Nokia sues Apple for infringement of multiple patents(nokia.com)
nokia.com
Nokia sues Apple for infringement of multiple patents
http://www.nokia.com/press/press-releases/showpressrelease?newsid=1349562
87 comments
It's going to be interesting to watch how Nokia squares up their Pro-Open Source message (see: maemo) with their IP enforcement strategies.
Nokia have of course every right to enforce their IP, but PR wise they look very lame for this move. The timing (just as Apple announces a record quarter) and the fact they clearly have failed to make a competitive product to the iPhone, just makes them look desperate.
Nokia have of course every right to enforce their IP, but PR wise they look very lame for this move. The timing (just as Apple announces a record quarter) and the fact they clearly have failed to make a competitive product to the iPhone, just makes them look desperate.
That's really beyond the pale, and probably even worse than the subject of this article.
Too bad that journalists in Finland can't write about these ...if they want to keep their job.
Nokia is too big a player in a small pond.
Nokia is too big a player in a small pond.
sent to [email protected] :
Dear Nokia,
For more than a decade I've been a loyal user of your products, pretty much every year or so I would upgrade my phone to your latest model.
Today that comes to an end.
My reason is that I think that companies should compete on quality and price, not to use software patents as a means of stifling competition.
Software Patents were a mistake when they were granted to begin with, to see the proud company that Nokia once was stoop to the use of the dirtiest weapons in business is really sad.
I realize that my voice hardly counts in issues like this, but I figured that by letting you know, you are aware that there is another price attached to this lawsuit.
best regards,
Dear Nokia,
For more than a decade I've been a loyal user of your products, pretty much every year or so I would upgrade my phone to your latest model.
Today that comes to an end.
My reason is that I think that companies should compete on quality and price, not to use software patents as a means of stifling competition.
Software Patents were a mistake when they were granted to begin with, to see the proud company that Nokia once was stoop to the use of the dirtiest weapons in business is really sad.
I realize that my voice hardly counts in issues like this, but I figured that by letting you know, you are aware that there is another price attached to this lawsuit.
best regards,
Jacques MattheijI think most of those patents actually concern hardware.
Proof please ?
From the press release:
The ten patents in suit relate to technologies fundamental to making devices which are compatible with one or more of the GSM, UMTS (3G WCDMA) and wireless LAN standards. The patents cover wireless data, speech coding, security and encryption and are infringed by all Apple iPhone models shipped since the iPhone was introduced in 2007.
--
So these are likely to be more hardware related. That doesn't make the claims any more valid, but I don't think that these will have many (any?) software claims.
The ten patents in suit relate to technologies fundamental to making devices which are compatible with one or more of the GSM, UMTS (3G WCDMA) and wireless LAN standards. The patents cover wireless data, speech coding, security and encryption and are infringed by all Apple iPhone models shipped since the iPhone was introduced in 2007.
--
So these are likely to be more hardware related. That doesn't make the claims any more valid, but I don't think that these will have many (any?) software claims.
All of those are software related. The only hardware parts are cpus, radios and interfaces.
I'm pretty sure several of those patents covering "GSM, UMTS (3G WCDMA) and wireless LAN standards" refer to actual hardware.
Standards exist to ensure interoperability. In software you can't even copyright an interface, let alone that you should be able to get a patent on an element that is a standard of communications.
It is, pardon the pun, patent nonsense.
It is, pardon the pun, patent nonsense.
Well I'm all for seeing somebody beat Apple at their own patent game, but like somebody said in another comment, this is probably just going to result in a patent sharing agreement. As such I dont really see the need to get so worked up. Besides it would indeed be unfair to the other 40 or so companies which have signed with Nokia if Apple gets away with this.
If in a town 50 merchants pay the local mob to not have their windows broken do you think it is unfair for someone to not pay the mob ?
Software patents are just a tool to extort, not an incentive to innovate.
Software patents are just a tool to extort, not an incentive to innovate.
Okay look at it this way: I spent 40B euros digging a well to get water in my extremely parched village. I would prefer to be able to make some of that back by charging others to draw water from my well. What is wrong with that???
