Ironworks Gaming Forum - Microsoft Vs. Apple, the iPod patent battles

Ironworks Gaming Forum (http://www.ironworksforum.com/forum/index.php)

- General Discussion (http://www.ironworksforum.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=36)

- - Microsoft Vs. Apple, the iPod patent battles (http://www.ironworksforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=94253)

Hivetyrant

09-28-2005 05:25 AM

Hehehe, most people will think it is cruel, but I think that this is pretty damn funny....
As cruel as it is, Apple should have been alot smarter in the first place.

Quote:

Apple released the iPod in November 2001 but didn't file for a patent until the following July. At some point during that period Microsoft filed for patents on some of the iPod's technology. The US Patent Office has ruled that Microsoft has the right to charge Apple an $11 licensing fee for each iPod sold. The furious Apple said that they will appeal the decision. This disputes comes out only a few days after Microsoft announced that it is waging war on the iPod and will soon release a rival line of players. So far, 21 million iPods have been sold worldwide, 18 million in the last year alone. You do the Math.

Callum

09-28-2005 09:52 AM

I find that hilarious. :D I'm not an iPod fan anyway... And that is just an amazing business call! [img]tongue.gif[/img]

burnzey boi

09-28-2005 10:27 AM

MP3 for me...

Erm.. Thats a lot of money bill gates is about to recieve.

Bungleau

09-28-2005 11:39 AM

In US patent law, you have up to a year to file the patent application from the time the invention is first proposed, discussed, or realized -- I don't know which one (Timber?).

I don't know exactly what the law covers regarding patents for the underlying technology... sounds like someone at Apple may have screwed up royally.

and yes, I'd be glad to take $11 per iPod. Heck, I'll be satisfied with just $1 apiece... :D

Iron Greasel

09-30-2005 05:30 AM

If you can patent something that has been in the stores for months, I'd say there's something wrong with the patent laws.

mad=dog

09-30-2005 06:51 AM

Initially you don't take a patent. You apply and there is a period where it can be contested. Microsoft cannot charge a per capita "license" for units already sold. They will have to justify that their patented technology was used and then they can be awarded a compensation in case it is ruled in their favour. This amount should technically reflect Microsofts loss, but it is often far less - it will hardly be 11$ pr unit. Such a case will usually take years before it reaches a conclusion - by that time it can hardly be an issue anymore. This is the way Microsoft themselves have managed to use their competitors technology. Basically stealing patented stuff is way too easy as it is rarely cost-effecient to defend your patent.
So. If MS decides to go forward and launch a 5 million suit they may, just may get 11 million in five years. I will take a bet that nothing comes out of it.

[ 09-30-2005, 06:52 AM: Message edited by: mad=dog ]

LennonCook

09-30-2005 07:37 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Hivetyrant:
Hehehe, most people will think it is cruel, but I think that this is pretty damn funny....
As cruel as it is, Apple should have been alot smarter in the first place.

<span style="color: lightblue">It has nothing to do with how smart Apple is, or how cruel MS is. It has entirely to do with one little thing: prior art. What MS did isn't cruel to Apple - or atleast, it is but that doesn't matter - it's bad for the people for whom patents exist (ie, all of society) (because MS clearly wouldn't know all the ins and outs of the invention, and so the patent couldn't be very detailed). Thankfully, there might be some chance yet.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:22 AM.