"Patent Licensing Company" Sues Rovio, EA Over App Store Tech

[Andy Chalk]

"Patent Licensing Company" Sues Rovio, EA Over App Store Tech

"Patent licensing company" Lodsys has added Rovio, Electronic Arts, Take-Two, Atari and Square Enix to its ongoing legal action over patent-infringing App Store technology.

Wikipedia says, in a properly attributed entry [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_troll#Effects], that a "patent licensing company" is a firm that acquires patents from various sources and then makes money by licensing them to other companies that can actually make use of them. It's not necessarily as leech-like as it sounds, according to Wiki, because it "facilitates access to technology by more efficiently organizing ownership of patent rights," but it still feels a little dodgy to me.

In any event, Lodsys is one such company that holds patents on technology that allows free versions of mobile apps to be upgraded to full versions from within the app. Lodsys licensed those patents to Apple but earlier this year launched legal action [http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2011-06-02-lodsys-sues-seven-app-store-devs-over-patents] against seven independent App Store developers for infringing upon them: Combay, Iconfactory, Illusion Labs AB, Shovelmate, Quickoffice, Richard Shindeman and Wulven Games.

The company has now expanded that lawsuit to include five more defendants and unlike the first batch, you've probably heard of this new bunch, which includes Angry Birds maker Rovio, Electronic Arts, Take-Two Interactive, Atari and Square Enix. Lodsys had originally demanded .575 percent of the U.S. revenues of all companies involved, but the lawsuit also asks for damages and reparations and seeks to have the infringement declared "willful," which could lead to triple damages.

Apple's position on the matter is that its patent license covers all third-party App Store developers as well, while Lodsys maintains that third-party developers are "responsible for securing the rights for their applications" and, obviously, for paying the piper when they fail to do so. And while nobody's going to get rich suing Iconfactory or that Shindeman guy, piling on Rovio, EA and the rest changes that situation considerably.

The expanded case also includes at least one Android app, Angry Birds, but Google has not yet commented on the matter.

Source: GamesIndustry [http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2011-07-25-lodsys-adds-rovio-ea-take-two-atari-square-enix-to-legal-case]


Permalink

 

[Kevlar Eater]

I've heard of and read cases like this, as have many of us (hopefully). I can expect this case to adjourn shortly... in the trash.

To the garbage bin, away!

 

[Skizle]

Is it just me or does this company have no case? Or if they do they have little to go on

 

[Blind0bserver]

So... this company that, more likely than not, no one has ever heard of and specializes in an industry that sounds incredibly bottomfeeder-ish, hopes to come out ahead of the combined legal machines of EA, Take-Two, Square and Atari.

Yeah, good luck with that one , guys.

 

[Tharwen]

That sort of company is often referred to as a Patent Troll.

So basically, IP firms feel the internet's pain.

 

[gunner1905]

So... this company that, more likely than not, no one has ever heard of and specializes in an industry that sounds incredibly bottomfeeder-ish, hopes to come out ahead of the combined legal machines of EA, Take-Two, Square and Atari.

Yeah, good luck with that one , guys.

Even though we know that Lodsys is a patent troll if they can get the case to be tried in East Texas (very patent holder friendly) then EA, Take-Two, Square, and Atari are the ones that need luck.

 

[Gindil]

So... this company that, more likely than not, no one has ever heard of and specializes in an industry that sounds incredibly bottomfeeder-ish, hopes to come out ahead of the combined legal machines of EA, Take-Two, Square and Atari.

Yeah, good luck with that one , guys.

Even though we know that Lodsys is a patent troll if they can get the case to be tried in East Texas (very patent holder friendly) then EA, Take-Two, Square, and Atari are the ones that need luck.

Want to know why so many patent cases go to Marshall?

It's because criminal cases such as the drug war (which really is costing us economically) take precedence.

Just today, there is a great write up about patent trolling in Silicon Valley and all of the damage it's doing to any innovation in the US. Link [http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110724/22250715225/when-patents-attack-how-patents-are-destroying-innovation-silicon-valley.shtml]

The episode does a nice job showing how much Silicon Valley hates patents -- and highlights how it's got nothing to do with people wanting to "steal" ideas, as patent system defenders will claim, but because ridiculous, broad, meaningless patents get approved all the time. The story quotes patent holders themselves who say they have no clue what their own patents mean and that they're "embarrassed" to have their name on such things.

If you want to hear about how Marshall patent trolling is set up, you might listen to the podcast. It's an hour long, but it's well worth it.

 

[William Dickbringer]

Ok all I got is that a patent company is suing 5 companies and that's all I got can anyone clarify

 

[JakobBloch]

Hmm the problem seems to me to be the ability to patent ideas and concepts. This may work for some things (I can't come up with any) but at the very least it prevents the invention of a better mousetrap in app-stores and programming in general. If there is a program or bit of code that does the same thing as what you are doing then you are apparently infringing on the patent even if your code does it better. So the trap never gets invented and the mice run rampant and no innovation is achieved.

In many businesses innovation is not something they want so some companies fight to keep the status quo. This is one of those cases.

 

[shadowform]

For once, I'm glad that EA has such a massive battery of lawyers under their command. Hopefully, they'll be able to curb stomp this company into the ground.

Honestly? In-game upgrades from a free to a paid version of a game are NOT new. Not in the least. Shareware games used to do this all the time: you'd get the first level of a sidescroller for free, and then when you beat it, it'd take you to a screen that tried to sell you the full version of the game.

 

[newwiseman]

It never ceases to amaze me how easy it is to patent something completely obvious and natural. "Technology to allow an app to upgrade its self" is how Lodsys's patent has been described. Sounds like an assignment I had in High School Programing, it was easy then and it's retarded now.

One example; Motorola still own the patent for putting a "computer" image on a "television" and every game console and video card with a "TV" out has had to pay a royalty on that idea... The problem is what defines a TV and what defines a monitor and how exactly do you separate the two.

It's one thing to own a specific bus, gate design, or a protocol, but to own the idea that so many different methods can accomplish is just Bullshit.

In programming classes many of the assignments ask you to make something that does a specific task like sorting numbers, and damn near every student will come up with a different solution, some short and efficient, and others long and slow. Patent law allows someone to own the idea of sorting numbers in this example regardless of implementation and method. Penn & Teller should do an episode of Bullshit on patent law.

Also patents and copyrights are very different things. I can copyright my code but what my code does may still fall under an existing patent, adding further degrees of shit to the muck that is a convoluted system.

 

[theultimateend]

So... this company that, more likely than not, no one has ever heard of and specializes in an industry that sounds incredibly bottomfeeder-ish, hopes to come out ahead of the combined legal machines of EA, Take-Two, Square and Atari.

Yeah, good luck with that one , guys.

The balls it takes to attack those three companies.

Talk about paying to fail.

 

[dthree]

These cases are not about a ridiculously broad patent. That battle has already been lost. Apple has licensed 4 patents from Lodsys and uses their "technology" in the iOS app stores. The claims of infringing uses are related to these developers use of Apple's tools that contain Lodsys's "technology". This would be like Fraunhofer attempting to collect patent licensing fees from people using iTunes to make MP3s. Apple already pays for a license to allow customers to use an MP3 encoding function in iTunes, the customers don't have to pay Franhofer.

Apple spells it all out in an letter to Lodsys.
http://www.macworld.com/article/160031/2011/05/apple_legal_lodsys_letter_text.html