the bomb? So wrong.

And why is there no lawsuit against Google, Microsoft and RIM? Those devices also use touch technology.

This what's wrong with our COURT system. This company was founded in January of 2007. Funny thing is the iPhone was announced in January 2007. Yes, the patent was issued in 1998, however, the patent basically describes ANY DEVICE with a touch interface and CPU.

"It has the same technical characteristics as portable system 101 but is based on a desktop computer with a touch-sensitive monitor"

What really gets me on these types of patent infringement claims is they wait until the market is flooded with devices using the technology. What our courts needs to realize is these late claims are merely a money making scheme. Yes I said scheme. These people are intentionally waiting until the market has too many devices to stop and then sue. Once they sue, if they win, they can potentially make billions on something they could have stopped years ago, in this case 5 years ago.

The patent system was designed to urge growth in innovation while protecting the little guy. In today's tech world, there are no little guys. You create a touch sensitive platform and actually put it out in a product, technology will inevitably build upon and improve upon the original and label it something else.

With this in mind, should this guy be sued by Palm (HP) because the Palm Pilot I had back in the day had a touch screen? Or nVidia be sued by them because they've had gestures with their nVidia drivers for quite a long time now?

The original patent holder was simply able to get a patent for something he pieced together from other peoples technology. The patent even acknowledges this. The courts need to see this when the complaint is registered and act appropriately. Then they need to charge the false accuser of malicious fraud or be counter sued for irreparable harm.

Additionally, they need to compensate each and every juror beyond what the court pays; at minimum the salary they're out of while in court. Start doing this and maybe people will stop wasting our time and money with these BS claims.

monospaced, on 23 April 2012 - 08:34 AM, said:

The patent was originally filed in 1997 and finalized in 1998. But your point is still valid!

The only reason Apple is being sued on every front is because they have lots and lots of money!
And the Patent System is broken. The only ones who benefit from these damn lawsuits are the GREEDY ASS LAWYERS!!!!!

What is with all the lawsuits lately? All these companies are just jealous because they can't make products as good as Apple, and now they want the money that they don't have.

This is why Apple is wise to hold on to some of it cash... to defend against the thieves who are technically incompetent to bring any idea to actual existence. Anyone can say he had the idea and go off to a patent office and file. They should sue the Phone Company for creating touch tone push button phones... after all they stole his idea 40 years before he had it.

Good to know the previous posters are in full possession of all the facts relevant to the case, and up on the latest patent law principles and precedents and their application to similar sets of facts.

The owner of intellectual property rights is no less entitled to compensation for violation of those rights than an owner of other types of property. Improper infringement of IP rights entitles their owners to damages, provided a lawsuit has been brought within the applicable statutory period or the party seeking damages has not otherwise improperly delayed seeking recovery for his or her loss to the alleged wrongdoer's detriment.

Bashing the lawyers, while perhaps the fashionable (and lazy) thing to do, relieves one of the obligation to think a little deeper about, e.g., the implications for innovation and how it might be stifled if those who spend the time and energy developing new technology can protect the value of that property.

Frivolous lawsuits can be and are dismissed regularly by courts, with, in many cases, damages and awards of attorneys fees levied against the party filing the action.

Sure, Apple has bottomless pockets. Heaven forfend if they actually did something wrong.

tsade, on 23 April 2012 - 11:33 AM, said:

The sentence comprising the third paragraph should read, Bashing the lawyers, while perhaps the fashionable (and lazy) thing to do, relieves one of the obligation to think a little deeper about, e.g., the implications for innovation and how it might be stifled if those who spend the time and energy developing new technology can't protect the value of that property.

tsade, on 23 April 2012 - 11:33 AM, said:

Many of your points are GREAT!

But what exactly are his "irreperable damages?" In what way did he actively seek to mitigate?

And, furthermore, what was he DOING with the marvelous technical innovations he patented?

We have an established history of case law that frowns, with every facial muscle available, when a party patents something and then appears to sit on it ando absolutely NOTHING with it. It certainly doesn't nullify, but it certainly serpuslu damages his case should he be seen to patent and then drop any development that leads to a tangible product.

LelandHendrix, on 23 April 2012 - 03:09 PM, said:

And therein lies the rub,right? How do you get the answers to your questions until the veracity of the allegations in the complaint and the validity of any defenses can be tested, and the extent of the plaintiff's damages, if any, can be determined, unless the litigation is allowed to proceed? Until the process runs its course, all the vilification of lawyers and the evils they allegedly do is just hot air.

The PowerBook 540c went on sale in May 1994. Buddy may have a problem if his 1997 application is not comprehensive, detailed, definitive and complete.

Cheers