US trade body decides Apple has case to answer The US International Trade Commission has decided to investigate HTC's allegations that Apple is infringing its patents. Its answer could see the iPhone banned from American stores. The ITC's investigation is in response to HTC's complaint, filed on May 12th, that Apple is in breach of various patents owned by HTC. The …
It's especially damaging to the software fields where the "invention" under protection is code, user interfaces, and math. A patent is supposed to prove that no other implementation of an algorithm existed, but it's impossible to prove a negative. The amount of software in existence increases exponentially, the probability of two independent developers working in the same domain on the same algorithm is very high.
It won't change though, companies who use patents have more money than those being hurt by patents.
... of HTC, Microsoft, Adobe, Google, anyone else Apple has pissed off in the last couple or so years?
One company on its own might not have the influence with the ITC, but there's the smell of blood in the water here and I wouldn't put it past the above mentioned companies to band together in such circumstances.
Do you really think that the FTC would favor a Taiwanese company over the largest US technology company? This is just HTC responding to the 13 patent infringements that Apple took to the FTC earlier in the year. Now HTC have some Microsoft patents to fight back with they are trying.
Interestingly enough the patent deal that HTC did with Microsoft now gives a precedent to the "Microsoft owns the Linux part of Android" as that was in the contract that was signed. HTC is paying Microsoft a royalty for every Android phone they ship!
The complaint is based on HTC's own patents, not anything from Microsoft.
We don't know what was in the contract HTC signed with Microsoft, and we probably never will, because the contract is secret. We know what MS has said about it, but we also know that Novell disagreed with what MS said about what their deal said, and who was paying who. Having read some of the evidence from Comes vs. Microsoft I'm not inclined to take any public statement from them at face value.
As you state the FTC would likely not favor one US patent holder (M$/HTC) over another (Apple).
Also if the patents were paid and filed properly in the US by US law, then yes I think the world would expect America to side with a Taiwanese, (or any country) over the US, if they did indeed have a valid legal claim. We don't favor American interests over others in our court systems (at least not openly as a matter of practice). That is the precise reason that so many companies use our patent system. (of course the US patent and IP property rules give them little choice)
Also who are you quoting here: "Microsoft owns the Linux part of Android" This is so wrong you should not quote or listen to whomever said this.
First Android is not Linux.
Second MS has no ownership over LInux, no part in any way.
Third MS has no ownership over Android* (see below)
Fourth Google developed Android, but has released it as an open source platform.
So M$ and HTC can both make android based phones if they care to. And being truly open source they can make their own version of it, and if others don't like it, they can also make their own version.
If HTC is paying M$ it is for other patents they felt they had infringed on, not on any part of Linux.
Android may be a little more at risk of having infringed on M$ technology, but until the proof is demonstrated in the court room it is all speculation.
And if this is the kind of patents like "using a touch screen device to store files" or other such IP nonense, it should be laughed out of court from all the SCI-fi prior art that has been demonstrated.
"Do you really think that the FTC would favor a Taiwanese company over the largest US technology company?"
Well if the US patents in question are valid, and Apple are indeed infringing, then yes, I do expect them to favour a Taiwanese company. The law is the law regardless of the origins of the plaintiff and defendant.
"A ban on Apple products would certainly hurt the company, and quite possibly the US economy"
Come now, that's a bit of a stretch don't you think? According to Google Finance they have 34,300 employees and a bit over $10 billion cash in pocket, so it isn't likely they would rush to lay anyone off, at least for a few days. While I'm sure it would cost them a few dollars, they are hardly on the brink and even if they were, they aren't that important regardless of what some people might think.
The title says that the ITC has decided that Apple has a case to answer. This is incorrect.
First, we only have a rumor that ITC is even looking into matters involving Apple, but even if they are, that doesn't mean that there's anything for Apple to answer. Apple doesn't have to do anything unless ITC actually opens a case against them.
Just another false hit-bait headline from the register.
Hopefully all these law suites cut Apple a slice from the reality pie - and perhaps some of the cult members might wake up to themselves too!
I'm so sick of all the bullcrap that Apple and their fanbois come out with - Apple did not invent the portable MP3 player. Apple did not invent the GUI. OSX is not virus free. The iPad is not magical.
If Apple disappeared it would have minimal effect on the economy if any at all, do you people really think that if apple vanished that all of a sudden there would be all these millions people walking around just completely lost with no technology to use...
Ok, well maybe a few thousand fanboi's would roam the streets sulking, but the rest of the world would simply just buy tech from another company and move on with their lives, apple is more insignificant than they think they are...
Apple would have a claim to fame if they were the ONLY company that made smartphones and MP3 players, but they're not, and as someone above stated, they're a determent to the economy because they horde money, they dont spend it...
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
