

Lodsys Responds to Apple, Files Lawsuits Against App Developers - hamedh
http://www.macrumors.com/2011/05/31/lodsys-responds-to-apple-files-lawsuits-against-app-developers/

======
nhangen
This is infuriating. I wasn't even given a letter, but I'd be happy to donate
money to a central organization, if there is one, ready to fight these
assholes.

Patents are bogus, and software patents are even worse. In this case, we're
talking about process and not technology. Maybe this is needed to bring light
to the issue and perhaps piss Apple off enough that they'll work to invalidate
the patent.

~~~
nfriedly
I'd bet that if Apple doesn't support the developers, the Electronic Frontier
Foundation will. And the EFF gladly accepts donations: <http://www.eff.org/>

~~~
mscarborough
Yes, that's true.

But hopefully between Apple/Google/MS/etc there is enough lawyering to not put
additional burden on the EFF for a such a generic feature to app markets.
Particularly if these companies want to avoid the 'but what if i get sued'
stigma.

------
MatthewPhillips
All this recent litigation nonsense is turning me into an extremist. Consider
me anti all patents. And I'm this close to being anti all copyright as well.

------
zmmmmm
Interesting that Apple is actually negotiating with them over this. They must
be seriously thinking about the value of the FUD it would create for their
competitors if Apple managed to come out of it with an exclusive (or even non-
exclusive, but expensive) license.

------
smackfu
It was pretty silly to think Lodsys, which is solely a patent-holding company,
would back down just because they got a letter from Apple's lawyers. Lodsys
has lawyers too.

~~~
brudgers
I don't think Apple expected Lodsys to back down - they were in negotiations
with them afterall [according to Apple's letter]. The letter was intended to
encourage developers to continue to develop for Apple's platform. If they had
been serious about stopping Lodsys, Apple would have been in court seeking an
injunction. However, the downside would have been Apple potentially setting a
precedent that established greater obligations toward developers than
currently exist - and that has such severe downsides to their business model
that they won't do it.

~~~
Someone
IANAL, but is it even possible for Apple to get an injunction, given that they
technically/formally are not a party in this case?

~~~
innernette
Apple would not get an injunction, but it could get a declaratory judgment.
Apple could get a judgment for invalidity or non-infringement.

You are right though, legally Apple is in a different position from the app
developers that are being sued, and that probably poses some problems. The
terms of Apple's license with Lodsys might hamstring some of their arguments.
Apple might not even have standing to get a judgment of non-infringement. On
the other hand, if Apple had filed for declaratory judgment, it could have
chosen a venue other than the Eastern District of Texas, the plaintiff-
friendly federal court that Lodsys chose.

It's a complicated decision for Apple, and it's more than just choosing to
stand up for developers or not. Apple was probably in the process of
evaluating the strength of their position when Lodsys rushed the issue to the
courthouse.

------
st3fan
So what exactly is this patent covering? I've heard several things .. the
'Upgrade to Pro Version' buttons, the 'Would you like to rate this app'
dialog, and some other things.

Does anyone actually know what it exactly is that they are after?

~~~
GHFigs
Their own public description of their patents[1] seems to cover both (and
more). However, the example Apple cites in their letter[2] refers to "user
feedback":

 _Once again, Apple provides, under the infringement theories set out in your
letters, the physical memory in which user feedback is stored and, just as
importantly, the APIs that allow transmission of that user feedback to and
from the App Store, over an Apple server, using Apple hardware and software.
Indeed, in the notice letters to App Makers that we have been privy to, Lodsys
itself relies on screenshots of the App Store to purportedly meet this claim
element._

If anybody has a link to an actual notice from Lodsys, that would be the best
source.

[1]: <http://www.lodsys.com/our-patents.html> [2]:
[http://www.engadget.com/2011/05/23/apple-responds-to-
lodsys-...](http://www.engadget.com/2011/05/23/apple-responds-to-lodsys-
infringement-accusations-says-develope/)

~~~
AndyJPartridge
There must be prior art.

Telephone voting on the Eurovision song contest? Customer helpline numbers?
Comment cards in restaurants?

Forgive me if I've missed something here.

~~~
Apple-Guy
Yup. The patent system is severely broken, especially their prior art research
(or lack of).

------
orangecat
When Sony got pwned, I had mixed feelings. That would not be the case here.

~~~
jdq
I'm not sure exactly what you are implying about feeling since Apple is very
polarizing (happy iOS devs are getting sued?), but if you take a step back
you'll see that this isn't just an Apple problem. The lawsuits will come to
Android app devs next, and probably most other mobile platforms with in-app
purchases.

