Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Apple Counter-Sues Nokia Over Patents

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on from the fight-fire-with-more-lawyers dept.

adeelarshad82 writes "About two months ago Nokia sued Apple for infringing Nokia patents in its iPhone. The 10 patents in the lawsuit, filed in the US state of Delaware, relate to technologies fundamental for devices using GSM, UMTS and/or local area network (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. In the latest development to the case, Apple said Friday that it had filed its own suit against Nokia, countering Nokia's claims of patent infringement with its own."

137 comments

  1. CEO Battle by Khris · · Score: 5, Funny

    Let's just put the CEO from both companies into a ring and have them fight it out. Whoever wins gets everything including the black turtleneck!

    1. Re:CEO Battle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      If Olli-Pekka Kallasvuo (CEO of Nokia) wins does he really want to eat Steve Job's liver in front of the angry mob? Given Mr Job's medical history that is kind of gross.

    2. Re:CEO Battle by daveime · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yes, and we could present it as a music video for Frankie Goes to Hollywood, entitled "Two Tribes 2009".

    3. Re:CEO Battle by davester666 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Why not? It's WAY newer than the old one, and I'll bet it would taste much better. Also should be much healthier for you (vs eating the old one)...

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    4. Re:CEO Battle by blind+biker · · Score: 1

      In that case Jobs is likely screwed. Kallasvuo is an asshole (I used to work in Nokia till that douche came to power) but he's fit: works out and does lots of sports. Jobs, well, his body has seen better days.

      --
      "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    5. Re:CEO Battle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aw-aw-aw. Lehhheeet's Go. Awoooo.

      Damn. I'm a geezer-loser.

    6. Re:CEO Battle by JonathanPDX · · Score: 1

      Isn't Steve Jobs simply leasing his current liver? (I hope that if Mr Kallasvuo does eat Mr Jobs' liver, he at least has the good sense to enjoy it with some fava beans and a nice Chianti.) ;-)

  2. I'm rubber and you're glue... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    I wish they'd all grow up...

    1. Re:I'm rubber and you're glue... by BeardedChimp · · Score: 4, Funny

      You fight like a dairy farmer!

    2. Re:I'm rubber and you're glue... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      You fight like a dairy farmer!

      How appropriate, you fight like a cow.

    3. Re:I'm rubber and you're glue... by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 3, Funny

      How appropriate, you fight like a company that MILKS its customers out of all their money and then spend half of it on pointless patent debates!

    4. Re:I'm rubber and you're glue... by Andtalath · · Score: 1

      How appropriate, you fight like a cow!

      I heard you where still wearing diapers!

    5. Re:I'm rubber and you're glue... by node+3 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What's Apple supposed to do? Just eventually lose the patent case and pay up? The MAD patent defense is considered one of the "necessary evils" of the tech world.

      When someone punches you, you punch back. Even if your principal is one of those idiots who, instead of trying to find out who thew the first punch, or who provoked who, just suspends both students.

    6. Re:I'm rubber and you're glue... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You forgot about the liberal spreading of BS ;)

    7. Re:I'm rubber and you're glue... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You fight like a dairy farmer!

      How appropriate, you fight like a cow.

      I got this scar on my face during a mighty struggle!

    8. Re:I'm rubber and you're glue... by CityZen · · Score: 5, Insightful

      > When someone punches you, you punch back.

      I think you're kind of missing the point. We shouldn't be behaving like cave-men in the first place.

      True, the corporate environment that all companies currently exist in tends to encourage this behavior. But the nature of this corporate environment is hurting everyone (except the lawyers), so how long will it be before we can all evolve and pursue better things?

      Reminds me of an anecdote concerning the game Mule. I played this game with my brothers, and we always competed against each other. When I mentioned the game to a friend of mine, she said "That's a great game. What was the richest your colony ever got?" I responded with some score I remembered at the time. She said something to the effect of "Why so low? We usually got 10x that!" It had not even occurred to me that one might try to play the game cooperatively, thus benefiting the colony as a whole, rather than the individual player.

      Somehow, mankind as a whole needs to make a similar observation.

    9. Re:I'm rubber and you're glue... by rtfa-troll · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Apple is not doing this "because someone sued them". Apple made it clear that they were out to block Nokia from touch screen phones:

      "We are watching the landscape," Cook told financial analysts. "We like competition, as long as they don't rip off our IP, and if they do, we're going to go after anybody that does."

      (see here)

      Apple has been building up for a patent war and so Nokia has no choice other than to strike before their N900 phones make them vulnerable. Remember Apple's lawsuit happy history was what caused the League for Programming Freedom. I guess the fact that so many seem to believe that Nokia is the agressor here (remember, they've been trying to Negotiate for years before this suit came out) really does show that Apple can distort reality.

      --
      =~ s,(.*),<sarcasm>$1</sarcasm>,g if any_point_you_wish();
    10. Re:I'm rubber and you're glue... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll have you know that a pitchfork is a very effective weapon. And you don't even want to know what kind of damage these machines can do.

    11. Re:I'm rubber and you're glue... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Lighten up Francis. This type of patent 'show' is common when these types of lawsuits happen. They basically give each company a good bargaining chip, and then they take it offline and settle out of court. This is about as 'by the book' as it gets.

    12. Re:I'm rubber and you're glue... by node+3 · · Score: 1

      I think you're kind of missing the point. We shouldn't be behaving like cave-men in the first place.

      No, I see the point very clearly. The fact is, we *ARE* cavemen. You're right that we shouldn't act like them (in general), but when someone takes that first caveman act against you, often your only response is to sink to their level. To remain "above the fray" and not revert to cavemanism yourself just lets them have their way with you, which is exceptionally stupid.

      But the nature of this corporate environment is hurting everyone (except the lawyers), so how long will it be before we can all evolve and pursue better things?

      This isn't about nurturing the caveman-prone corporate environment, it's about what you do *within* the caveman-prone corporate environment.

      Again, if someone punches you, you punch them right back, harder, until they stop. This is *not* the same as promoting the first punch.

      Somehow, mankind as a whole needs to make a similar observation [cooperation benefits everyone].

      Sort of. Competition benefits everyone as well. What doesn't benefit everyone (and in fact, often leads to a net benefit to no one), is cut-throught capitalism/corporatism. I'm with you on that, but do you expect Apple and Nokia to instead cooperate? That really makes no sense. Nokia's suit is a reactive, caveman-esque resort of a company in fear. I don't really blame them too much, other than that they should know that it's not a winning move. But again, given that Nokia did what they did, and that the world works the way it does, Apple's response is really just about the only rational one.

