Apple found guilty of infringing on three MobileMedia Ideas patents, damages could be "substantial"

Apple found guilty of infringing on three MobileMedia Ideas patents, damages could be
A jury in Delaware has found Apple guilty of infringing on three patents belonging to MobileMedia Ideas LLC. The latter is a company put together by Nokia, Sony and MPEG-LA to hold patents. Currently, it has 300 patents in its name. The original suit, filed in 2010, alleged that the Apple iPhone infringed on 14 MobileMedia patents, a number that was reduced to three by the court. The patents that Apple was found guilty of infringing on included 6070068, 6253075, and 6427078 relating to "incoming/current call processing", "incoming call rejection", and "image capture/transfer," respectively.

Apple's defense was that the complaint should be invalid "due to obviousness," but the jury disagreed. After listening to a one-week trial, it took the jury all of four hours to find that MobileMedia Ideas LC had "suffered and will continue to suffer damages and irreparable injury," at the hands of Apple. MobileMedia Ideas CEO Larry Horn said that his company is not in the "litigation business" and wants to license the patents, which were originally owned by Nokia and Sony. U.S. District Judge Sue L. Robinson will schedule a trial to be held over the issue of damages, which Horn says could be "substantial." Apple had no comment on the verdict.

source:  Bloomberg

FEATURED VIDEO

53 Comments

1. CivicSi89

Posts: 349; Member since: Jul 23, 2011

Sock it to em. They deserve it.

4. Mxyzptlk unregistered

Sounds like an unknown company who wants to pirate off apples success and money.

13. someones4

Posts: 627; Member since: Sep 16, 2012

Hey there, do you mind commenting something different and unexpectable for a change? You sound like a broken record player.

16. dsDoan

Posts: 235; Member since: Dec 28, 2011

If you're not going to read the article, then you shouldn't reply. "The latter is a company put together by Nokia, Sony and MPEG-LA to hold patents."

17. tedkord

Posts: 17356; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

Sounds like a known fanboy iRationalizing.

23. .GsmArena.

Posts: 5; Member since: Oct 23, 2012

This eyefag needs to be banned

24. babyk

Posts: 379; Member since: Nov 03, 2011

oh really thats the way you see it? smh...pirate off apples success and money? Are u forgetting they started pirating success first? U must be lost for saying that

27. networkdood

Posts: 6330; Member since: Mar 31, 2010

Mxy cries because the tactics used are something APPLE would do.

47. -box-

Posts: 3991; Member since: Jan 04, 2012

Not only would they do it, they HAVE done it. Somewhat common practice, actually, as it prevents reciprocity.

30. eisenbricher

Posts: 973; Member since: Aug 09, 2012

My dear friend didn't you read that the company was founded by Nokia, Sony and MPEG-LA to hold patents? It's not a troll company, but one that holds three inventors' patents.

44. rusticguy

Posts: 2828; Member since: Aug 11, 2012

Time for greatest innovator to shell out some cash for being the greatest thief :)

45. Danre

Posts: 85; Member since: Sep 02, 2012

@Mxyzptlk.......i think you hate apple ..or may be you like company who infringes.....because your comment make no sense. So ether it a sarcasm or your not mature...

46. SuperAndroidEvo

Posts: 4888; Member since: Apr 15, 2011

Dude you are the most feeble minded person in the history of PhoneArena.com. Did you really just say that? lol

28. CheapSocks

Posts: 21; Member since: Nov 07, 2012

should be invalid due to obviousnous? A. obviousnous is not a word. B. so does that mean samsung shouldn't have to pay apple since rectangular shape with rounded corners is pretty obvious too? C. Apple's officially gone off the deep end and power crazy.

2. freebee269

Posts: 542; Member since: Aug 10, 2012

"Apple's defense was that the complaint should be invalid "due to obviousness," but the jury disagreed." what kind of defense is that? lol

18. dsDoan

Posts: 235; Member since: Dec 28, 2011

That's the kind of defense you should use when a company tries to ban your products because your software icons have "rounded corners."

3. Mxyzptlk unregistered

Sounds like a pretty unfair ruling.

9. wumberpeb

Posts: 453; Member since: Mar 14, 2011

To quote you, on every ruling in favor of Apple, "Companies should protect their intellectual property." Why would this be unfair? Because it's against Apple? You just say things to incite angry responses. Pure troll. Tone it down and contribute something...

10. mick25

Posts: 110; Member since: Nov 12, 2012

completely fair you mor0n.

19. tedkord

Posts: 17356; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

Why don't you just come out and say it. All that matters to you is that it's Apple. If it's Apple, it's good. If it's against Apple, it's bad. You're as easy to read as a kindergarten text book.

5. wumberpeb

Posts: 453; Member since: Mar 14, 2011

A taste of their own medicine? Nah, a bottle of bleach is much more like it

7. PapaSmurf

Posts: 10457; Member since: May 14, 2012

"Apple's defense was that the complaint should be invalid "due to obviousness," but the jury disagreed." So suing other manufacturers for "rectangle with rounded corners" and "slide to unlock" isn't obvious? Some hypocrites they are.

22. blingblingthing

Posts: 962; Member since: Oct 23, 2012

I guess those other companies didn't work hard on their product to create the best consumer experience possible.

42. jopancy

Posts: 78; Member since: Apr 25, 2012

Stop deluding yourself that Apple's product offer the best user experience. Stop repeating like a fool what marketers spoon-fed you. And FYI, Apple's Iphones ain't that cool.

12. someones4

Posts: 627; Member since: Sep 16, 2012

Please apply cold water to burn area.

14. phil2n

Posts: 519; Member since: Apr 30, 2012

Thats the other thing why i hate apple

15. nyamo

Posts: 274; Member since: Mar 19, 2011

Now to play the waiting game. I'm sure apple will.appeal

20. PapaSmurf

Posts: 10457; Member since: May 14, 2012

And lose again.

25. babyk

Posts: 379; Member since: Nov 03, 2011

apple will appeal to a one dollar virdict

39. ReddD

Posts: 37; Member since: Oct 29, 2012

Doubt they have an argument to appeal with if they went with 'invalid due to obviousness' in the 1st round.

* Some comments have been hidden, because they don't meet the discussions rules.

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at https://www.parsintl.com/phonearena or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit https://www.parsintl.com/ for samples and additional information.