This is not like Nokia went and patented something that was already existing in the market and is trolling. They poured their own money into it, so why would they let a competitor, esp. a very succesful competitor use their tech for free???
This is not like Nokia went and patented something that was already existing in the market and is trolling. They poured their own money into it, so why would they let a competitor, esp. a very succesful competitor use their tech for free???
What tech would that be ?
The patents listed all contain stuff that seems to be pretty obvious when it comes to mobile communications.
Yes, you need encryption, thousands of manyears of work not done at Nokia preceded that. Yes, you will need GSM, which is unfortunately patent encumbered, but since there is no other option that makes any patents on that tech a simple matter of extortion.
WiFi ? How else will you connect to a lan from a mobile phone ?
Etc. If this is Nokias best shot at showing how they're going to 'compete' with Apple then they've just told us they don't think they can. What a total waste of a reputation.
It reminds me of the GIF patent.
The patents listed all contain stuff that seems to be pretty obvious when it comes to mobile communications.
Yes, you need encryption, thousands of manyears of work not done at Nokia preceded that. Yes, you will need GSM, which is unfortunately patent encumbered, but since there is no other option that makes any patents on that tech a simple matter of extortion.
WiFi ? How else will you connect to a lan from a mobile phone ?
Etc. If this is Nokias best shot at showing how they're going to 'compete' with Apple then they've just told us they don't think they can. What a total waste of a reputation.
It reminds me of the GIF patent.
I believe it is something to do with the core "GSM technologies and its evolution to UMTS / 3G WCDMA", an area where Nokia has indeed done a lot of original research.
That would be a chipset issue, apple does not make it's own G3/UMTS chipset, although there are some rumours that they have some custom mods.
Your analogy is flawed. It would be more like:
I spent 40B euros figuring out how to and and digging a well to get water to my parched village. I add a bucket, but the water is still kind of muddy. I'm the only well, though, so I do well enough.
Then someone comes along and digs a well a couple hundred feet away, adds a pumping system (so they can sell more water) and a filtration system (so the water is cleaner). Nobody wants my water anymore. So I'm about to go broke.
So of course, instead of making a better pumping and filtration system, I sue the guy making the better well. At least, that's Nokia's position.
I spent 40B euros figuring out how to and and digging a well to get water to my parched village. I add a bucket, but the water is still kind of muddy. I'm the only well, though, so I do well enough.
Then someone comes along and digs a well a couple hundred feet away, adds a pumping system (so they can sell more water) and a filtration system (so the water is cleaner). Nobody wants my water anymore. So I'm about to go broke.
So of course, instead of making a better pumping and filtration system, I sue the guy making the better well. At least, that's Nokia's position.
In the above post, the well represents the patented technology. He creates the technology (digs the well) and patents it (seeks to profit from it by monopolizing it's use).
In your analogy, you seem to be skipping the issue of patents entirely. Note that Apple did not go out and "dig it's own well" by developing something completely unrelated to GSM, UTMS, Wi-Fi, etc. Whether Nokia's claim turns out to be valid aside, it's undeniable that Apple is using the technology that Nokia is making the claim on. That is to say, they aren't suing over Apple developing "the better well", they're suing Apple for using their well without compensation.
In your analogy, you seem to be skipping the issue of patents entirely. Note that Apple did not go out and "dig it's own well" by developing something completely unrelated to GSM, UTMS, Wi-Fi, etc. Whether Nokia's claim turns out to be valid aside, it's undeniable that Apple is using the technology that Nokia is making the claim on. That is to say, they aren't suing over Apple developing "the better well", they're suing Apple for using their well without compensation.
Would you still write that letter if they were instead targeting RIM or some other manufacturer of phones?
Yes. I think that software patents are a severe problem and I vote with my feet when it comes to this kind of issue.
I'm sure my one-man-boycott isn't going to impress anybody but that's the sweep your own street argument working for you.
It's a variation on the 'if one percent fallacy', 'if everybody does it then it will make a difference'. And I'm sure that not everybody - or even a small percentage - will do this, after all the only time when it will make Nokia recant is if the loss in sales outweighs their potential gain in this suit.
