

HTC's patents could lead to an ban on the next iPhone & iPad - sindhiparsani
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/biz/archives/2012/09/08/2003542211

======
beloch
On the one hand, I'm pretty sick of this nonsense. On the other hand, it might
be in everyone's best interest if HTC succeeds here. If millions of fanboys
are denied their shiny new iPhones and Apple, which is rather well connected
in Washington, finally winds up losing money due to the patent system, maybe
we'll finally seem some progress towards reform.

~~~
thaumaturgy
For me, it's been fascinating to see what huge companies that are flush with
more cash than ever before [1] will do with that cash during a prolonged
recession.

The most common argument for continuing to lower taxes on businesses is that
it will stimulate the economy because the businesses will spend the money on
their employees. It looks like what actually happens is that they spend the
money waging legal wars against each-other.

[1]: [http://www.businessinsider.com/corporate-profits-just-hit-
an...](http://www.businessinsider.com/corporate-profits-just-hit-an-all-time-
high-wages-just-hit-an-all-time-low-2012-6)

~~~
ceejayoz
Legal wars tend to be expensive because they involve spending a lot of money
on employees, though.

~~~
elemenohpee
On lawyers and other non-productive employees though, not in a way that would
grow the economy. That's a huge broken window fallacy.

------
redthrowaway
Hopefully this will be the case that gives Cook the ability to "gracefully
withdraw" from Jobs' legal intifada against Android, and we can end this
silliness for good.

~~~
onetimeuse001
There is no Android vs iPhone here. At worst for Apple, they let HTC off the
hook and continue against others, for as long as they can.

~~~
freehunter
It doesn't sound like there could be any "let HTC off the hook". The whole
point of this is that HTC is seeking an injunction against Apple. Even if
Apple withdrew all complaints, HTC could still seek that injunction.

~~~
onetimeuse001
Apple won round one and really screwed HTC
[http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/12/20/us-htc-apple-
paten...](http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/12/20/us-htc-apple-patent-
idUSTRE7BI24620111220) . It's not in HTC's interest to pick a fight will
mighty Apple at all, so the best scenario for HTC would a deal with Apple.
Apple can sue them again and again and again for patent after patent. Even the
legal fees will be felt by HTC

Remember: HTC's loyalties are with their shareholders, not to fight a war
against Apple on behalf of Google or Android fans. If their board determined
that selling bottled water was better than making phones, they have a duty to
pivot. Google (Motorola) is different, they have a much larger stake in
Android.

------
bgarbiak
Once Apple will announce LTE on iPhone all hell will break loose. HTC has two
related patents, Samsung - 79. Source:
[http://www.networkworld.com/news/2012/042612-lte-patent-
wars...](http://www.networkworld.com/news/2012/042612-lte-patent-
wars-258713.html)

~~~
alexchamberlain
Nokia owns loads of patents for GSM which the standards bodies negotiated
terms on; I'm sure it will happen here as well.

~~~
eisa01
Apple has already settled with Nokia:
[http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/jun/14/apple-
nokia...](http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/jun/14/apple-nokia-patent-
case)

~~~
simonh
Yes, but Apple being sued over patents is OK, it's only when they sue somebody
else that there's a problem.

It's just like with Chinese labour. Everyone else uses them, but Apple using
them is wrong, even if they pay more than everyone else and the workers prefer
to work in the Apple device factories.

Didn't you get the memo?

~~~
StavrosK
The problem is that Apple was the one who started using patents offensively,
as far as I know.

~~~
sbuk
Sorry, but that'd be Nokia and Motorola.

~~~
elemenohpee
A timeline: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smartphone_wars>

------
alexchamberlain
Dear Judges of the World,

Please declare all relevant patent holders to modern mobile phone and tablet
technology must grant Compulsory Licences.

Regards,

The World

This is getting ridiculous - very few of these patents are really innovative
anyway!

References: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_licensing>

~~~
onetimeuse001
Can they? Judges have to go by existing laws, not invent them.

~~~
alexchamberlain
I honestly don't know; more prominent lawyers/judges etc could comment on it
at least to encourage governments to step in. A lot of time and money is being
wasted here.