    13. Re:I'm rubber and you're glue... by node+3 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Apple is not doing this "because someone sued them". Apple made it clear that they were out to block Nokia from touch screen phones:

      Nonsense. Nokia *has* touch screen phones. Apple did not sue them.

      Apple has been building up for a patent war

      Defensively, as evidenced by the fact that they did not sue first.

      Nokia has no choice other than to strike before their N900 phones make them vulnerable.

      That doesn't make any sense. How does initiating a suit about completely different technologies change anything with regards to touch screen patents? Nokia did not stave off a suit by their preemptive strike. In fact, they *brought it about*.

      Remember Apple's lawsuit happy history was what caused the League for Programming Freedom.

      Uh, that's a suit from twenty years ago, and one in which their partner (Microsoft) took proprietary knowledge from Apple to create a copy of their prized OS. This wasn't some sort of patent-troll style suit.

      I guess the fact that so many seem to believe that Nokia is the agressor here

      Because *they are*. They struck first. How is that so difficult?

      (remember, they've been trying to Negotiate for years before this suit came out)

      So, again, Nokia went after Apple first?

      really does show that Apple can distort reality.

      Those clever Apple folks! They can distort reality so completely that it wraps completely around on itself to where it started. Nokia struck first. Apple has been able to twist things so thoroughly that it even *looks* like Nokia struck first. Astounding!

    14. Re:I'm rubber and you're glue... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Defensively, as evidenced by the fact that they did not sue first.

      Indeed... Apple did not sue first... it just stole Nokia's patent technology first.

      Uh, that's a suit from twenty years ago, and one in which their partner (Microsoft) took proprietary knowledge from Apple to create a copy of their prized OS. This wasn't some sort of patent-troll style suit.

      You mean the lawsuit that Microsoft won, by proving that their product was built differently from Apple's and did not duplicate or resemble any Apple code? It is widely known that Apple and Microsoft both borrowed their windowing OS concepts from Xerox.

      Because *they are*. They struck first. How is that so difficult?

      Apple was the initial aggressor. Apple made use of patented technologies built around the standardization of GSM and WCDMA. Apple did not participate in the creation of the standards, the development process of the standards, the design of the standards, or the R&D of the standards. Apple is not a member of the standards body. Nokia is protecting its patents and demanding a higher royalty from Apple than from companies who are members of the standard body because Apple did not and does not contribute to the standards body. This is Nokia's right under the agreements made in the formation of the standards body.

      So, again, Nokia went after Apple first?

      Apple went first by willfully and knowingly utilizing Nokia's patented technologies.

      Those clever Apple folks! They can distort reality so completely that it wraps completely around on itself to where it started. Nokia struck first. Apple has been able to twist things so thoroughly that it even *looks* like Nokia struck first. Astounding!

      Again, it is Apple that "struck first". If Apple had negotiated prior to creating devices that infringe on Nokia's patents then Nokia would not be forced to sue.

    15. Re:I'm rubber and you're glue... by Deus.1.01 · · Score: -1

      I hope now you've learned to stop picking Jobs for the Macintosh division.

      --
      My -1 Troll is actually a +1 funny. And my -1 flame is actually a +1 insightfull.
    16. Re:I'm rubber and you're glue... by CityZen · · Score: 1

      We are arguing different points.

      You are focusing on the specifics of this particular case. I have made no comments about whether Apple's actions are "good" or "bad," but rather that the whole situation is kind of ridiculous.

      I'm trying to see beyond this particular case and envision what set of conditions would allow for companies in general to focus on "progress" (whatever that means) instead of in-fighting.

      This particular case revolves around patents. These days, patents are kind of like weapons. Companies try to generate or otherwise acquire as many patents as possible as kind of an arms race. Once a company has achieved a critical mass of patents, they generally try to work out non-aggression pacts (cross-licensing agreements) with their competitors to avoid patent wars. But the landscape is full of pirates (in the "Aaarh!" sense) who will gather up some patents to go on offensives just to score some quick booty.

      Anyone who's given the matter some thought will realize that the present patent system is broken and needs revamping. However, companies are kind of like drug addicts with regard to patents. They can see the damage that they can do, but they really don't want to give them up.

      Regarding patents, I think it's time for rehab. However, patents are just one of the many ways that corporate culture is messed up. Trying to fix everything would be a much bigger job than trying to overhaul the US's health-care system. And, just like that problem, if the majority of people don't see that there's anything wrong, nothing will ever change.

    17. Re:I'm rubber and you're glue... by sopssa · · Score: 1

      "Best defense is to attack" is not just non-sense.

    18. Re:I'm rubber and you're glue... by oldhack · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      That was one truly disgusting post. Hell is too good for your lot.

      --
      Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
    19. Re:I'm rubber and you're glue... by oldhack · · Score: 1

      League of Programming Freedom? Is that like FSF in Marvel comics universe?

      --
      Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
    20. Re:I'm rubber and you're glue... by jcr · · Score: 4, Informative

      You mean the lawsuit that Microsoft won, by proving that their product was built differently from Apple's and did not duplicate or resemble any Apple code?

      Your memory is a bit fuzzy there. Microsoft won that suit because the license Sculley gave them, which was supposed to permit them to use Apple's IP for products that Microsoft shipped on the Mac was poorly worded, and didn't restrict them from using Apple's IP anywhere else.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    21. Re:I'm rubber and you're glue... by cyclomedia · · Score: 1

      I have three brothers and we were quite the reverse, having a home LAN we played coop through Doom, Doom2, Quake, Quake 2 and Duke Nukem 3D. It took us a while to figure out why there were no monsters in Multiplayer mode in Half Life.

      --
      If you don't risk failure you don't risk success.
    22. Re:I'm rubber and you're glue... by JAlexoi · · Score: 1

      Nonsense. Nokia *has* touch screen phones. Apple did not sue them.

      Since Apple did not invent the touchscreen, just patented some specific thing, those patents might not yet apply to existing Nokia phones with touchscreen.

      Because *they are*. They struck first. How is that so difficult?

      Nokia is in fact the "agressor" here, but not in any bad sense. Since they only filed the lawsuit after their talks broke down. (Imagine, you being called bad guy just because you filed a suite against your neighbour, because his dog was constantly destroying your property.)

    23. Re:I'm rubber and you're glue... by Waccoon · · Score: 1

      I was picked on a lot when I was a kid. My teachers told me to ignore it, and the other students would get bored and leave me alone. They didn't.