But that doesn't matter to me. Point of principle. You do software patents, I might buy your stuff. You sue using software patents (and there seems to be some confusion about that, the non-software issues are dead obvious, the software issues should never have been granted or should have become common property the second Nokia started pushing for those things to be accepted as standards).
Nokia was one of the parties pushing hardest to allow software patents in the EU:
http://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/Software_patents
I'm sure my one-man-boycott isn't going to impress anybody but that's the sweep your own street argument working for you.
It's a variation on the 'if one percent fallacy', 'if everybody does it then it will make a difference'. And I'm sure that not everybody - or even a small percentage - will do this, after all the only time when it will make Nokia recant is if the loss in sales outweighs their potential gain in this suit.
But that doesn't matter to me. Point of principle. You do software patents, I might buy your stuff. You sue using software patents (and there seems to be some confusion about that, the non-software issues are dead obvious, the software issues should never have been granted or should have become common property the second Nokia started pushing for those things to be accepted as standards).
Nokia was one of the parties pushing hardest to allow software patents in the EU:
http://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/Software_patents
"Software Patents were a mistake..."
Have you seen some facts that this would be about software patents? I would guess it is a mixture of hardware and software, from the press release:
"The ten patents in suit relate to technologies fundamental to making devices which are compatible with one or more of the GSM, UMTS (3G WCDMA) and wireless LAN standards. The patents cover wireless data, speech coding, security and encryption..."
Have you seen some facts that this would be about software patents? I would guess it is a mixture of hardware and software, from the press release:
"The ten patents in suit relate to technologies fundamental to making devices which are compatible with one or more of the GSM, UMTS (3G WCDMA) and wireless LAN standards. The patents cover wireless data, speech coding, security and encryption..."
[deleted](1)
Doesn't Apple abuse patents too? In Job's original iPhone presentation, didn't he say something like "and we've patented the hell out of it"?
Unless you don't but Apple either, which makes sense.
Unless you don't but Apple either, which makes sense.
The system is broken. If a company had a successful product, and didn't "patent the hell out of it", others would get those patents, and sue it.
So personally, I don't blame companies for patenting. I do blame companies that sue.
But the system needs fixing.
So personally, I don't blame companies for patenting. I do blame companies that sue.
But the system needs fixing.
You like to have rules, but don't like them to be enforced?
No, I'd much rather not have the rules at all :/
With the rules setup how they currently are, it'd be irresponsible for a company such as Apple not to patent things incase they get sued.
I'd rather see that changed so that no one can get silly all-encompassing general patents, and certainly not software or UI patents.
With the rules setup how they currently are, it'd be irresponsible for a company such as Apple not to patent things incase they get sued.
I'd rather see that changed so that no one can get silly all-encompassing general patents, and certainly not software or UI patents.
What constitutes abuse? Is simply applying for and being granted a patent for something you've developed inherently abusive, or have they actually wielded their patents in an anti-competitive way? You'll note that they haven't sued Palm or Google over multi-touch gestures, in spite of a huge amount of press claiming they could and would.
I think Cisco even had a product named iPhone...
"We like competition because it makes us better, but we will not stand for companies infringing on our IP and we will use whatever weapons we have at our disposal."
Tim Cook, Apple COO, Jan 21 2009.
Tim Cook, Apple COO, Jan 21 2009.
Well, atleast Nokia has done quite a lot of research on that field, so its not just patent trolling.
Unfortunately, a lot of these patents are the overly broad variety. I wonder if this is just Nokia's attempt to get a cross licensing deal with Apple. The amount that was quoted ($200mil) is extremely low.
[deleted]
Ok, I just bought my last nokia phone.
Screw them and the horse they rode in on, this is just a bid of weakness. If you can't compete with your product line in fair ways then you should revamp your product line, not turn to your lawyers.
What a bunch of losers.
I've been using Nokia phones for the last decade, with a two week 'diversion' to Samsung (talk about bad firmware). Nokia has an 'ok' product but it could be a whole lot better, I'm as loyal as can be but software patents are a bad thing and using them like this is just plain dumb.