------
eckyptang
Am I the only one who is utterly tired of reading this sort of stuff?

All it proves is that smart phone vendors are universally asshats and this
market is dangerous, risky and volatile so I don't want to be involved.

~~~
mrich
Most markets where money can be made are like that, though...

~~~
eckyptang
Not really. I've worked in many competitive markets and we've not been suing
the asses of each other. A victory for another is motivation for us.

------
X-Istence
What I don't understand is how companies can hold patents on something that is
so clearly a standard that is required to be used by anyone that wants to
connect to an LTE based network. If anything these patents should be licensed
under FRAND, and should be licensed by the manufacturer of the modem not by
every single device manufacturer that happens to include an LTE enabled modem
in their device.

I don't quite understand how someone can own patents on a standard and
selectively allow and disallow people from using that standard. Why hasn't
this been banned? Why are there no completely open standards for communication
between a wireless base-station and a wireless node?

Are there any patents on VHF/UHF communications using FM/AM modulation? Were
there any patents that have expired that I am not aware of because I am fairly
young compared to the technology (avid HAM radio user ... not nearly as well
educated on its history)? Where these same patent battles happening when
people were building radio's?

~~~
fluidcruft
I agree it's weird that the scope of the patents aren't limited to the actual
modems and that the modem manufacturers haven't handled the licensing. But,
maybe things are too fragmented... the modem chipset doesn't include the
antenna or the SIM card. Possibly the patents cover things that are only
possible once assembled. Given different antenna designs you couldn't expect
the modem manufacturer to provide a blanket license them all. If that makes
any sense. Similarly a floppy disk drive manufacturer doesn't provide
universal licenses for all possible software that could be stored on a floppy
used in the drive.

But your point about UHF/VHF is very interesting and I'd also be interested in
learning more. There were at least a few famous big battles over radio
(Tesla/Marconi/Edison) and TV (Farnsworth/RCA) but these are inventor vs
company (probably more entertaining than bigcorp vs bigcorp). I'm sure the
transition to color TV was quite ripe for company vs company battles. There
was also the big change in patent law/precident mid last century. In an
entrepreneurship course taught by a patent attorney, he described it as
patents suddenly having big value while having been nearly worthless
previously.

------
jamesrom
Do you really think that Apple wont settle if they don't think they will win?
I'm pretty sure whatever patents HTC has can't be worth a mere drop of iPhone
sales profit.

Apple are more likely to buy HTC outright for the patents in question than not
sell the iPhone.

------
imrehg
Isn't part of the patent system, that one could license the said technology
for a given price? It's really sad, that that the first step is not
negotiation and revenue, but lawyering and "ban it to hell!".... I don't care
who started it.

~~~
alephnil
For some sorts of copyright, that is the case, like for music.

A company can legally deny another company a license to a patent or set an
unreasonable price for it. Normally it is in a company's best interest to
license the patent, but they are not legally required to do it.

------
Mordor
If closing Apple is the end game, can they take on the world... and win?

------
ktizo
_“I don’t care if they bought these patents to sue you or not,” Pender told
McKeon. “They are a property right.”_

Surely he should care if people are purchasing patents purely for litigation.
There are not many other items that you can legally purchase for the sole
purpose of using the courts to stop someone from doing something that would
otherwise be perfectly legal.

~~~
icarus127
But it's not perfectly legal if the patent is valid. The infringement would
just be against the original company if said company hadn't been bought. Or
are you suggesting that when a company is acquired all it's patents should
become null and void?

~~~
ktizo
Fair point, I wasn't really thinking that one through at all. Of course it is
still infringement both before and after purchase and the previous owner may
have been just as likely to litigate as the previous one.

And I wasn't suggesting that a companies patents should become null and void
after purchase, however my logic was still horribly flawed here. I really
should avoid the internets when tired.

Although I do think, as I have stated elsewhere, that a right to a monopoly
should not be treated the same as any other property asset and should maybe
have some limits in transferability and stuff like that.

------
junto
Apple is a US company. I can't see a US court backing HTC. There will be a
loophole. Watch this space.

~~~
atirip
Creative wasnt US company... Stop watching.

