Comments on: Apple loses patent suit, will have to pay $19M

By: RSS Weekly Digest - #4

RSS Weekly Digest - #4 — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 11:23:52 +0000

[...] First Android Netbook will cost $250? Flip Video Ultra HD makes its unofficial debut, gets unboxed Apple loses patent suit, will have to pay $19M NVIDIA’s GT300 specs outed — is this the cGPU we’ve been waiting for? FBI accuses [...]

By: Devin Coldewey

Devin Coldewey — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 20:28:35 +0000

Man, they must really be overworked down there. All the possibly-shady tech and patent suits are filed there almost without exception.

By: JRetSapDoog

JRetSapDoog — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 12:35:43 +0000

According to tech.blorge.com,

“The three patents in question are US Patent No. 5,710,906, US Patent No. 5,813,036 and U.S. Patent No. 6,405,291, all etitled “Predictive Snooping of Cache Memory for Master-Initiated Accesses.”

The case was filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, not surprisingly.

By: ［CG］特許訴訟に負けて1900万ドルを支払うアップル

［CG］特許訴訟に負けて1900万ドルを支払うアップル — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 11:40:26 +0000

[...] [原文へ] [...]

By: Cyber Akuma

Cyber Akuma — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 11:23:19 +0000

Wait a minute, no details?

WHAT were the patents that Apple infringed on?

By: writerkols

writerkols — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 11:17:17 +0000

Maybe as you say, there is a psychological leaning towards the underdog. Here, Opti Inc. is clearly the underdog and Apple the snobbish, wrong-doer. As human beings, we want the underdog to win as there is a thrill in the underdog winning. (Maybe, because, deep down, we feel like the underdog in the large expanse of this world and it winning, is victory for us.) Though I’m not a psychologist to specify any terms for this tendency, this is clearly our stand in battles between top dogs and underdogs (unless the topdog is our favorite). This is why Susan Boyle’s victory made so much sense to us.

By: Patentstreit: Apple muss 19 Millionen Dollar Strafe zahlen | TechFieber | Hot Gadget Blog. Smart Tech News.

Mon, 27 Apr 2009 05:29:01 +0000

[...] Apple loses patent suit, will have to pay $19M [...]

By: Haxcid

Haxcid — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 04:06:46 +0000

1. reverse engineered the products in question, OR, apple opened their mouth about how they did something.

2. if you violated a clearly documented patent, IE I patent the frying pan, you build one that works exactly like mine, even though yours is steel and mine was iron, I patented the concept, and physical design, you are still violating my right to license the technology for profit. It does not take a grudge of the little guy VS. corporate America to figure that one out.

Glad to see Apple get its wrist slapped and as Jobs is a dick, you can bet someone is getting fired for it.

By: Ankit Gupta

Ankit Gupta — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 20:49:16 +0000

If anyone knows more about this, I have a few questions:

1) How did Opti Inc. determine Apple was doing this? Wouldn’t this require some level of inside knowledge on their design or is this kind of technological advance easy to determine with external tests like performance?

2) Is there any study into the psychology of the jury members in cases like this where you have a large company fighting a smaller one? As in, it’s easier to find Apple guilty and have to pay $19 million than it is to convince yourself that the small company is wrong and there is no case at all. I could be entirely wrong on this too, it’s just my perspective.