      One day I got fed up, grabbed one of the bullies by his shirt collar and threw him down the hallway. Boy, did I ever get in trouble, but it did have one major benefit: nobody picked on me again. Ever.

      Like it or not, we are cave men. Looking back, both the teachers and students taught me more about human nature than academic material.

    24. Re:I'm rubber and you're glue... by rochrist · · Score: 4, Informative

      You mean the lawsuit that Microsoft won, by proving that their product was built differently from Apple's and did not duplicate or resemble any Apple code? It is widely known that Apple and Microsoft both borrowed their windowing OS concepts from Xerox.

      Uh, no. Apple /purchased/ what they got from Xerox with stock. It's kind of time this urban myth died.

    25. Re:I'm rubber and you're glue... by rtfa-troll · · Score: 1

      This type of patent 'show' is common when these types of lawsuits happen. They basically give each company a good bargaining chip, [...]

      And with that I have little problem. However any presentation of either Apple or Nokia as innocent little flowers being picked on by a big bully I do have a problem with. They are both big corporations which know how to look after themselves. Apple has a history of copying other people's innovation (the Mouse & Windows based interface - from Xerox) and then accusing others of stealing it (Microsoft); Apple is also running around threatening everone in the phone industry with lawsuits. In this case I really think they have it coming to them.

      --
      =~ s,(.*),<sarcasm>$1</sarcasm>,g if any_point_you_wish();
  3. Who are these niggers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    Nokia and Apple, what are their purpose?

  4. Nuke Delaware from orbit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's the only way to be sure.

    1. Re:Nuke Delaware from orbit by BlackSnake112 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      A lot of banks are headquartered there. Wait... good idea.

    2. Re:Nuke Delaware from orbit by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      And news corporation...

      --
      http://michaelsmith.id.au
    3. Re:Nuke Delaware from orbit by grayshirtninja · · Score: 1

      And Evony

    4. Re:Nuke Delaware from orbit by FooAtWFU · · Score: 1

      A lot of credit card companies are headquartered there. If you blow it up, how will we be able to tell that the economic crisis is over? I'm counting on those dozens of otherwise-useless credit card offers to let me know when it's safe!

      --
      The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
    5. Re:Nuke Delaware from orbit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A lot of credit card companies are headquartered there. If you blow it up, how will we be able to tell that the economic crisis is over? I'm counting on those dozens of otherwise-useless credit card offers to let me know when it's safe!

      You are a regular Jon Stewart. Unfunny at best, obnoxious at the least.

  5. OH SNAP. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Noki-O-NO-U-DIDN'T. Break some lawyer off in their assets, Steve. Show em how we do in CUPERTOWN.

    1. Re:OH SNAP. by rxan · · Score: 1

      Noki-Ah, nevermind...

  6. Just a small part by MikeMacK · · Score: 3, Insightful
    "The patents Apple has allegedly infringed cover wireless data, speech coding, security and encryption"

    Uhhh...so like the whole frickin' thing...

    1. Re:Just a small part by jpmorgan · · Score: 5, Informative

      Not really. Apple has only been in the cell phone business for a few years... Nokia is a granddaddy. If you look at the patents Apple is saying that Nokia is infringing, they're comparatively minor. Let's look at the patents...

      No. 5,555,369: Method of creating packages for a pointer-based computer system
      No. 6,239,795 B1: Pattern and color abstraction in a graphical user interface
      No. 5,315,703: Object-oriented notification framework system
      No. 6,189,034 B1: Method and apparatus for dynamic launching of a teleconferencing application upon receipt of a call
      No. 7,469,381, B2: List scrolling and document translation, scaling, and rotation on a touch-screen display
      No. RE 39, 486 E: Extensible, replaceable network component system
      No. 5,455,854: Object-oriented telephony system
      No. 5, 379,431: Boot framework architecture for dynamic staged initial program load
      No. 5,634,074 : Serial I/O device identifies itself to a computer through a serial interface during power on reset then it is being configured by the computer
      No. 5,915,131 : Method and apparatus for handling I/O requests utilizing separate programming interfaces to access separate I/O services
      No. 7,383,453 B2: Conserving power by reducing voltage supplied to an instruction-processing portion of a processor
      No. 5,848,105: GMSK signal processors for improved communications capacity and quality
      No. 6,343,263 B1 : Real-time signal processing system for serially transmitted data

      Mostly we're talking fluffy software patents. The last few are potentially meaty, but given how little time Apple has been in this business, and how recent these were filed and granted, they're probably pretty specific (although I don't have the time to pick through the actual claims). Worst case scenario for Nokia is probably, they pull their smartphones from the US market for 6 months while they work around them. And the US smartphone market is a minor part of Nokia's business.

      But Nokia... Nokia has patents on just about every wireless technology known to man. Worst case scenario for Apple is they can cancel the iPhone and put an ethernet jack in the next MacBook Air.

    2. Re:Just a small part by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I looked through some of those patents. What a joke, Themes, Serial device detection, VNC/RD/BBS. Out of the ones I read, not one of them really should have been granted a patent... I thought the patent office was lousy before; wow -- talk about bogus patents.

    3. Re:Just a small part by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "given how little time Apple has been in this business". Cell phones, yes, but not handheld computers with touchscreens, a specialised OS for stylus input, with the ability to communicate wirelessly. The Newton was released in 1993. Apple has plenty of patents from the NewtonOS period, many of which would also apply to smartphones. In any case, this is just a defensive response from Apple. In any case, they don't look much more fluffy than those than Nokias.

    4. Re:Just a small part by the+ReviveR · · Score: 1

      I went through these patents earlier and I also thought the list was surprisingly weak.

      Only one of these patents seems to be an actual "iPhone patent".

      No. 7,469,381, B2: List scrolling and document translation, scaling, and rotation on a touch-screen display

      I understood this one to be basically scrolling a document with your finger on touchscreen (instead of hand cursor and mouse). It was applied for in december 2007 so I would be surprised if it didn't also have prior art.

      Apple's rhetoric seems to try to imply that Nokia is simply copying iPhone, and yet in the brief there isn't all that much about iPhone related accusations. In fact they are even going after something like Carbide.C++ that is a Symbian development platform running on Windows.

  7. AM I reading the subtext right? by Teese · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Apple is complaining that Nokia isn't offering the Standards based cell phones on Reasonable and Nondiscriminatory basis? Isn't Nokia required to do that as part of submitting those patents as part of the GSM standard. It stated that in the lawsuit that nokia wanted a patent cross-license agreement with apple for the rights to the GSM patents. That's not reasonable and nondiscriminatory.

