
Notable iOS Developer Suggests API Boycott to Fight Patent Trolls - bond
http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/notable_ios_developer_suggests_api_boycott_to_fight_patent_trolls.php
======
Construct
Even disabled in-app purchases still leaves you open to litigation. Lodsys is
demanding their 0.575% of all transactions going forward as well as those that
occurred in the past.

Obviously, 0.575% of in-app sales for a handful of high-profile apps isn't
going to make Lodsys wealthy. What they really want is for Apple to buy their
patent for millions of dollars to make this bad publicity go away.

Even more worrisome are the reports now that MacroSolve is extorting app
developers in the same way for using forms in their applications.

In-app purchase and using forms in your application are absolutely trivial to
someone skilled in the art. Unfortunately, the costs of proving this in a
court are likely to be massive, especially now that Apple et. al. have
essentially validated this patent by licensing it themselves. Very
disappointing across the board.

~~~
awj
> especially now that Apple et. al. have essentially validated this patent by
> licensing it themselves. Very disappointing across the board.

I thought that Apple picked up this licenses as part of a bulk deal with the
previous holder where they bought hundreds/thousands/millions of licenses all
in one place as blanket cover. It's impractical to believe that they hand-
vetted each one, so it hardly sounds like validation, even in court.

~~~
shareme
Apple, Google and MS licensed the same patent when it was with IV its now with
asshole patent troll..asshole patent troll is claiming that license does not
cover 3rd party developers who make use of an api from Apple, Google, or MS.

~~~
hga
Brings into question the utility of bothering to do business with IV, doesn't
it?

------
bradleyland
Unfortunately, calls to boycott are rarely successful. The defect rate is too
high because of the huge incentive to defect. Also, in this specific case, the
collateral damage will be the buying public. If there's one thing that
consumers have proven time and time again is that ultimately, all they want is
the product; they don't care about your cause. Secondly, but possibly more
importantly, customers respond negatively to being used as a means to someone
else's end. Developers denying customers features and updates because of a
patent lawsuit boondoggle is about as far from consumers' needs & wants as it
gets. This reinforces the natural incentive to defect in a boycott scenario.
Not only are you emptying the market of competition, but you are endangering
the customer relationship. I'll be amazed if this garners any level of
participation from the iOS development community.

------
nhangen
As an iOS developer, I want to know why Apple has not addressed this yet?
Seriously.

~~~
RyanKearney
You're using the API wrong.

Sent from my iPhone

------
jarsj
Time to create an "iOS Developer Foundation to Fight Patent Trolls". I will be
happy to donate 1% of my revenues to such an organization who promises to
fight these buggers on behalf of us.

~~~
robterrell
Dude, I am _already_ donating _30%_ percent of my revenues to an organization
that should be doing that.

~~~
jarsj
No, that organization has other interests to protect while this one would be
democratic and transparent. I am serious guys.

~~~
robterrell
I applaud your seriousness. But I don't want to spend the time on it. I would
rather develop software in an ecosystem that is protected from such crap. If
it ends up being Microsoft's, or Google's, or HP's, then so be it.

This is a threat to Apple's profits (directly, through lost app sales, and
indirectly, by driving developers away from the platform). Can't imagine that
Apple has other interests more important to protect.

Also, I think the 1% fund would be consumed by the first lawsuit. I don't know
about Lodsys, but often patent trolls keep attorneys on staff, so they're not
burning billable hours, while your legal team is. They can make us burn
through our fund very quickly.

No, this is Apple's fight -- and if Apple won't fight it, the platform is
doomed anyway, because all of the patent trolls will smell blood in the water.

------
carussell
It's weird that this is being framed as a boycott. It's more like complying
with patent law (even if you don't like the patent and assuming it's actually
valid.)

Person B: "Hey, so what happened with your situation, where the patent holder
demanded you either license it from them or discontinue
use/manufacture/trade?" Person A: "I'm now boycotting them." Person B: "So...
discontinue use/manufacture/trade."

~~~
adolph
I think the difference is that there is is an user interface item that looks
like it may result in in-app purchase but actually has a message to the user
about why the feature doesn't work. This is different from not using in-app
purchasing at all.

I don't think Apple would approve an app with such a user interface item.

------
Incubus
Can someone confirm for me if Apple require developers to use this API for in-
app purchases? If that is the case, I really hope that they step up and do
something about it soon.

~~~
dhimes
I imagine Apple is furious. They paid Lodsys in good faith for a license.
Hopefully now they are rewriting the API to get around the patent. Then they
can tell Lodsys to go fuck themselves.

~~~
ikono
There's no proof that Apple paid Lodsys for this patent. It's almost certain
that they have a licence for it from a previous deal with IV who was the
previous owner of this and many many other patents. Lodsys can't sue Apple so
they're trying to do so indirectly by threatening the ecosystem.

~~~
lukifer
You're probably right, and what's more, it's likely they didn't license this
patent specifically, but rather it was included in a family of patents for
which they negotiated a license fee.

------
ryanisinallofus
<http://goo.gl/4vRWy>

The patent is from 2007. Surely in-app phone purchases existed before.

Byt he way- the license prices in the article seems to be pointing to in app
upgrades. Like from a free app to the pro version. From Lodsys' website:

"In the case of an Application doing an in-application upgrade (and only this
scenario), Lodsys is seeking 0.575% of US revenue over for the period of the
notice letter to the expiration of the patent, plus applicable past usage."

------
ryanisinallofus
One way to stop trolls would be a developer owned organization that would
accept patent donations, and raise funds to purchase patents. Once the
organization owned enough patents it could protect developers with the "sue me
and I'll sue you" defense.

It would take a while but after a few noteworthy donations some protection
could be had for members of the organization.

~~~
zuppy
You can't do that against a company that doesn't build anything (as in the
regular patent troll).

------
benologist
I think it's a great idea, although obviously it would be better if Apple just
stepped up themselves (saw rumors that was likely / in progress).

But as I noted in the comments on RWW they're going beyond in-app purchases
and targeting at least one company that's got no in-app purchases and is doing
the pretty standard free/paid combo.

------
chicagobob
IMHO: wrong strategy. Tweaking your app for every patent that a troll throws
at you leaves you vulnerable forever.

a) I hope Apple does something globally to protect the iOS ecosystem;

b) I think software patents need to be reformed (I'm not sure they need to be
eliminated, maybe they do / maybe they don't, that's another discussion).

------
brisance
I'm not familiar with the legal nuances. Does buying licensed music through
iTunes Music Store count as "in-app purchase" which would be in effect, prior
art, thereby violating the patent?

------
ignifero
Why would Apple ever get in the way? Just so they don't lose the 0.002% of
their revenues? Wont that also be a PR disaster for them? (Apple the elephant
going after the tiny patent holder).

Face it guys, whether it's Apple taking your 30% or Facebook (who also takes
30%) or Google (who also takes 30%) or anyone, indie developers are always
left on their own and herded like sheep.

~~~
ChrisLTD
It wouldn't play that way in court of public opinion. It's not too hard to
recognize Lodsys as a leech on productive companies like Apple.

