Lodsys Publishes May 2011 Legal Response to Apple's Challenge

Over the past two years, a number of app developers have been contacted by patent holding firm Lodsys, demanding licenses for and in some cases filing suit over patents related to in-app purchasing and other functionalities. Earlier this month, Lodsys gained renewed attention when it began a new round of lawsuits targeting a number of developers large and small, including Disney and Gameloft.

At the time of Lodsys' initial effort to extract licenses from App Store developers, Apple's General Counsel Bruce Sewell sent a letter to Lodsys backing App Store developers and claiming that Apple was "undisputedly licensed" to Lodsys' patents through an arrangement that also protected app developers. Apple later requested and was given limited permission to intervene in at least some legal proceedings on behalf of targeted developers.

lodsys_logo_2012
Lodsys had responded to Apple's claims of protection for developers with both public blog posts and a private legal response to Apple in May 2011, and Lodsys had encouraged Apple to publish that legal response, but Apple apparently declined to do so.

In response to requests from developers seeking more information from Lodsys on the basis for its claims, Lodsys today released a redacted version of its initial legal response to Apple, dated May 31, 2011. Redactions include the removal of specific discussion of Apple's license terms with Lodsys.

The letter outlines a number of arguments as to why developers are not covered by Apple's license with Lodsys, pointing to Apple's own developer program agreements that strictly limit its relationships with developers to agency appointments rather than any broader business agreements.

First, you assert that, "[u]nder its license, Apple is entitled to offer these licensed products and services to its customers and business partners, who, in turn, have the right to use them." May 23 Letter at 1 (emphasis added). But, based on our review of [sic] publically available information, we understand that Apple expressly disclaims that App Makers are "business partners."

The response from Lodsys then proceeds to walk through six other arguments against Apple's claim that app developers are protected through Apple's license, including discussions of sublicensing, Apple's express disclaimer of any ownership interest in third-party apps, Apple's insistence that developers are solely responsible for liabilities related to their apps, and pass-through licensing issues.

Nearly two years later, the initial dispute remains unresolved, and Lodsys continues to contact developers in order to obtain licenses to its technologies with over 200 entities large and small now licensed for Lodsys' patents. Many smaller developers have found it simpler to agree to licenses representing small percentages of their revenue rather than face the prospect of lawsuits from Lodsys, but others remain in the crosshairs as Lodsys continues to stake its claims.

Popular Stories

iPhone 16 Pro Sizes Feature

iPhone 16 Series Is Just Two Months Away: Everything We Know

Monday July 15, 2024 4:44 am PDT by
Apple typically releases its new iPhone series around mid-September, which means we are about two months out from the launch of the iPhone 16. Like the iPhone 15 series, this year's lineup is expected to stick with four models – iPhone 16, iPhone 16 Plus, iPhone 16 Pro, and iPhone 16 Pro Max – although there are plenty of design differences and new features to take into account. To bring ...
iPhone SE 4 Vertical Camera Feature

iPhone SE 4 Rumored to Use Same Rear Chassis as iPhone 16

Friday July 19, 2024 7:16 am PDT by
Apple will adopt the same rear chassis manufacturing process for the iPhone SE 4 that it is using for the upcoming standard iPhone 16, claims a new rumor coming out of China. According to the Weibo-based leaker "Fixed Focus Digital," the backplate manufacturing process for the iPhone SE 4 is "exactly the same" as the standard model in Apple's upcoming iPhone 16 lineup, which is expected to...
New MacBook Pros Launching Tomorrow With These 4 New Features 2

M5 MacBook Models to Use New Compact Camera Module in 2025

Wednesday July 17, 2024 2:58 am PDT by
Apple in 2025 will take on a new compact camera module (CCM) supplier for future MacBook models powered by its next-generation M5 chip, according to Apple analyst Ming-Chi Kuo. Writing in his latest investor note on unny-opticals-2025-business-momentum-to-benefit-509819818c2a">Medium, Kuo said Apple will turn to Sunny Optical for the CCM in its M5 MacBooks. The Chinese optical lens company...
tinypod apple watch