    --
    "I'm a Genius!"*


    *Not an actual Genius
    1. Re:AM I reading the subtext right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course! Apple cannot be in the wrong. Never.

    2. Re:AM I reading the subtext right? by sznupi · · Score: 0, Troll

      Nokia contributed greatly to the development of those standards. As I understand you expect they hand it over for everybody to use without, say, expectation of mutual recognition?

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    3. Re:AM I reading the subtext right? by dissy · · Score: 1

      It stated that in the lawsuit that nokia wanted a patent cross-license agreement with apple for the rights to the GSM patents.

      While I can't comment on the other patents yet, I find this one particularly crazy, since last I saw Apple does not manufacturer nor design nor sell GSM chips...

      It would be like you buying a car from the dealer, then get sued for violating someones patent because the car manufacturer did just that.

    4. Re:AM I reading the subtext right? by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 1

      Well, the issue is "Reasonable and Nondiscriminatory."

      Let's say I make boring cellphones and I pay Nokia $0.25 for every cellphone that I sell. I really have nothing of value for Nokia except for money, so that's what they take. And that's fine.

      Now let's say I have a patent on a method of turning lead into gold and I use this to make golden cellphones. Now that patent is worth potentially more than $0.25 for every cellphone that I sell. So should Nokia be able to say, "Hey, cross-license that patent and we'll let you slide by with $0.01 for every phone you sell. If you don't agree to cross-license that patent, we're going to demand $10,000,000 for every phone you sell."

      That's neither reasonable nor non-discriminatory.

    5. Re:AM I reading the subtext right? by sznupi · · Score: 1

      That sounds fine at first glance, but remember that Apple is the one who eagerly states they are ready to fight for their patents.

      Si modifying a bit your scenario, the method of turning lead into gold is actually quite straightforward and obvious, with Nokia also arriving at it. But then the small company starts to bark; this Nokia sees as an entity not willing to "Reasonable and Nondiscriminatory" relations (remember any relations involves two entities, works both ways...)

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    6. Re:AM I reading the subtext right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      It stated that in the lawsuit that nokia wanted a patent cross-license agreement with apple for the rights to the GSM patents. That's not reasonable and nondiscriminatory.

      Unreasonable, no. Discriminatory, possibly. If Nokia's patents are part of the specification, Apple should be allowed to license them under the same terms that others get.

      What it sounds like is Nokia is trying to parlay their GSM patents into a license to use Apple's touch screen technology or some other patented item used in the iPhone. This is a very reasonable request, but Apple should have every right to consider the two licenses separately rather than cross licensing.

      I can't tell whether that's what's actually going on here, but if Nokia is only offering to license the patents under a cross-licensing agreement without the option to pay the same licensing fees as others get, that's discriminatory.

    7. Re:AM I reading the subtext right? by jpmorgan · · Score: 1

      No. Nokia offers the patents to everyone under 'Reasonable and Nondiscriminatory' terms, since they're essential for implementation of several wireless technologies. Literally everybody else in the industry licenses them. But Apple doesn't want to pay.

    8. Re:AM I reading the subtext right? by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I would agree. But, again, the idea that Nokia can hold up the patents that Apple needs in order for Nokia to get the patents that they want is certainly not "Non-discriminatory."

      To go with my previous example, if Nokia says, "it's $0.25 per cellphone, but we'll cut it if you cross-license these patents," that's one thing. But to say "You must cross-license these patents" is something else.

      This gives Nokia an incredible advantage over Google, RIM, Microsoft, and anyone else who makes a cellphone operating system. Nokia makes a cellphone operating system but they also have patents which Google, RIM, and Microsoft—Nokia's competitors—must license in order to work with GSM networks. So you have to license technology from your competition if you want to work on GSM networks.

      Nokia is definitely taking advantage of the situation by trying to use these must have patents in cellular telephony in order to improve their own cellphone operating system which is used on the phones that they sell.

      That's definitely non-discriminatory.

    9. Re:AM I reading the subtext right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you miss the part about "standards" in your own post?

    10. Re:AM I reading the subtext right? by saleenS281 · · Score: 1

      And rightly so. They spent billions of dollars and years of research to garner those patents. Nobody was stopping Apple from investing heavily in cell networks in the early 90's. They just weren't interested in the market.

      Apple can just "pick a different cellular technology" if they don't want to license from Nokia. I don't see anyone demanding Apple allow third parties to make computers that run OSX... The response is "well you can run windows or linux instead". Well Apple can make a phone that runs on CDMA instead.

      It never ceases to amaze me the double standards that get applied to Apple around here...

    11. Re:AM I reading the subtext right? by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'd agree, except for the fact that these patents are part of a standard which Nokia has agreed to license in a "Reasonable and Nondiscriminatory" fashion. They can't suddenly decide to charge Apple more because Apple competes with them. That is discriminatory.

      Apple is not saying that they shouldn't have to pay to use those patents. They are saying that they shouldn't have to pay more or give up valuable IP to use those patents since other companies don't have to pay as much or give up IP. Making Apple do that is discriminatory.

      There is no double standard. If Nokia had not agreed to license the patents in a "Reasonable and Nondiscriminatory" fashion, I'd agree with you. Of course, their patents probably would not have been used.

    12. Re:AM I reading the subtext right? by saleenS281 · · Score: 1

      You keep saying that, but you're basing it on what? I've seen absolutely nothing that says Nokia is asking for anything of the sort.

      Is there some factual documentation to back this up, or is it yet another "apple can do no wrong" assumption?

    13. Re:AM I reading the subtext right? by JAlexoi · · Score: 1

      Nokia probably did ask Apple to cross license patents, because it's a usual practice. They cross license and charge some amount. Apple clearly does not want to cross license and just wanted to pay the small fee that everyone else pays. While, everyone else adds a cross licensing deal with those payments.
      Nokia's suit is all about setting the price and based on that requiring backpay based on that price. Now imagine how hard it will be to calculate the price, because most other licensing contracts had not only the cash value in them bu also IP cross licensing.

    14. Re:AM I reading the subtext right? by JAlexoi · · Score: 1

      There is a high chance others actually have cross licensed as part of one single deal. Since Apple is, probably, the only company in the market that has no technological patents in the field. So getting to that reasonable and non-discriminatory will be quite hard.

    15. Re:AM I reading the subtext right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As far as I know, customer IS responsible for manufacturer's violation of patents. Yes, I know, I know ...

    16. Re:AM I reading the subtext right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The bastards. How dare they take advantage of $10 billion and 15 years of research. If Apple wants to jump into the market they should get all that R+D for free!

