Got a tip for us? Share it...

New in OS X: Get MacRumors Push Notifications on your Mac

Resubscribe Now Close

Apple Granted Limited Permission to Intervene in Lodsys Case

Last year, patent holding firm Lodsys took on app developers using Apple's In App Purchase system for iOS, suing a number of large and small developers over their implementation of the feature in their apps. Apple stepped forward to assist its developers by claiming that its existing licensing arrangement with Lodsys protected developers, but Lodsys has persisted in its efforts to require licensing by the developers as well.


In mid-June, Apple filed a motion to intervene in Lodsys' lawsuits against the developers, seeking to officially represent itself as both a defendant in the case and a plaintiff asserting counterclaims against Lodsys. Lodsys opposed the motion, and there has been little news on the progress of the lawsuits over the past nine months.

FOSS Patents now reports that Apple has just been granted limited permission to intervene in the case, with a judge allowing Apple to participate with regards to licensing arrangements.
In early August, Apple insisted that its motion should be granted. But for a long time, nothing happened with respect to Apple's motion. In the meantime, the judge originally presiding over the case resigned. Today, finally, Apple's motion was granted in part: "Apple is permitted to intervene in this suit, but such intervention is limited to the issues of patent exhaustion and licensing."

Judge Rodney Gilstrap concluded that Apple was entitled to intervene, and in any event, a permissive intervention (one that the court can allow in its discretion) was also an option.
While some of the defendants have already settled with Lodsys, it now appears that Apple will have an opportunity to demonstrate for the court that its licensing agreements with Lodsys preclude the patent holder from also demanding royalties from developers using the intellectual property already licensed by Apple.

Top Rated Comments

(View all)

30 months ago
Please Apple Legal Team, beat the **** out of these trolls.
Rating: 22 Votes
30 months ago

Is Lodsys really quoting Edison??:confused: Last I checked, Lodsys didn't invent of the things they're suing over. They're just hoping for a quick payday by extorting developers.


Apple doesn't invent the apps in its store, but it gets $300 of each $1,000 mostly for being the only store allowed.

Many developers have already made a deal, since Lodsys only gets $4 royalty per $1,000. Not worth fighting over.
Rating: 20 Votes
30 months ago

Apple doesn't invent the apps in its store

Apple does not have a quote from Edison next to their logo.
Rating: 13 Votes
30 months ago
Is Lodsys really quoting Edison??:confused: Last I checked, Lodsys didn't invent of the things they're suing over. They're just hoping for a quick payday by extorting developers.
Rating: 11 Votes
30 months ago

Is Lodsys really quoting Edison??:confused: Last I checked, Lodsys didn't invent of the things they're suing over. They're just hoping for a quick payday by extorting developers.


They picked the worse person to quote too lol.
Tesla > Edison
Rating: 11 Votes
30 months ago
I for one hope Apple rips them to pieces. Patent hogs like these have absolutely nothing to contribute to the industry and their very existence makes a complete mockery of intellectual property laws.
Rating: 7 Votes
30 months ago

Says who?


Patent law. If Company A licences patent 101 for use in their component 18b, the patent holder of 101 is not allowed to sue company C who used component 18b in their widget 19.2 class C. If patent law worked like that, no one would ever get anything done and we'd probably live like we did in the 18th century.
Rating: 6 Votes
30 months ago

Apple doesn't invent the apps in its store, but it gets $300 of each $1,000 mostly for being the only store allowed.

Many developers have already made a deal, since Lodsys only gets $4 royalty per $1,000. Not worth fighting over.


Nice revisionist view. Other than the "mostly for being the only store allowed" how about:

[LIST]
[*]Creating the ecosystem upon which the apps run.
[*]Creating the tools with which the developers develop.
[*]Providing excellent support for the developers.
[*]Advertising for the developers.
[*]Handling and paying for all of the transactional costs.
[*]Continuing to develop better, faster hardware to run the developed apps.
[/LIST]

I think that, if you asked the vast, vast majority of the developers they would tell you that they get far more value from their relationship with Apple than they ever would with Lodsys.
Rating: 5 Votes
30 months ago
I thought Google found prior art to completely invalidate the Lodsys patents and that a separate lawsuit was opened to invalidate them. I understand the two lawsuits happen in parallel, but anybody know the status of that?

The patent that Google found uses nearly the exact same language in the claims as the Lodsys-owned patents and the meaning of the claims were essentially the same too.

Lodsys currently makes money from Apple and others based on licensing of these patents. I'd love to see the Lodsys patents get completely invalidated so the Lodsys revenue stream from existing licensees gets completely cut off due to their greed. That would be awesome if they sued for more money and wound up with legal costs and losing their revenue stream.
Rating: 4 Votes
30 months ago

Is Lodsys really quoting Edison??:confused: Last I checked, Lodsys didn't invent of the things they're suing over. They're just hoping for a quick payday by extorting developers.


Neither did Edison. He rushed to patent the works of Tesla. Seems ironically appropriate.

----------

Why such a obvious thing didn't occur before? Why would a judge not agree on a defendant to show evidence of agreement?

Have I missed something?


Apple is not the defendant. App developers are. Apple wants to intervene in their cases.
Rating: 3 Votes

[ Read All Comments ]