This week, we explore Google's move to buy Motorola and load up on the company's many patents. But, as is often the case with almost everything, quantity is not always conducive to quality.
Meanwhile, Samsung and Apple continue to duke it out in Europe over which countries can or can't sell the Galaxy Tablet, and back in the United States some of Samsung's new legal strategies are revealed. Of course, they involve Stanley Kubrick and Donald Duck.
And a new player in Apple's legal web is emerging, as a number of law firms in the United States are suing Apple and several major book publishers for conspiring to fix prices. Now, one of those firms is maneuvering to take control of all the lawsuits under one big class action suit, which is causing lots of name calling, snarky comments, and thoughts about exactly who is conspiring with whom.
Motorola basically invented the consumer market for the cell phone in the 80s with the "brick" phone, and certainly produced some huge winners over the years with the StarTAC and the RAZR. Now, the iconic cell phone manufacturer is about to become part of Google, leading many to wonder if this hardware and software marriage would spawn the first Google-branded Motorola Android phone.
Clearly, there was a lot more on the table in this deal, specifically about 17,000 patents, which significantly adds to the thousand or so patents that Google already had. However, not all patents are money-printers; take a look at this chart (via 9to5mac) and you might be surprised at who is leading the pack in most patents issues, and how far down the list Apple is:
Obviously, holding a lot of patents is not the same as holding a few really good patents. So what is the big deal about Google snatching up all of Motorola's patents?
Well, in that stack of 17,000 patents were eighteen very powerful ones, patents that form the heart of three existing lawsuits Motorola has going against Apple.
Is it Google's plan to use these patents to open new legal action against Apple, to protect technology they currently have, or to force a compromise in the various lawsuits that the two companies are directly and indirectly involved in? The strategy is not clear yet, but stage is certainly being set.
(DUN DUN)
On July 1, 2011, Apple went for a slam-dunk against Samsung and filed for a preliminary injunction against Samsung, which would block the sale of Samsung's Infuse 4G, Galaxy S 4G, Droid Charge, Galaxy Tab 10.1 in the United States.
Two days ago, Samsung filed an opposition brief; basically a document detailing why the injunction should not be granted to Apple. Most of the brief is under seal and not in the public record yet, but FOSS Patents reported on one interesting component of the strategy: Samsung's lawyers plan to argue that there is prior art for the basic design of the iPad in older sci-fi movies. Specifically, this scene in Stanley Kubrick's 1968 film 2001: A Space Odyssey.
Among patent lawyers, there is a "fun" legend about how a Donald Duck cartoon was the basis for refusing a patent in the 1940s, so this strategy is not as silly as it might appear. The key is to be able to prove that a "person having ordinary skill in the art", commonly referred to as a POSA or PHOSITA in the United States, could have invented the iPad after watching the movie.
OK, maybe it is silly after all. However, the way courts test to judge PHOSITA is a notorious gray area in patent law, so anything is possible here.
(DUN DUN)
Last week, Seattle-based law firm Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro filed what Alison Frankel's On The Case blog described as a "blockbuster of a suit." The 42-page lawsuit alleges that Apple, and five of the six major US book publishers, conspired to fix pricing for e-books. According to Frankel, named partner Steve Berman said the firm "spent half a year investigating" the extensive data they compiled for the lawsuit.
Imagine their surprise when just a few days later four copy-cat class actions suddenly appeared in New York and California federal courts. One of the law firms, Finkelstein Thompson, has also moved to consolidate all the class actions suits together, which according Frankel's blog, has Berman "bristling" to retain control.
"I'm going to say that these guys are all copycats and don't deserve to be the lead," Berman said. "They're all copying us, hoping to get a piece of the action... It's really outrageous.They're just trying to take our case away."
The Bookseller quoted the blog Publishers Lunch with perhaps a more accurate angle on the situation: "All told, the timing and similarity of these filings more strongly suggests a conspiracy among lawyers than there ever was among publishers."
Adrian covers daily news as well as the weekly Law & Apple column for MacLife.com. You can follow him on Twitter, if you want to.