    17. Re:AM I reading the subtext right? by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 1

      I keep giving examples. From above:

      They are saying that they shouldn't have to pay more or give up valuable IP to use those patents since other companies don't have to pay as much or give up IP.

      What part of this is confusing?

      Suppose HTC gets charged $0.25 per cellphone. Why should Apple have to give up IP worth millions to use the same patents?

    18. Re:AM I reading the subtext right? by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The Bastards! How dare they say that they will license in a "Reasonable and Nondiscriminatory" fashion and then turn around and charge their chief competitor more than anyone else?

      Suppose I release something GPL. Then I decide not to and, furthermore, sue all the people who downloaded and used it under the GPL. Obviously, that would be a breach of contract.

      So if Nokia agreed to be non-discriminatory, that means they can't charge Apple more than they would charge anyone else. That means they can't go after Apple's IP unless they go after everyone else's. Doing otherwise is "Discriminatory."

      Fun example: Microsoft creates the Open XML Document format and agrees to charge a "Reasonable or Non-discriminatory" amount for it's use. They then charge Linux projects more than anyone else to use it because Microsoft wants to hurt Linux Office projects.

      We'd be screaming bloody murder--and rightly so.

  8. Resolution by whisper_jeff · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Expect both cases to be dropped and an announcement of mutual licensing between the two companies in ... about three or four weeks.

    A classic example of patents being used defensively by Apple to counter Nokia's offensive use.

    1. Re:Resolution by dwiget001 · · Score: 1

      And, for bonus points: A classic example of what is wrong with the U.S. patent system -- sort of.

    2. Re:Resolution by larry+bagina · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Apparently, that's what nokia wanted in the first place. So Apple thinks they can win or at least get better terms.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    3. Re:Resolution by Vintermann · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Apple's multitouch patent is ridiculous, and it's one I don't think they want to license. While Nokia is doing the suing, I think this is a reasonable pre-emptive strike. That patent strangles smartphone competition.

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
    4. Re:Resolution by KumquatOfSolace · · Score: 1

      Yes, this is very much standard practice in the industry.  That's why big tech companies file so many patents -- ammunition in case they need it.

      Unfortunately it doesn't work against patent trolls because they have no product to sell.

    5. Re:Resolution by Ma8thew · · Score: 2, Informative

      Not likely. The reason Nokia is suing Apple is that Apple refused to mutual licensing. Apple presumably wanted to pay the same licensing fee all other mobile manufacturers do, but Nokia wanted to swap their patents for Apple's.

    6. Re:Resolution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      It's a defensive patent. In case someone like another Creative sured them for multi-touch this or that. It's an unfortunate reality of doing business in tech.

      So far, I haven't seen Apple sue based on patents pre-emptively. I could be wrong though.

    7. Re:Resolution by LandDolphin · · Score: 1

      Is there something out there that says Nokia cannot set whatever price they want for use of their patent?

      --
      Spelling and Grammar errors have been added to this post for your enjoyment
    8. Re:Resolution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      For the bazillionth time... Apple didn't patent multi-touch. The patented certain multitouch gestures

    9. Re:Resolution by toppavak · · Score: 1

      Or a classic example of patents being used by Nokia to get cheap licensing to Apple IP

    10. Re:Resolution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Yes, the fact that they agreed to license them on a reasonable and non-discriminatory basis when the technology they held patents for became the GSM standard. Expecting Apple to cross-license all their iPhone specific patents when every other cellphone manufacturer pays a small licensing fee is neither reasonable nor non-discriminatory.

    11. Re:Resolution by rtfa-troll · · Score: 1

      Yes, the fact that they agreed to license them on a reasonable and non-discriminatory basis when the technology they held patents for became the GSM standard.

      I think we have a [citation needed] on that one. And whilst your digging out, remember that agreements to standards only apply to essential patents which the company agrees to contribute or fails to declare when actively aware of the patent during standardisation. You might also want to have a look at this

      IPR owners are only required to declare whether, or not, licenses are available, i.e. either by filing licensing declarations in respect of their Essential/potentially Essential IPRs, or declaring the non-availability of such IPRs;

      --
      =~ s,(.*),<sarcasm>$1</sarcasm>,g if any_point_you_wish();
    12. Re:Resolution by jipn4 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A classic example of patents being used defensively by Apple to counter Nokia's offensive use.

      You make it sound as if Apple is the aggrieved party here. But Apple has been pilfering other people's ideas and products liberally in order to create the iPhone. Apple's contributions have largely been in excellent packaging, but they have innovated fairly little. Nokia, on the other hand, has produce innovative phones with bad user interfaces. I think the "offender" here really is Apple, and Nokia deserves a cut of Apple's financial success, given the relative contributions of the two companies to the mobile phone market.

    13. Re:Resolution by jipn4 · · Score: 1

      Are there any interesting patents Apple actually holds on phone technologies? Based on the list I saw earlier, there was nothing that was particularly interesting.

      Maybe Nokia wants licenses for the multitouch patents. I think Nokia, Google, and Microsoft should just get together and have Apple's multi-touch patents invalidated since there is prior art.

    14. Re:Resolution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, Apple explicitly refused to pay some of the fees every other phone anufacturer has agreed to for several licenses.

    15. Re:Resolution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Apple's contributions have largely been in excellent packaging, but they have innovated fairly little. Nokia, on the other hand, has produce innovative phones with bad user interfaces.

      So someone who has put in the work to do proper human interface design, market analysis and HCI should just roll over and show their collective jugular to a competitor that can't do any of these things, in fact, hasn't been able to do any of thes things despite a huge headstart, and is now looking like an also-ran in the market?

      What's next, should we feel sorry for Windows Mobile?

      I think a lot of people fail to understand exactly how innovative Apple really is, primarily because their own concept of innovation is limited.

    16. Re:Resolution by JAlexoi · · Score: 1

      That is the problem, Apple does not want to cross license.

    17. Re:Resolution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How is that better?

    18. Re:Resolution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A classic example of patents being used defensively by Apple to counter Nokia's offensive use.

      You make it sound as if Apple is the aggrieved party here. But Apple has been pilfering other people's ideas and products liberally in order to create the iPhone. Apple's contributions have largely been in excellent packaging, but they have innovated fairly little. Nokia, on the other hand, has produce innovative phones with bad user interfaces. I think the "offender" here really is Apple, and Nokia deserves a cut of Apple's financial success, given the relative contributions of the two companies to the mobile phone market.