Bye Bye Nokia, you once were an outstanding company.
Screw them and the horse they rode in on, this is just a bid of weakness. If you can't compete with your product line in fair ways then you should revamp your product line, not turn to your lawyers.
What a bunch of losers.
I've been using Nokia phones for the last decade, with a two week 'diversion' to Samsung (talk about bad firmware). Nokia has an 'ok' product but it could be a whole lot better, I'm as loyal as can be but software patents are a bad thing and using them like this is just plain dumb.
Bye Bye Nokia, you once were an outstanding company.
If Nokia has innovated in the mobile communication area, why would it be wrong for them to use their intellectual property rights.
A separate question is if intellectual property is a good idea at all. But that is beyond the question at hand.
Patent trolls are just a bad idea, but in this case Nokia may have created a foundation that the Apple is building upon. Companies pay for licensing technology all the time. USB, Firewire, Bluetooth, ...
A separate question is if intellectual property is a good idea at all. But that is beyond the question at hand.
Patent trolls are just a bad idea, but in this case Nokia may have created a foundation that the Apple is building upon. Companies pay for licensing technology all the time. USB, Firewire, Bluetooth, ...
Eh. Apple has continually played the patent game to the detriment of others. I don't feel any particular animosity towards Nokia for playing the same game with Apple. With any luck, this will be another example of why our patent system is flawed and needs to be revamped.
When has Apple sued another company for patent infringement (not including countersuits)?
"Apple Inc. v. Atico International USA Inc. et al" looks like it would fit the bill (see http://news.justia.com/cases/featured/delaware/dedce/1:2008c... )
Apple has continually played the patent game to the detriment of others.
Such as when?
Such as when?
The main example on my mind was iPhone patents and how Palm had to tread carefully around them in order to make the Pre:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090121/1932143481.shtml
However, I'd be surprised if other examples didn't exist.
Note: When I said Apple "played the patent game" I wasn't specifically referring to filed lawsuits. The threat of a lawsuit is often enough.
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090121/1932143481.shtml
However, I'd be surprised if other examples didn't exist.
Note: When I said Apple "played the patent game" I wasn't specifically referring to filed lawsuits. The threat of a lawsuit is often enough.
Palm had to tread carefully around them in order to make the Pre
Only in the sense that an author has to "tread carefully" around ripping off another author's work. Clearly Apple's patents did not prevent the Pre or Android or any number of other devices from making it to market without apparent functional omissions. What exactly is the problem?
The threat of a lawsuit is often enough.
Enough for what? To prevent someone from violating your rights under law? Well, yeah. That's the way a lot of things work. Holding a patent does not strike me as inherently reprehensible.
Only in the sense that an author has to "tread carefully" around ripping off another author's work. Clearly Apple's patents did not prevent the Pre or Android or any number of other devices from making it to market without apparent functional omissions. What exactly is the problem?
The threat of a lawsuit is often enough.
Enough for what? To prevent someone from violating your rights under law? Well, yeah. That's the way a lot of things work. Holding a patent does not strike me as inherently reprehensible.
That's may be true.
But that does not give nokia a free pass to do this either.
But that does not give nokia a free pass to do this either.
Are they software patents? It's not clear from the press release.
"The ten patents in suit relate to technologies fundamental to making devices which are compatible with one or more of the GSM, UMTS (3G WCDMA) and wireless LAN standards. The patents cover wireless data, speech coding, security and encryption and are infringed by all Apple iPhone models shipped since the iPhone was introduced in 2007"
Pretty clear to me. Encoding, data, security and encryption are all software issues, not hardware issues.
Pretty clear to me. Encoding, data, security and encryption are all software issues, not hardware issues.
Actually all of those can be done at the hardware level, but I'm pretty sure that aint the way Apple is doing it, so yeah has to be software.
Software patents don't specifically patent software. They patent a machine implementation of an idea. The hardware you speak of needs some kind of control logic anyway. So it's covered either way.
I loved early nokia phones, but they seriously can't compete with the iPhone. The nokia N800 etc sounded great but are pretty disappointing.
