- Joined
- Mar 28, 2012
- Messages
- 4,361
- Reaction score
- 2,070
In a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee, Google asserts that popular patents held by companies like Apple should be considered de facto standards essential, arguing the ubiquitous inventions are just as important to consumers as certified essential properties.
In other words, Google’s view is that just as there are patents that are standard essential, there are also patents that are commercially essential — patents that cover features that are so popular as to have become ubiquitous. The latter are just as ripe for abuse as the former, and withholding them is just as harmful to consumers and the competitive marketplace. Viewed through that lens, multitouch technology or slide-to-unlock might be treated the same way as an industry standard patent on, say, a smartphone radio.
Apple strongly disagrees. Bruce Sewell, Apple's top lawyer, writes a rebuttal letter to the committee, saying in part, that simply because a "proprietary technology becomes quite popular does not transform it into a ‘standard’ subject to the same legal constraints as true standards."
In other words, simply because an Apple technology is extremely popular with consumers, doesn't mean Apple has to license that technology to competitors. Apple owns numerous patents regarding nearly all iOS technologies, a fact that Steve Jobs touted when he launched the first iPhone in 2007.
From Sewell's letter:
The capabilities of an iPhone are categorically different from a conventional phone, and result from Apple’s ability to bring its traditional innovation in computing to the mobile market. Using an iPhone to take photos, manage a home-finance spreadsheet, play video games, or run countless other applications has nothing to do with standardized protocols. Apple spent billions in research and development to create the iPhone, and third party software developers have spent billions more to develop applications that run on it.
Though Tim Cook has said that he hates lawsuits he has said he will staunchly defend Apple's inventions from copycats.
These things became popular with consumers because Apple expended resources inventing them and making them popular. It sounds to me as if Google is making excuses in order to try to use Apple technology for free.
Dear Google, Perhaps you should invest the resources that Apple did on R&D instead of demanding to freely reap the benefits of someone else's work.
In other words, Google’s view is that just as there are patents that are standard essential, there are also patents that are commercially essential — patents that cover features that are so popular as to have become ubiquitous. The latter are just as ripe for abuse as the former, and withholding them is just as harmful to consumers and the competitive marketplace. Viewed through that lens, multitouch technology or slide-to-unlock might be treated the same way as an industry standard patent on, say, a smartphone radio.
Apple strongly disagrees. Bruce Sewell, Apple's top lawyer, writes a rebuttal letter to the committee, saying in part, that simply because a "proprietary technology becomes quite popular does not transform it into a ‘standard’ subject to the same legal constraints as true standards."
In other words, simply because an Apple technology is extremely popular with consumers, doesn't mean Apple has to license that technology to competitors. Apple owns numerous patents regarding nearly all iOS technologies, a fact that Steve Jobs touted when he launched the first iPhone in 2007.
From Sewell's letter:
The capabilities of an iPhone are categorically different from a conventional phone, and result from Apple’s ability to bring its traditional innovation in computing to the mobile market. Using an iPhone to take photos, manage a home-finance spreadsheet, play video games, or run countless other applications has nothing to do with standardized protocols. Apple spent billions in research and development to create the iPhone, and third party software developers have spent billions more to develop applications that run on it.
Though Tim Cook has said that he hates lawsuits he has said he will staunchly defend Apple's inventions from copycats.
These things became popular with consumers because Apple expended resources inventing them and making them popular. It sounds to me as if Google is making excuses in order to try to use Apple technology for free.
Dear Google, Perhaps you should invest the resources that Apple did on R&D instead of demanding to freely reap the benefits of someone else's work.