      Assuming you're right...You just validated Apple's claim. Apple is saying "look, we want to pay you for the patents you own, fair and square. But we want to pay the license that everyone else is paying." Nokia is saying..."Yeah, beacuse you're Apple and you're stealing our money because you made a killer product, we'll charge you 300% more AND require you to license our stuff back to us."

  9. the lawyers always win by mister_playboy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    There will still be a winner in this case... the lawyers.

    --
    Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law ::: Love is the law, love under will
    1. Re:the lawyers always win by furball · · Score: 1

      Here's a crazy idea: in-house lawyers.

    2. Re:the lawyers always win by nomadic · · Score: 1

      There will still be a winner in this case... the lawyers.

      Just like there's always a winner when someone has cancer... the doctors.

    3. Re:the lawyers always win by cfriedt · · Score: 1

      so very true...

    4. Re:the lawyers always win by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just like there's always a winner when someone gets murdered...the murderer.

    5. Re:the lawyers always win by swb · · Score: 1

      Sure, the in-house guys "manage" all the litigation but don't do much besides draw a nice salary.

      They hire outside counsel to do the actual litigation and the other tedious BS.

  10. so its just like football? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    offsetting penalties.. replay the down.

    -dirtbag

  11. Full text of Apple countersuit + patents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Digital Daily has posted a list of the patents at issue here and the full text of Apple's counterclaims -- which are pretty brutal. "Excerpt: In 2007, Apple introduced the iPhone a ground-breaking device that allowed users access to the functionality of the already popular iPod on a revolutionary mobile phone and Internet device. The iPhone is a converged device that allows users to access and ever expanding set of software features to take and send pictures, play music, play games do research, serve as a GPS device and much more.The iPhone platform has caused a revolutionary change in the mobile phone category.

    In contrast, Nokia made a different business decision and remained focused on traditional mobile wireless handsets with conventional user interfaces. As a result, Nokia has rapidly lost share in the market for high-end mobile phones. Nokia has admitted that, as a result of the iPhone launch, “the market changed suddenly and [Nokia was] not fast enough changing with it.

    In response, Nokia chose to copy the iPhone, especially its enormously popular and patented design and user interface."

    1. Re:Full text of Apple countersuit + patents by Red+Flayer · · Score: 4, Informative

      Meh. ATD is historically very fanboyish on Apple.

      I don't trust that site for unbiased analysis of anything Apple, though to be fair -- at times his product reviews have been honest.

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    2. Re:Full text of Apple countersuit + patents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you read the patents in the list? It looks darn near what you'd expect to see from an IP troll that collected a bunch of old, dusty patents from the '90. For instance, for the first one I wonder if a USB license would not cover it by default.

      Sure, MAD and all that - I'll grab the popcorn and wait for a settlement - but seeing as Nokia invoked GSM patents and Apple came up with patents on granma's shoes I'm wondering what else Nokia can dig up from grampa's closet to add to its claims. If 90's is the best Apple can come up with then their 'innovator' stance is laughable and they're likely to be the ones to cough up the cash. This looks more like a 'you'll get less cash for the GSM patents because we're throwing in these licenses for FREE'

    3. Re:Full text of Apple countersuit + patents by cbhacking · · Score: 1

      Out of curiosity, exactly what Nokia device is Apple (or allthingsd.com) claiming to be a copy of the iPhone? Nokia has had touchscreen-based (though not multi-touch) devices, both with and without phone chips, since before the existence of the iPhone, and while most if not all such devices could play music, none of them (in my experience) could be said to have copied the iPhone's or iPod's user interface. Many of these devices have also had installable applications available, though again I don't know of any that use the iPhone's App Store model.

      If there's a Nokia device out there that is a copy of the iPhone's "design and user interface", I'd love to see it. The closest thing that comes to mind is the N900, which runs Maemo Linux, and bears considerably little superficial resemblance to the iPhone.

      --
      There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
    4. Re:Full text of Apple countersuit + patents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      N97 junk.

    5. Re:Full text of Apple countersuit + patents by JAlexoi · · Score: 1
      This is the main stumbling point for Apple:

      The iPhone is a converged device...

      Meaning that iPhone is not a technological advance, but just "repackaging". That implies that they used someone else's technology. Nokia holds most of GSM patents, so Apple must have had to use some of them.
      On the other hand, Nokia never did hide the fact that they would copy good ideas. But not all ideas are patentable, while most technology is.

    6. Re:Full text of Apple countersuit + patents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Meh. ATD article is waaaaaaaaaay more informative than the PCMag parent article.

  12. Patent fight!!! by harmonise · · Score: 1

    [grabs popcorn]

    --
    Cory Doctorow talking about cloud computing makes as much sense as George W Bush talking about electrical engineering.
  13. Nokia sues Apple for infringing technology patents by Colin+Smith · · Score: 5, Funny

    And Apple sues Nokia for what? The process for creating black shiny things?

     

    --
    Deleted
  14. but we patented the wheel! by cfriedt · · Score: 1

    Has Apple essentially admitted that they are infringing on Nokia's patents by not stating exactly which patents they're counter-suing for?

    Maybe Apple thinks it can level out the playing field by saying 'we patented the ${x}', where ${x} can be any one of 'portable computing device', 'portable multimedia player', 'portable touch device', 'portable internet', 'portable camera', 'portable transistor', 'portable wheel', ... , etc.

    but we patented the portable media wheel ... see? ... [click-click-click-click]

  15. It IS crazy! by NoYob · · Score: 5, Funny

    Here's a crazy idea: in-house lawyers.

    Do you know how hard it is to potty train a lawyer?! It's not like a dog or better a cat that makes a bee line for the litter box. Nooooooo!

    Lawyers need a big office if they don't have one, they'll shit all over everything. They need an expensive car or they'll pee over everything. And as for food! Oh God!

    Just gimme a cat.

    --
    It's NOT me! It's the meds! I'm on 1000mg of Fukitol.
    1. Re:It IS crazy! by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 1

      Just be sure to have them spayed.

    2. Re:It IS crazy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, I'm a lawyer, and I have had a vasectomy. Hmmm.

    3. Re:It IS crazy! by Mikkeles · · Score: 1

      Not so; Pasteur was not entirely correct. Lawyers spontaneously generate out of the muck. (That's why muck-rackers so frequently have lawyers around them.)

      --
      Great minds think alike; fools seldom differ.
    4. Re:It IS crazy! by ColdWetDog · · Score: 2, Funny

      Not so; Pasteur was not entirely correct. Lawyers spontaneously generate out of the muck.

