UN launches military intervention to end the patent wars, French jets begin bombing Apple HQ
13 replies, posted
[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18736415[/url]
[quote=BBC News][B]A rash of patent lawsuits has prompted the UN to call smartphone makers and others mobile industry bodies together.[/B]
It said the parties needed to address the "innovation-stifling use of intellectual property" which had led to several devices being banned from sale.
It said innovations deemed essential to industry standards, such as 3G or Jpeg photos, would be the meeting's focus.
It noted that if just one patent holder demanded unreasonable compensation the cost of a device could "skyrocket".
Microsoft and Apple are among firms that have called on others not to enforce sales bans on the basis of such standards-essential patents.
However, lawyers have noted that doing so would deprive other companies of way to counter-attacking other types of patent lawsuits pursued by the two companies.
[B]Fighting over Frand[/B]
Companies are supposed to license standards-essential patents on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory terms (Frand).
That means that the patent-holder cannot discriminate who gets to use its invention and that the cost cannot be excessive.
However, the International Telecommunication Union - the UN agency hosting the event - said that the parties involved differed over what they believed to be a reasonable charge for Frand-type patents, and whether they should be allowed to seek legal injunctions to block shipments if they failed to agree terms.
"We are seeing an unwelcome trend in today's marketplace to use standards-essential patents to block markets," said the ITU secretary general Dr Hamadoun Torre.
"There needs to be an urgent review of this situation: patents are meant to encourage innovation, not stifle it."
[B]EU probes[/B]
Motorola Mobility - now owned by Google - managed to impose a brief sales ban of iPhone and iPads in Germany last year after Apple refused to pay it a licence fee. The dispute centred on a patent deemed crucial to the GPRS data transmission standard used by GSM cellular networks.
Motorola has also attempted to ban Xbox games consoles and Windows 7 software in Germany after Microsoft refused to pay it fees for a technology necessary to offer H.264 video coding and playback.
Samsung has also attempted to use its 3G patents to bar Apple from selling products in Europe, Japan and the US.
The efforts have led the EU to launch official investigations into both Motorola and Samsung's behaviour.
[B]'No simple answer'[/B]
However, industry watchers note that Apple has used lawsuits to ban Samsung products in both the US and Australia and attempted to restrict sales of other companies' devices powered by Android.
Microsoft has also demanded and secured license fees from manufacturers making smartphones using Google's operating system.
Illya Kazi, a member of the UK's Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys said competing interests would make it hard to resolve the matter.
"The situation is complex and it's very easy for someone to complain something is not fair because it is adverse to their position," he told the BBC.
"I don't think there's a simple answer. High-level talks can't be a bad thing, but I would be surprised if they can come up with an agreed implementable conclusion."
The talks are scheduled to take place at the ITU's headquarters in Geneva on 10 October.[/quote]
Or....Write an angry letter.
[url]http://world.time.com/2011/03/17/gaddafi-warns-benghazi-rebel-city-we-are-coming-and-therell-be-no-mercy/[/url]
[quote]In a recently concluded address broadcast on the Apple website, Tim Cook offered a grim warning to residents of the Googleplex, the center of the Android development team seeking to topple Apple's iPhone: “We are coming tonight, and there will be no mercy.”
The past week has seen developers loyal to Cook march closer to the Googleplex. They’ve deployed airpower and heavy artillery against a string of towns once inhabited by Android phone users, reclaiming strategic cities one by one. The death toll is unknown. (Apple's offensive has also, according to reports, led to the disappearance of four New York Times journalists.) Now, ahead of a pivotal vote in the U.N. Security Council that may place a no-fly zone over Apple HQ and prompt international air strikes on Cook’s forces, the CEO who has ruled for 1 year insists his victory at hand. He demanded Android users turn on Google employees and chillingly told the city to expect their phones to be searched for “porn apps,” house by house, “model by model.”
