Apple’s FRAND patent counterclaims against Samsung and Motorola

By contrast, Samsung and Motorola try to shut Apple’s products down on the basis of allegedly standards-essential patents, seeking injunctions and (in MMI’s case) an ITC import ban regardless of whether Apple might be willing to pay FRAND royalties. Contrary to making a clear distinction as Nokia did, Samsung and Motorola simply lump standards-related and unencumbered patents together as if all patents were the same.

via fosspatents.blogspot.com

Interesting read about Apple’s claims that Samsung and Motorola are abusing their FRAND (fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory) patents.

Especially interesting when you consider that Nokia rightly drew a distinction between the two kinds of patents, and Apple settled with them.

A Reasonable Look at the Apple and AT&T iPhone4 Lawsuit.

Not surprising I suppose, the lawsuit makes no mention of the perhaps questionable judgements of the plaintiffs who bought the product(s) sight unseen.

The star witness as it turns out seem to be some unqualified blogging site diatribes as technical references.

Frankly as a former RF Engineer myself, I can tell you that the performance issues claimed are inconsistent. The demonstration tests ill-informed. And there are as many wireless network variables as there may be device variables.

via blogs.forbes.com

The frenzy over this issue is ridiculous. How many class action suits is this for Apple this decade? 50? 100? And it’s not just Apple. 

The problem with these nonsense suits—I call this one nonsense based on their cited authorities and how they’re playing it in the media—is that sooner or later they mask legitimate ones.

One is hard pressed to believe this firm is doing anything other than chasing a buck when three of the four links used in support of their initial statement about the “iPhone 4 investigation” are from Gizmodo. Bad enough to use blogs with questionable technical expertise in the first place, but citing one with a recent and obvious axe to grind against Apple seems the height of cluelessness. Meanwhile, the only non-Gizmodo link is to a rumors site. Lovely. 

Oh well, I’ve seen stranger suits prevail (a spilled cup of coffee comes to mind). I guess that’s why firms like Ambulance & Chaser, LLC. continue to try their luck.

Monkey see, Monkey sue

MONKEYmedia® today filed a lawsuit against Apple, Inc.… Apple’s [alleged]
infringement involves its user interfaces for document summarization,
RSS readers and video players that can display multiple versions of text
and/or audiovisual content. The lawsuit
was filed in the Western District of Texas – Austin Division.

via businesswire.com

It must be a valid lawsuit because it meets all the necessary requirements. Company you never heard of? Check. Obscure patents dealing with commonplace tech (RSS readers, video players)? Check. Filed in a “rocket docket” in Texas? Check.

Monkey see, Monkey sue

MONKEYmedia® today filed a lawsuit against Apple, Inc.… Apple’s [alleged]
infringement involves its user interfaces for document summarization,
RSS readers and video players that can display multiple versions of text
and/or audiovisual content. The lawsuit
was filed in the Western District of Texas – Austin Division.

via businesswire.com

It must be a valid lawsuit because it meets all the necessary requirements. Company you never heard of? Check. Obscure patents dealing with commonplace tech (RSS readers, video players)? Check. Filed in a “rocket docket” in Texas? Check.