What a sad thing for them to resort to.
What a sad thing for them to resort to.
N900 could be interesting in this regard.
Most of my disappointment with the N800 was in the operating system and UI. There was absolutely no support either. I don't think it even came with a manual. It looked like it had been cobbled together rather than lovingly thought out.
maemo looked interesting, but even the firmware update method was archaic and extremely over complex. From what I remember it only worked if you unplugged the usb cable and plugged it in at exactly the right point or something! (swear to god, this was in the README).
Maybe it's all changed now though.
maemo looked interesting, but even the firmware update method was archaic and extremely over complex. From what I remember it only worked if you unplugged the usb cable and plugged it in at exactly the right point or something! (swear to god, this was in the README).
Maybe it's all changed now though.
N900 is interesting in that it is both a tablet PC (or whatever term fits best) and a phone. One less device to carry.
I do not know re. if the UI experience has changed. I can see how N-series tablets can appeal to hackers who like to modify the software that is running on their device. From this POV having a full-fledged Linux on a mobile device is a plus. But N710/N800 was indeed less slick in terms of the user experience than Apple's devices.
I do not know re. if the UI experience has changed. I can see how N-series tablets can appeal to hackers who like to modify the software that is running on their device. From this POV having a full-fledged Linux on a mobile device is a plus. But N710/N800 was indeed less slick in terms of the user experience than Apple's devices.
If you can't beat them, sue them?
"The patents cover wireless data, speech coding, security and encryption and are infringed by all Apple iPhone models."
I would love to know exactly what they are suing for?
"The patents cover wireless data, speech coding, security and encryption and are infringed by all Apple iPhone models."
I would love to know exactly what they are suing for?
I was thinking exactly the same thing. Am I too pessimistic in thinking they're suing for a 'slice of the pie'?
Launching this lawsuit at a point where Apple stock is at an all-time high might not be a coincidence.
Yeah and apparently Apple stock fell after the announcement.
Isn't apple just as bad with itunes and the palm pre?
http://www.technewsworld.com/story/67615.html?wlc=1256230659
Google isn't immune either
http://phandroid.com/2009/09/25/cyanogen-gets-cd-from-google...
None of these companies are golden. Buy what works for you.
http://www.technewsworld.com/story/67615.html?wlc=1256230659
Google isn't immune either
http://phandroid.com/2009/09/25/cyanogen-gets-cd-from-google...
None of these companies are golden. Buy what works for you.
Well, Apple hasn't sued Palm for a patent violation and Palm is the one violating the USB IF's rules on device identification.
The release is not clear where the infringement is, but AFAIK the GSM compatibility is in the GSM modem.
I dont know if Apple is liable if the infringement is by the modem in the iPhone since Apple doesnt make the modem, they buy it from another company.
I dont know if Apple is liable if the infringement is by the modem in the iPhone since Apple doesnt make the modem, they buy it from another company.
What I don't get: the iPhone came out in, what, 2007? Why is Nokia only just now getting around to suing Apple over these patents?
Because they just realized they can't make something that will compete with the Iphone without violating apples patents ?
So they figure rather than to wait they should sue first, hope to get apples attention in a way they can't ignore and 'settle' for cross licensing. And so the madness continues.
Nokia should give up their software patents and simply make a stand instead of going out of their way to look like losers here.
They were one of the most r&d driven companies in the world after Xerox, the stuff they did was pretty groundbreaking, unfortunately in the field of software that allows you to take out patents. That should have never happened. Nokia was one of the parties lobbying the EU very hard to allow software patents:
http://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/Software_patents
Now you can see why.
So they figure rather than to wait they should sue first, hope to get apples attention in a way they can't ignore and 'settle' for cross licensing. And so the madness continues.
Nokia should give up their software patents and simply make a stand instead of going out of their way to look like losers here.
They were one of the most r&d driven companies in the world after Xerox, the stuff they did was pretty groundbreaking, unfortunately in the field of software that allows you to take out patents. That should have never happened. Nokia was one of the parties lobbying the EU very hard to allow software patents:
http://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/Software_patents
Now you can see why.
