Apple to Lodsys: Only we know how our technology works

Apple to Lodsys: Only we know how our technology works

Summary: Apple insists that it is allowed to intervene in the ongoing Lodsys vs. developers legal battle.

SHARE:
TOPICS: Apple
28

In the latest installment in the Lodsys vs. developers saga, Apple insists that it allowed to intervene on the part of the sued developers because it is the only party that knows how everything works.

Background:

In this latest legal salvo, Apple attacks Lodsys's previous opposition brief, making a number of points which are excellently summarized by Florian Mueller over on the FOSS Patents blog.

However, one of the arguments made by Apple is very interesting. In response to Lodsys's claim that there was no need for Apple to enter the legal fray because some of the latest defendants - such as EA Games and Rovio - had the financial capacity to defend themselves, Apple gracefully bypasses this argument and points out how 'none of the defendants have the technical information, expertise, and knowledge regarding how Apple's technology works or the negotiation and intent of the License itself to fully articulate and develop Apple's exhaustion defense.'

The news that Apple still wants to intervene, even after Lodsys's rebuff attempt, will be welcome news to small developers looking for assistance in dealing with this patent troll.

Topic: Apple

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

28 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • RE: Apple to Lodsys: Only we know how our technology works

    Why is 'Florian Mueller' either quoted or referenced daily on Zdnet?<br><br>Does he add creditably to your article?
    Return_of_the_jedi
    • RE: Apple to Lodsys: Only we know how our technology works

      @Return_of_the_jedi I don't even think the guy is a lawyer and according to wiki he isn't even in the USA so if he were a lawyer it would likely be for Germany.
      slickjim
      • RE: Apple to Lodsys: Only we know how our technology works

        @Peter Perry <br><br>He is NOT a lawyer. Only plays one the web w/o the disclaimer. <br>He is a full time <i>anti-</i> "FOSS Activist", who pays his salary is still unknown.
        Return_of_the_jedi
    • RE: Apple to Lodsys: Only we know how our technology works

      @Return_of_the_jedi

      Exactly. He's not a lawyer, he's not a programmer. He's just some random shill. I think the foreign sounding name for some reason gets US writers to not go looking for him. "Oh he's German, he must be legit, cause Germans love opensource."

      When you actually look into who he is, what he does, there's not much information. There's no evidence he's ever worked on a FOSS project, he's not a lawyer, and he's clearly not a programmer. What area of expertise does the guy have? None really.
      snoop0x7b
      • RE: Apple to Lodsys: Only we know how our technology works

        @snoop0x7b He might not even be real!
        slickjim
      • RE: Apple to Lodsys: Only we know how our technology works

        @snoop0x7b What area of expertise does the author of this article have, or any of the posters here? They have their brains and logic, and that's all they need. If Adrian says it's "excellently" summarized, then it's excellently summarized. I don't care what the person does for a living; I'll judge their writings by its contents.

        Why in the ZDNet poster world is every single other individual a paid "shill" for sinister forces? And I'm broke - where can I get on this paid shill payroll? Who do I need to shill around here? ;-)
        jgm@...
      • RE: Apple to Lodsys: Only we know how our technology works

        @snoop0x7b

        So , he is basically the same as Rush Limbaugh, but for tech patents?
        mlashinsky@...
      • RE: Apple to Lodsys: Only we know how our technology works

        @jgm@ because Florian is being represented as some type of patent expert every time ZDNET bloggers use his name and it is misleading.