~~~
benologist
Lodsys is already targeting Android developers too.

[http://www.macrumors.com/2011/05/27/lodsys-also-targeting-
an...](http://www.macrumors.com/2011/05/27/lodsys-also-targeting-android-
developers-with-patent-infringement-claims/)

~~~
kefs
I've been curious to see if/how this will affect my proof-of-concept Android
app Click It/Click It Gold. I built it within 3 days specifically to test the
in-app billing api just after their debut... No word from Lodsys, yet.

<http://www.kefsco.com/clickit.html>

~~~
sc00ter
I may have missed it, but why aren't you testing in-app upgrade from Click It
to Click It Gold? :o)

~~~
kefs
They're both free apps.. The only difference is that clicks in Gold cost $99,
as opposed to 99c.

------
methodin
Is it legal and/or feasible to start a Kickstarter project to help fund these
developers' legal costs? Not sure how it could be distributed but if they
could somehow pool together it would make for a pretty awesome stand. I know
I'd gladly contribute to stop these stupid a-holes from pulling these stunts
on the average joe.

~~~
nhangen
I don't think Kickstarter would approve it, but I'm about to release a plugin
that might help : <http://ignitiondeck.com>

Hate to sound spammy, but this issue matters to me.

------
zdw
Source post here: [http://www.lodsys.com/1/post/2011/05/-responsibility-and-
acc...](http://www.lodsys.com/1/post/2011/05/-responsibility-and-
accountability-lodsys-usd1000-offer.html)

Betting $1000/dev that they're right is definitely gutsy.

~~~
Edog
Of course, they just making an offer, and, like any gift, they are under no
obligation to make good on it.

If they refused to honor the offer in the event that they lose, they would not
likely be worried about their reputation.

~~~
elithrar
It's only what, $8000? A drop in the ocean for Lodsys, and $1000 isn't going
to do anything for these developers.

------
AndyJPartridge
I just don't get how this can be upheld.

It's OBVIOUSLY impossible for Johnny Coder to be aware of every patent that
has been filed to date.

Copying someones overall design wholesale, I can understand. The "Look and
Feel" copyright system is a much neater solution than all this patent
nonsense.

~~~
jcarreiro
> It's OBVIOUSLY impossible for Johnny Coder to be aware of every patent

There is no requirement that you be aware of the patent to infringe upon it.
In fact, awareness of the patent may entitle the patent holder to increased
damages.

Disclaimer: I write software for a living. I'm not sure where I stand on the
idea of software patents but I suspect they do more good than harm. I think
that someone suing small, independent developers who made the mistake of using
an Apple-provided API in an obvious way and who lack the financial means or
legal expertise to defend themselves is reprehensible.

~~~
rimantas

      > I suspect they do more good than harm
    

I would like to see examples of software patents doing more good.

~~~
cwp
I would like to see examples of software patents doing any good at all.

~~~
cheald
There's uh...well, there's...no, wait, there's that one...well, balls.

------
daimyoyo
Why would these people file suit the week before WWDC? It makes no sense at
all.

------
thmzlt
What about other mobile platforms? Don't they allow in-app purchases?

~~~
zoul
[http://www.macrumors.com/2011/05/27/lodsys-also-targeting-
an...](http://www.macrumors.com/2011/05/27/lodsys-also-targeting-android-
developers-with-patent-infringement-claims/)

------
shareme
Given that they bought 'future' license rights to a patent and not previous
entered into patent license rights.. what other laws factor into the case?

I do not think RICO applies here just yet. Certainly filing untrue claims
against a party that will not be a party to any patent claim is not too bright
as a business model.

In any case both Apple, Google, MS, etc would be the ones acting on legal
cases to remove or keep an app in the market not the individual developer. I
AM NOT A LAWYER.. however would it be wise to see whether Apple, Google, MS,
etc fight this at the DCMA/case level of when a court tries to request a take
down?

------
thisisblurry
Good luck with that.

------
necrecious
Wonder if there is a way to get WBC style trolls to go up against patent
trolls.

~~~
younata
just convince them that patent trolls support the "homosexual agenda".

Doing that is the hard part. Good luck.

~~~
necrecious
WBC style trolls are those who abuse the legal system for personal gain, by
legal but not necessarily moral means.

Patent trolls are exactly in this mold, the question is if there is a way to
make money off of them?

Any system will have parasites. You can change system, i.e. patent reform, or
introduce a predator for the parasite.