Maybe they were busy making products and trying to sell them? Maybe Apple's lawyers were stalling them and Nokia let it slide?
Repeating the bit about spending "EUR 40 billion in R&D during the last two decades" adds more weight to it?
Yes, the idea is, they spent 40 billion creating IP, now they get the government to enforce a monopoly on that IP for them. That's the point of patents.
If I flush 50 million dollars down a toilet, can I too have the government enforce broad patents on software practices that are obvious and have existed for years?
I believe the patents Nokia speaks of were neither obvious, nor existed for years when Nokia originally patented them. Nokia's IP is present in every GSM phone.
Are you comparing spending money in R&D to flushing money down a toilet? Not letting R&D money be flushed money would be a good reason to support patents.
[deleted]
they are getting desperate
Nah, they're probably out to implement something that Apple has patented and that Apple isn't willing to licence. I'm betting they'll settle on a patent sharing agreement.
Yes, it can be this, or it might be as well exactly what the press releases says. In other words, Apple is to arrogant to pay licensing fees for what other are already paying.
"Nokia has already successfully entered into license agreements including these patents with approximately 40 companies, including virtually all the leading mobile device vendors, allowing the industry to benefit from Nokia's innovation."
"Nokia has already successfully entered into license agreements including these patents with approximately 40 companies, including virtually all the leading mobile device vendors, allowing the industry to benefit from Nokia's innovation."
I wonder which patents Nokia wants to have access to.
What the hell.. ? I thought us Finns didn't do lame greed-lawsuits.
Maybe it's not a lame greed lawsuit? Nokia has IP in every GSM phone... Perhaps Apple isn't licensing like they are supposed to? We'll have to see how it pans out.
Fucking A. This is going to be awesome :D
While I strongly disagree with this at best destructive, at worst childish use of our legal system, lets not forget that apple has been only too quick to use similar tactics whenever it suits them.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/05/apple-sues-woolwort...
What do the say about those who live by the sword?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/05/apple-sues-woolwort...
What do the say about those who live by the sword?
That was a suit to defend their trademark. They just had to stop using the logo.
Nokia is suing Apple because they've been beaten at handsets and are losing money, and someone decided this was their best shot at getting back.
Nokia is suing Apple because they've been beaten at handsets and are losing money, and someone decided this was their best shot at getting back.
Yes but despite the downvotes, I'm sicking to this one. There was litte danger of confusion between brands, Apple basically just made a nuisance of itself.
Apple has a long history of heavy handed legal tactics against much weaker entities, including bloggers and critics. Apple innovates. They have a real product, so they often find themselves on this end of the stick when it comes to patents. In other matters however, they seem quite comfortable swing it. Especially at small heads.
I suppose there's no small element of schadenfreude here to see the tables turned and Apple unfairly harassed by a perversion of the law.
Apple has a long history of heavy handed legal tactics against much weaker entities, including bloggers and critics. Apple innovates. They have a real product, so they often find themselves on this end of the stick when it comes to patents. In other matters however, they seem quite comfortable swing it. Especially at small heads.
I suppose there's no small element of schadenfreude here to see the tables turned and Apple unfairly harassed by a perversion of the law.
Factually inaccurate. Apple did not sue Woolworths. Apple registered an objection against the granting of Woolworth's trademark during the period that the granting agency (IP Australia) specifically asks for objections to be filed.
From Wikipedia's entry on Australian trademark law: If an application is accepted it will be published for opposition purposes for three months, during which time third parties may oppose registration on certain grounds. If there are no oppositions, or any oppositions are overcome, a certificate of registration will issue. The term of registration in Australia is 10 years
From Wikipedia's entry on Australian trademark law: If an application is accepted it will be published for opposition purposes for three months, during which time third parties may oppose registration on certain grounds. If there are no oppositions, or any oppositions are overcome, a certificate of registration will issue. The term of registration in Australia is 10 years
Of course, they still have no device on the market that does what our devices could do, and probably never will. I hope Bilski changes some of the patent BS for the better.