TinyPod Turns Your Apple Watch Into an iPod

Wednesday July 17, 2024 3:18 pm PDT by
If you have an old Apple Watch and you're not sure what to do with it, a new product called TinyPod might be the answer. Priced at $79, the TinyPod is a silicone case with a built-in scroll wheel that houses the Apple Watch chassis. When an Apple Watch is placed inside the TinyPod, the click wheel on the case is able to be used to scroll through the Apple Watch interface. The feature works...
iphone 14 lineup

Cellebrite Unable to Unlock iPhones on iOS 17.4 or Later, Leak Reveals

Thursday July 18, 2024 4:18 am PDT by
Israel-based mobile forensics company Cellebrite is unable to unlock iPhones running iOS 17.4 or later, according to leaked documents verified by 404 Media. The documents provide a rare glimpse into the capabilities of the company's mobile forensics tools and highlight the ongoing security improvements in Apple's latest devices. The leaked "Cellebrite iOS Support Matrix" obtained by 404 Media...
Apple Watch Series 9

2024 Apple Watch Lineup: Key Changes We're Expecting

Tuesday July 16, 2024 7:59 am PDT by
Apple is seemingly planning a rework of the Apple Watch lineup for 2024, according to a range of reports from over the past year. Here's everything we know so far. Apple is expected to continue to offer three different Apple Watch models in five casing sizes, but the various display sizes will allegedly grow by up to 12% and the casings will get taller. Based on all of the latest rumors,...

Top Rated Comments

nepalisherpa Avatar
147 months ago
What a "load" of ****! But, then again, I don't mind seeing all these "freemium" apps gone! :D
Score: 9 Votes (Like | Disagree)
bmunge Avatar
147 months ago
You are wrong. They exist purely to hold patents and make a business out of licensing them.

Only when miscreants steal their property are they forced to sue anybody.

HTH.
They are manipulating a flaw in our judicial system for the sake of profit. They have no viable claim of ownership of the IAP system. It's a ridiculous scheme that seeks to exploit app developers.
Score: 8 Votes (Like | Disagree)
zin Avatar
147 months ago
Lodsys is a patent holding company. Correct me if I'm wrong, but these exist purely to hold patents and make a business out of suing people who they claim to be in violation of their patents, whilst not necessarily being related in any way to the actual inventors or original filers of them, nor do they actually use the patents themselves to create products or deliver services?

It's things like this that clog up the justice system. There must be a backlog of patent cases just like this. The whole system needs dumping and redoing.
Score: 8 Votes (Like | Disagree)
jclardy Avatar
147 months ago
I have to correct you. Patent holding companies do not "make a business out of suing people". They exist to advance innovation by rewarding the inventors. They collect patents and license them to tech companies. Just like, say, music record companies or publishing companies work with musicians and writers. Then of course, some companies use inventor ideas but do not want to pay. That's where lawsuits come into picture. Apple does the same to protect their intellectual property (but on much bigger scale than any "patent troll").

I'm all for giving credit where credit is due. But the issue is that this is a ridiculously stupid patent. It is essentially a patent on clicking a button to purchase a digital commodity.

The real issue is that software patents like these get issued in the first place. They should require an actual functioning implementation and not just an idea.
Score: 6 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Gasu E. Avatar
147 months ago
You are wrong. They exist purely to hold patents and make a business out of licensing them.

Only when miscreants steal their property are they forced to sue anybody.

HTH.

No, Lodsys is a shell company which shares an address (down to the suite number) with a number of other shell companies in a small office in Marshall, Texas. They have no one actively marketing these patents. It's just a lawsuit factory.

I would suggest you try reading one of their patents (you can find them listed in their entry in wikipedia), then justify your use of the word "miscreant".
Score: 5 Votes (Like | Disagree)
zin Avatar
147 months ago
I have to correct you. Patent holding companies do not "make a business out of suing people". They exist to advance innovation by rewarding the inventors...
But their website states that the inventor of the patents does not receive any revenue from licenses. The only entities receiving revenue are the new owners and Lodsys, which are not innovating using the patents as the inventor would have, but rather making profit purely from holding them. I don't understand how that is advancing innovation.

It seems to me as though Lodsys are merely acting as middlemen in the name of profit.
Score: 5 Votes (Like | Disagree)