      M. Pasteur was concerned about the origin of lifeforms. Not lawyers.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  16. I wish them good luck by Vintermann · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ... and hope they hurt each other as much as possible.

    --
    xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
    1. Re:I wish them good luck by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 1

      I hope that somewhere in the appeals process, the judge rules that none of the software patents are valid. If Apple and Nokia just hurt each other, they will take it out on consumers -- every penny paid in royalties for an iPhone or a Nokia phone will be passed right on along to consumers, and there will be one more case of software patents being upheld available for future patent trolls.

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    2. Re:I wish them good luck by Vintermann · · Score: 1

      "If Apple and Nokia just hurt each other, they will take it out on consumers"

      Yeah, but since I'm not a customer of either, and think they deserve to lose all their customers to other parties, I don't particularly mind that. Come to the light side, we have better cookies anyway.

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
  17. That would mean glorious times ahead for Nokia by sznupi · · Score: 3, Interesting

    There's one quite likely reason why Nokia CEO would possibly...destroy most corporate opponents:

    Well into the mid-20th century, academic degrees remained important factors for politicians asking for the electorate's confidence. Likewise, one's military rank in reserves has been a decisive factor on selecting leaders and managers both in the public and the private sector. Even today, most Finnish managers are amongst those who have attained either an NCO (non-commissioned officer) or a reserve officer rank during their conscript tour of duty.

    (emphasis mine, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meritocracy#Grand_Duchy_of_Finland )

    --
    One that hath name thou can not otter
    1. Re:That would mean glorious times ahead for Nokia by Selfbain · · Score: 3, Funny

      But could he defeat a person who has the ability to warp reality itself?

      --
      Well, it has never been successfully tested.
    2. Re:That would mean glorious times ahead for Nokia by r_jensen11 · · Score: 3, Informative

      That quote is not surprising, considering that military service is compulsory in Finland. It's tantamount to being surprised that there is a strong correlation of people who do well in business performed well in school.

    3. Re:That would mean glorious times ahead for Nokia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Olli-Pekka Kallasvuo never went to army, what is uncommon in Finland.

    4. Re:That would mean glorious times ahead for Nokia by sznupi · · Score: 1

      Sure, but you have to consider little details.

      For example, in most post-soviet countries, where military service is theoretically compulsory, people with good education, coming mostly from rich homes, have the ways to weasel themselves out (with good reasons: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conscription_in_Russia#Russian_Federation it wasn't that bad at my place (where conscription was recently abandoned), but gives good overview). Essentially, the ones who end up serving are from the so called "bottom" of the society, finance & education wise. The closest to "NCO = higher chance of becoming a manager" was doing what was essentially a 4 month summercamp, during studies; with the only purpose of making sure that "military won't bug me now". Similar attitude is prevailing even in "professional military" that we will only have now - serving is an easy way of attaining comfortable financial situation. It is even explicitly stated in draft marketing!

      OTOH, from what little I know, it's quite a bit different in Finland. Widespread participation, you get selected for NCO or officer training, it isn't a summercamp (as a matter of fact your service is much longer then?). Makes me a little marveled at the whole thing.

      Anyway, it was mostly just about pointing out that statistical chances of Finnish CEOs in a ring are probably quite high ;p (at least against a typical CEO)

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    5. Re:That would mean glorious times ahead for Nokia by cntThnkofAname · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Hmmm I dunno, I have a personal theory that Jobs is an android from the future (lame OS punning not intended). I don't even need facts to back this up. Just check out the apple website, everything is shiny and starts with a lowercase "i". As most of my non technical friends insist apple has better and faster components... Instead of argue with them, I just shrug and suggest my theory which I have just shared with you guys ;)

    6. Re:That would mean glorious times ahead for Nokia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Olli-Pekka Kallasvuo did not service in the military, most propably exempted for medical reasons unless he is a jehovah's witness (strange exception in the finnish law) or he is from the demilitarized Åland region (he's not).

  18. Our economy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How awesome is it that our economy funnels heaps of money away from other projects (research, development, etc) and into making patents, regulating patents, and fighting over patents. The patent system is obviously our greatest invention ever, something we must prop up for years to come!

  19. maybe they should just pay up by jipn4 · · Score: -1, Troll

    What's Apple supposed to do? Just eventually lose the patent case and pay up?

    Most of what is responsible for the success of the iPhone--Mach, Objective-C, the GUI, MP3 players, multitouch, the app store, song recommendations, phone cameras--was invented elsewhere and simply copied ("stolen") by Apple. So, yes, maybe Apple should just lose the patent case and pay up; there's a good chance that they really do owe the money.

    1. Re:maybe they should just pay up by node+3 · · Score: 1

      What's Apple supposed to do? Just eventually lose the patent case and pay up?

      Most of what is responsible for the success of the iPhone--Mach, Objective-C, the GUI, MP3 players, multitouch, the app store, song recommendations, phone cameras--was invented elsewhere and simply copied ("stolen") by Apple. So, yes, maybe Apple should just lose the patent case and pay up; there's a good chance that they really do owe the money.

      Do please elaborate on the *actual* parties from whom Apple stole these technologies, and what grounds they'd have for a suit against Apple.

    2. Re:maybe they should just pay up by DurendalMac · · Score: 5, Informative

      Apparently some people get the opposite effect from Jobs' reality distortion field. Let's see here...

      Mach: It's open source. So long as Apple abides by the license (which they do), there is no possible way they can "steal" it.
      Objective-C: Apple is far from the only ones to have an Obj-C language. And the funny thing is that NeXT was the first company to license it, which Apple later purchased. Yep, obtaining a license certainly equates to theft!
      MP3 Players: Are you fucking serious? Apple was far from the first to make an MP3 player. They were simply the most successful. Holy crap, Sony ripped off the inventor of the wax cylinder by making the Walkman!
      Multitouch: Apple purchased Fingerworks, who had developed a number of multitouch technologies and interfaces. Again, buying is stealing?
      The App Store: You can't possibly be fucking serious.
      Song recommendations: See above. You mean they can recommend something based on something else you bought? WOW, they stole that...from the rest of the ENTIRE FUCKING INDUSTRY.
      Phone cameras: Holy. Fucking. Shit. I'm not even going to address this.

      Words cannot describe just how incredibly stupid you really are.

    3. Re:maybe they should just pay up by jipn4 · · Score: 0, Troll

      You can look that up yourself; the actual source of those technologies can be found mostly under those wikipedia entries.

      I put the term "stolen" in quotes because that is the term Apple fanboys like to use when other companies adopt technologies that Apple has popularized; the actual term is "copying", and that's OK. It is particularly OK because most of what makes the iPhone what it is didn't even come from Apple.

