Nokia patent suit against HTC in Germany is tossed by the judge
The judge took the action on Thursday morning, noting in open court that "HTC's devices don't meet the claim limitations of a 'first memory' and a 'second memory', rejecting Nokia's proposed claim construction that would have had scope for different areas of the same memory, organized by software means, to constitute different 'memories' within the meaning of the patent."
Nokia has already won an injunction against the HTC One and HTC One mini in the U.K., but HTC was granted a stay on both devices so it can appeal the decision. In that case, Nokia accused HTC of using a component that used a part controlled by a Nokia patent. Last month, Nokia won an injunction against all of HTC's Android models in the country. The patent in that case allows for the transfer of resource information (like a URL) between phones connected by Bluetooth or NFC. And just days before that decision, which was also handed down by Judge Dr. Matthias Zigann presiding over a different court, Nokia won another patent infringement suit against HTC in Germany. This case involved a patent for technology that helps PCs decide which driver to use when hooked up to a smartphone using the USB port.
Nokia has responded to today's decision with a statement that you can find below.
However, this does not change the fact that the same court found in December 2013 that two other Nokia patents were infringed by HTC products, enabling Nokia to enforce injunctions against the import and sale of all infringing HTC products in Germany, as well as to obtain damages for past infringement.
Nokia began its actions against HTC in 2012, with the aim of ending HTC's unauthorised use of Nokia's proprietary innovations and has asserted more than 50 patents against HTC. Since then, Nokia believes it has demonstrated beyond doubt the extent to which HTC has been free riding on Nokia technologies, with HTC found to infringe six Nokia patents in venues including the Regional Courts in Mannheim and Munich, Germany, the UK High Court and the US International Trade Commission. HTC's first New Year's resolution for 2014 should be to stop this free riding and compete fairly in the market."-Nokia
1. WHoyton1 (Posts: 1618; Member since: 21 Feb 2013)
Well done Germany don't let Nokia turn into the next patent troll! Long Live Technical progression!!
4. ihavenoname (Posts: 954; Member since: 18 Aug 2013)
Well done Germans! They don't like to continue this patent BS.
6. noler (Posts: 152; Member since: 19 Aug 2013)
I prefer Nokia patent troll than HTC copy troll. HTCopypaste...
7. ihavenoname (Posts: 954; Member since: 18 Aug 2013)
Copy? How is HTC copying Nokia? This is patent violation, not copying.
8. elitewolverine (Posts: 621; Member since: 28 Oct 2013)
because you are copying because you did not create the technology or htc would be able to have the patent.
hence 'copy', i truly think you dont know what a patent is.
17. JC557 (Posts: 699; Member since: 07 Dec 2011)
How so? STMicro was responsible for the mic, which by the way HTC did make phones with good mics prior, and it should've been STMicro on the hook. Desings should not even be mentioned here because they are dically different.
11. InspectorGadget80 (Posts: 5632; Member since: 26 Mar 2011)
Why can't we have judges like this here in the u.s.?
14. Augustine (Posts: 432; Member since: 28 Sep 2013)
Because they are beholden to fat campaign contributions from corporations. In other countries this is called bribery, but in the US this is legal. That's how morals work in America: if an immoral act furthers someone's bottom line, it's legalized.
16. InspectorGadget80 (Posts: 5632; Member since: 26 Mar 2011)
Yeah I know that's right. But still man wish we have one like him.
2. UrbanPhantom (Posts: 944; Member since: 30 Oct 2012)
HTC should stop pilfering intellectual property from other more progressive companies, and provide compensation to the original developers of the technology. They managed to dodge this particular bullet for now, but there are still other patent disputes pending, and Nokia is going to collect on at least one of them...
Getting what is rightfully due is not being a patent troll: it's called ownership and rights management. The originators of the technology in question should receive adequate compensation for the costs of their R&D.
3. protozeloz (Posts: 5321; Member since: 16 Sep 2010)
How's HTC ripping off Nokia's IP? Just because Nokia is trying to snag some money out of HTC doesn't mean HTC is stealing from them...
And a progressive company? Nokia was sold for way less than Motorola was and Motorola was really bad :/ I don't see any progress in that
9. elitewolverine (Posts: 621; Member since: 28 Oct 2013)
he really cant explain it better than he did. Nokia has the patent, other companies pay license fees, and they do samsung etc do. HTC does not.
This is not money snagging out of thin air. The concept is really not hard at all to understand.
15. Augustine (Posts: 432; Member since: 28 Sep 2013)
You're naive. A granted patent doesn't mean that the idea was prior art. This is decided in courts when a patent is challenged. IOW, a patent may be revoked by a judge if found to be common practice before it was filed. But the patent office does not really do a good job discerning this, only courts do a little better.
12. newbey123 (Posts: 308; Member since: 19 Mar 2012)
About time a judge with a brain. This was stupid to begin with and Nokia is just desperate because their phones are crap.
18. Sire3008 (Posts: 73; Member since: 26 Sep 2013)
Nokia phones are crap? Like seriously? Do you even live on earth? Don't get too emotional when OEMs fight... All are just as bad
19. Ashoaib (Posts: 604; Member since: 15 Nov 2013)
Come on man... nokia is really not that good, so newbey123's point is some how true
13. Augustine (Posts: 432; Member since: 28 Sep 2013)
This is a case of prior art that should have never been granted a patent. But the patent lawyers couldn't care less when filing the patent, as granting a patent means nothing until it's challenged in court, when the patent lawyers get involved again to think it over. The conflict of interest is patent, since the lawyers get paid twice, nay much more because the hours are many more in trial than when filing.