The speech, like all Cook oratory, was suffused with his typical bluster, echoing decades-old anti-open source rhetoric. In Cook’s address, it was he who was the agent of technology’s “liberation” — this when, for the past few weeks, the entirety of Android's userbase has hailed it “Free Software.” As TIME has observed, after the heady, exuberant initial success of the anti-Cook rebellion, the Apple counteroffensive has been swift and ruthless. The latest town to fall was Palo Alto; Google developers and residents streamed out of the city on the road to Mountain View, fleeing tank and mortar fire.
But the Googleplex — larger, more populous, and the most significant base for the Android movement — will prove far trickier to capture. Observers expect Google to put up a last stand here, and a bloody siege may only spur the slow-moving international community to finally intervene. Not surprisingly, Cook made overtures to Mountain View, describing the city as his “sweetheart,” and cooingly called on his “children” to come back to the fold before things got too out of control. But, if live footage from Mountain View's main square is to be believed, few in Google’s last stronghold are listening. Standing up to the threat of a brutal final offensive by Cook’s troops, thousands in Mountain View gathered at night and hurled shoes at images of the CEO. Attention now turns to New York, where, in a matter of hours, the international community may have its most significant mandate yet to intervene in the conflict.[/quote]
came here expecting apple to have declared war on world
left disappointed
[QUOTE=Ylsid;36651831]came here expecting apple to have declared war on world
left disappointed[/QUOTE]
judging by all the lawsuits I'd say that already happened
Apple should wise up or fuck off with selling things in the whole of Europe including the UK.
I don't care how much they mark up their stuff just as long as I can choose what I want instead of them getting devices forcefully removed from the market.
Misleading thread title
got my hopes up
[QUOTE=Ylsid;36651831]came here expecting apple to have declared war on world
left disappointed[/QUOTE]
The damage from iPhones exploding in pockets would be catastrophic. :v:
[quote]It said innovations deemed essential to industry standards, such as 3G or Jpeg photos, would be the meeting's focus[/quote]
Who the fuck filed a lawsuit against phones using JPEG
Apple is a threat to free market principles
The title made me expect The Onion or something.
sensationalist headlines.
[QUOTE=Taepodong-2;36656891]The title made me expect The Onion or something.[/QUOTE]
The world is one big Onion article.
[QUOTE=areolop;36652456]Who the fuck filed a lawsuit against phones using JPEG[/QUOTE]
Funny story actually and not just phones:
[quote]In 2002, Forgent Networks asserted that it owned and would enforce patent rights on the JPEG technology, arising from a patent that had been filed on October 27, 1986, and granted on October 6, 1987 (U.S. Patent 4,698,672). The announcement created a furor reminiscent of Unisys' attempts to assert its rights over the GIF image compression standard.
The JPEG committee investigated the patent claims in 2002 and were of the opinion that they were invalidated by prior art. Others also concluded that Forgent did not have a patent that covered JPEG. Nevertheless, between 2002 and 2004 Forgent was able to obtain about US$105 million by licensing their patent to some 30 companies. In April 2004, Forgent sued 31 other companies to enforce further license payments. In July of the same year, a consortium of 21 large computer companies filed a countersuit, with the goal of invalidating the patent. In addition, Microsoft launched a separate lawsuit against Forgent in April 2005. In February 2006, the United States Patent and Trademark Office agreed to re-examine Forgent's JPEG patent at the request of the Public Patent Foundation. On May 26, 2006 the USPTO found the patent invalid based on prior art. The USPTO also found that Forgent knew about the prior art, and did not tell the Patent Office, making any appeal to reinstate the patent highly unlikely to succeed.
Forgent also possesses a similar patent granted by the European Patent Office in 1994, though it is unclear how enforceable it is.
As of October 27, 2006, the U.S. patent's 20-year term appears to have expired, and in November 2006, Forgent agreed to abandon enforcement of patent claims against use of the JPEG standard.[/quote]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.