        I mean really, at least Pam Jones of Groklaw is a Paralegal so she has some legal background.
        slickjim
  • RE: Apple to Lodsys: Only we know how our technology works

    Maybe Apple should just buy Lodsys and put an end to the whole situation? Doesn?t Apple have something like $75+ billion in cash?
    Rick_Kl
    • RE: Apple to Lodsys: Only we know how our technology works

      @Rick_Kl
      Because that doesn't put an end to "the situation." That only puts an end to Lodsys. Remember that movie, the Gremlins? Well, paying off Lodsys would be like pouring water on a gremlin.
      Robert Hahn
      • RE: Apple to Lodsys: Only we know how our technology works

        @Robert Hahn And being found guilty makes matters worse!
        slickjim
      • RE: Apple to Lodsys: Only we know how our technology works

        @Robert Hahn I'm now having visions of gremlins jumping on Steve Jobs and ripping at his turtleneck while he spins in circles... dang, someone needs to redo Gremlins 2 and set it at Apple rather than a media mogul HQ. The Woz could ride in on his Segway and smack all the gremlins with his polo mallet to save Jobs... It could all start innocently enough with "Mac OSX Mogwai"... yes, this would be the first Apple-themed product I'd be quite happy to spend money on. :-)
        jgm@...
    • RE: Apple to Lodsys: Only we know how our technology works

      @Rick_Kl That would require Lodsys to be for sale. Companies can refuse offers... I believe Lodsys is privately held. And if I were an evil patent troll and sold the company to Apple (which I'm not) for a billion$, I'd just take the money, found another patent troll company and use that money to buy up more patents and do the same thing over again.
      snoop0x7b
  • RE: Apple to Lodsys: Only we know how our technology works

    Agree with the sentiments on Mueller. It's getting to point where he is quoted so much by ZDNet bloggers now that he might as well work in place of them for the same.
    rikasa
  • RE: Apple to Lodsys: Only we know how our technology works

    Obviously, Rob Enderle was busy playing with his cats (AKA, a 'in staff meeting').
    comp_indiana
  • RE: Apple to Lodsys: Only we know how our technology works

    Even the independant developers have the technical information about how it works, it's very unlikely they would testify so because:
    1) It will be against their own interest
    2) Already signed an NDA with forbid them to discuss the technical information, even they DO know about it.
    Samic
  • Did I read this correctly?

    "none of the defendants have the... knowledge regarding... the negotiation and intent of the License itself"

    Is Apple suggesting that none of the app developers understand the license they agreed to with Apple? That's quite a shocking admission that Apple's legalese is so confusing that no mortal person could understand the intent of the license.
    toddybottom
    • RE: Apple to Lodsys: Only we know how our technology works

      @toddybottom
      No. Apple signed a license for this technology with the inventor, prior to the sale of the patent to Lodsys. Apple is arguing that the license with the original inventor -- which Apple's developers have not seen -- "exhausts" the patent, meaning that no more fees can be extracted from Apple or its licensees for use of this technology.
      Robert Hahn
      • RE: Apple to Lodsys: Only we know how our technology works

        @Robert Hahn The question then is, is the license valid or was the sale to Lodsys done with the knowledge that Apple had certain rights that it would be able to keep.

        They need to change the way software patents are approved, if they are to be allowed at all. A patent that would normally be assigned should be presented to the public for review for things like prior art. A committee from a pool of programmers (who are checked out to be sure they have no bias) should be consulted for things as
        to whether or not something might be considered obvious.
        Ex: There is a patent suit against apple going on over the "fast boot". A feature I thought about myself over 20 years ago because of my impatience with how slow the computers I was working with at the time were. Actually, my idea was more along the lines of keeping the entire OS in a rom with some persistent memory used for certain things that would change. The OS was much smaller back then, but the overall concept of having it available is "obvious" and I'm sure searching the newsgroups or magazines of that era will lead to posts and discussions along these lines.
        richard233
      • RE: Apple to Lodsys: Only we know how our technology works

        @Robert Hahn
        <ul><i>The question then is, is the license valid or was the sale to Lodsys done with the knowledge that Apple had certain rights that it would be able to keep.</i></ul><p>You're right, that is a huge question. Because if the judge finds out that the plain language of Apple's license gave them the right to sublicense this technology, and Lodsys knew that, then Lodsys' behavior in being careful not to sue Apple directly, and to oppose Apple's entry into this lawsuit, amounts to Lodsys trying to deceive the court. If the judge rules that's what happened, people could go to jail.
        Robert Hahn