Topic: Patents
Apple’s U.K. Suit Against Qualcomm Adds to Global Patent War – Bloomberg (Mar 4, 2017)
Just a quickie here – Apple has now sued Qualcomm in the UK too, on top of its existing suits in China and the US. There’s not a lot more detail in this article or, apparently, in the court filing itself, but the thrust of the UK case seems to be the same as in the other cases already filed.
via Bloomberg
Uber’s self-driving unit quietly bought firm with tech at heart of Alphabet lawsuit – Reuters (Mar 1, 2017)
This is an interesting angle on the Uber-Waymo lawsuit over the alleged stealing of LiDAR technology by Anthony Levandowski – it appears Levandowski’s Otto acquired a company which specialized in LiDAR technology before it was itself acquired by Uber, providing an alternative theory for how the company was apparently able to get up to speed so quickly on the technology. One of Waymo’s key arguments in its suit was that Levandowski appeared to make unreasonably rapid progress on LiDAR following Otto’s founding, and that the only explanation was theft of ideas, designs and so on from Waymo. As an interesting side note, see also this newly-released October 2016 interview with Anthony Levandowski from Forbes, in which he somewhat bizarrely volunteers the information that he didn’t steal any IP from Google when he left. He also talks through his long history with autonomous driving technology, which raises a key point here: clearly Levandowski learned a lot about this technology over the years, and taking that knowledge with him to a new employer clearly isn’t stealing. So how does Waymo prove in court that Otto/Uber used the documents he allegedly downloaded rather than his personal knowledge (or technology from somewhere completely different) in designing LiDAR systems? If you know the best way to build a LiDAR system because you’ve done it before, are you obligated to act as if you have no idea how to do it when you move to a new employer? I’m not a lawyer, but I think some of these questions are fascinating, and are likely to be critical in this case.
via Reuters
Qualcomm Comments on Apple Complaint – Qualcomm (Jan 21, 2017)
This is Qualcomm’s official statement on Apple’s lawsuit filed yesterday in San Diego, and it predictably pushes back on the key points in Apple’s filing. It argues that Apple has been the instigator of the various investigations of alleged anticompetitive behavior by Qualcomm in various jurisdictions, and that Apple has been misleading in its statements to the various authorities involved. Unlike some patent disputes, many of which are ultimately settled out of court, this one looks set to go the distance, given the sheer acrimony involved and the fact that this goes beyond a mere dispute over royalties. Combined with the FTC and Korean case, Qualcomm has plenty on its hands here.
via Qualcomm Comments on Apple Complaint | Qualcomm
Apple Sues Qualcomm Over Patent Royalties in Antitrust Case – Bloomberg (Jan 20, 2017)
First we had the FTC taking action against Qualcomm, and now Apple is joining the fray, and I’d argue that’s not at all coincidental. Apple would obviously dearly love to pay Qualcomm less money for licensing and chips, and the FTC has given it the perfect ammunition by highlighting alleged wrongdoing on Qualcomm’s part. Intriguingly, it appears that Qualcomm has been withholding rebates due to Apple in retaliation for Apple assisting the South Korean authorities with their recent investigations into anticompetitive practices by Qualcomm. But Apple is also going a lot further, by making some of the same arguments put forth in the FTC case about overcharging for essential FRAND patents. This is going to get ugly. I’m seeing – both in this Bloomberg piece and elsewhere – suggestions that this lawsuit stems from high pressure Apple feels around iPhone growth and margins, but that’s nonsense – Apple will always try to get the best margins possible, and when it’s given a way to apply pressure to a supplier, it’ll do so. The FTC action provided just such a way, so that’s the proximate cause here, not any sort of crunch on the Apple side.
via Apple Sues Qualcomm Over Patent Royalties in Antitrust Case – Bloomberg
Apple Pulls All Withings Accessories From Apple Online Store Following Nokia Lawsuit – Mac Rumors (Dec 23, 2016)
Apple clearly doesn’t appreciate Nokia’s recent lawsuit over patents, and is choosing to let Nokia know by dropping its Withings products from its stores. This will have a minimal impact on Apple’s retail operation, but Apple retail is a great premium channel for Withings, so this is a nice way to put some minor pressure on while the lawsuit is underway.
via Apple Pulls All Withings Accessories From Apple Online Store Following Nokia Lawsuit – Mac Rumors
Nokia sues Apple for infringing patents, industry back on war footing | Reuters (Dec 22, 2016)
Apple and Nokia have a long history as competitors in the smartphone market, but since Nokia’s sale of its phone business to Microsoft, the relationship has changed. It appears Apple now wants to renegotiate terms, and Nokia doesn’t. This will probably end in a settlement of some kind, perhaps court-facilitated.
via Nokia sues Apple for infringing patents, industry back on war footing | Reuters
America’s Big 5 tech companies increase patent filings, Microsoft holds lead in AI technologies – IPWatchdog.com | Patents & Patent Law (Dec 22, 2016)
Interesting and valuable analysis. But clearly an oversimplification to make patents held the arbiter of a “lead” in AI. Ultimately, whether you lead in AI comes down to the customer benefit you drive from it, not the patents themselves.