    4. Re:maybe they should just pay up by grouchomarxist · · Score: 1

      Just to add some details, NeXT in 1995 ended up buying the Objective-C trademark and rights from Stepstone.

  20. what a bunch of hypocrites by jipn4 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Apple introduced the iPhone a ground-breaking device that allowed users access to the functionality of the already popular iPod on a revolutionary mobile phone and Internet device. [...] In contrast, Nokia made a different business decision and remained focused on traditional mobile wireless handsets with conventional user interfaces.

    Nokia had smartphones and touch screen devices long before the iPhone even existed. Much of the iPhone is basically derived from the Palm Treo, the Danger Hiptop, Symbian, and the ideas of countless small developers and academics. Instead of acknowledging their enormous intellectual debt to all these other companies and developers, Apple is claiming to have done it all themselves.

    The iPhone has been engineered with the usual Apple gimmicks and flair, but technically, it is not a ground-breaking device in any area. But, as is typical for Apple, first the rip everybody off, and then they claim that they are the aggrieved party. They tried the same thing with the GUI and window systems and lost badly. Apple is truly evil.

  21. One actor is missing by Ilgaz · · Score: 1

    What would rock at this point is: MS getting into fight and suing BOTH of them :)

    Do you think I am joking? I expect anything from MS regarding mobile operating systems since it is only Windows Mobile not going anywhere.

    1. Re:One actor is missing by hitmark · · Score: 1

      meh, microsoft would not get directly involved.

      now that SCO have crashed and burned, what proxies do they have left that can be deployed?

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
  22. It can be even worse by Ilgaz · · Score: 1

    What if Judge orders to remove lots of features from both Apple and Nokia devices? It will be a total mess, a comedy like newer devices having less features.

    These days, the devices get monthly firmware updates. "It is built into chip, we can't change." is not an excuse anymore. As both companies are playing with justice system, system can play with them in very evil way too.

  23. Nokia is making a mockery of all Finns by aristotle-dude · · Score: -1, Troll
    Let's take a look at these patents:

    No. 5,555,369: Method of creating packages for a pointer-based computer system No. 6,239,795 B1: Pattern and color abstraction in a graphical user interface No. 5,315,703: Object-oriented notification framework system No. 6,189,034 B1: Method and apparatus for dynamic launching of a teleconferencing application upon receipt of a call No. 7,469,381, B2: List scrolling and document translation, scaling, and rotation on a touch-screen display No. RE 39, 486 E: Extensible, replaceable network component system No. 5,455,854: Object-oriented telephony system No. 5, 379,431: Boot framework architecture for dynamic staged initial program load No. 5,634,074 : Serial I/O device identifies itself to a computer through a serial interface during power on reset then it is being configured by the computer No. 5,915,131 : Method and apparatus for handling I/O requests utilizing separate programming interfaces to access separate I/O services No. 7,383,453 B2: Conserving power by reducing voltage supplied to an instruction-processing portion of a processor No. 5,848,105: GMSK signal processors for improved communications capacity and quality No. 6,343,263 B1 : Real-time signal processing system for serially transmitted data

    Is Nokia trying to patent object oriented programming? How are any of these patents only directly related to cellular phones? I see nothing specific to cell phones. These patents should never have been granted in the first place. Should I patent "Object Oriented method of storing information in memory", sue the hell out of all software developers that implement objects storing data and file an injunction to prevent future violations? That patent would halt all OOP software development.

    I would tell Nokia to go to hell and lobby my country's government to implement trade embargo on all Nokia products.

    I'm a finn but I think Nokia needs to have their ass handed to them in court and have all of those patents revoked.

    --
    Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
    1. Re:Nokia is making a mockery of all Finns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And then sponge off the rest of Europe when your country goes down the toilet, that'll learn them

    2. Re:Nokia is making a mockery of all Finns by Atypical+Geek · · Score: 4, Informative

      You do realize that those are Apple's patents, right? Nokia actually holds patents on nearly every wireless technology known to man.

    3. Re:Nokia is making a mockery of all Finns by aristotle-dude · · Score: 0, Troll

      My mistake. Nokia's patents are equally ridiculous as they are trying to patent Wifi use on a mobile device. The device is irrelevant.

      --
      Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
    4. Re:Nokia is making a mockery of all Finns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just ignore him, he states he's a Finn, but it was only the other week that he was a Canadian:

      http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1452090&cid=30178752

      He's an Apple fanboy of the worst kind, a troll who can't even keep his story straight. Not worth wasting your time on.

      It's quite telling that even now that people have pointed out how he got the companies wrong he's still trying to twist it as Nokia's fault.

    5. Re:Nokia is making a mockery of all Finns by aristotle-dude · · Score: 0, Troll

      Just ignore him, he states he's a Finn, but it was only the other week that he was a Canadian:

      So, it is impossible for me to be both? I was born in Finland and I have citizenship there. I'm also a Canadian citizen. People can be dual-citizens you know.

      I got the patents wrong and I'm not afraid to admit that mistake. Why don't you sign up for an account Mr. Coward? Nokia is trying to patent Wifi on a cellphone and a bunch of other obvious things that anyone would likely stumble across naturally. Nokia is just trying to protect their cartel.

      --
      Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
  24. Why dont we by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    just stop fucking around and get rid of this fuckedup apple crap once and for all time jobs sucks apple sucks all apple products suck even bigger the jerks mincing down the road Oh look at me on my iPhone you fucked up 2 bit faggot all apple users are faggots .

    1. Re:Why dont we by rochrist · · Score: 1

      Classy!!!

  25. My Mistake. But nokia's patents are equally dumb by aristotle-dude · · Score: 1
    Nokia has patented using Wifi on a cellphone. I'm sorry but the device is irrelevant. Unless Nokia invented WiFi, they have no business trying to patent some other person's work just because they implemented it on a new device. It is still a standard that was created by other people.

    Also, it is inconceivable that Nokia wants to collect a percentage of the handset prices when, except for the cellular radio and related software, the iPhone is basically an iPod Touch and you don't see them going after Apple for it do you? If 70% of the cost of the device is not covered by Nokia's patents, why should they get a percentage of the price of the entire device?

    Furthermore, shouldn't it be Infineon and other suppliers of GSM related components who pay the royalty fees? Why should the handset makers pay?

    --
    Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
  26. They are fighting like little children by ThePadrinoDotCom · · Score: 1

    They are fighting like little children Little tiny ones at that http://www.thepadrino.com/