Touch-Screen Lawsuit Hits Toshiba, Apple, HTC and Many Others

[Ed Hansberry]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.betanews.com/article/Touchscreen_lawsuits_hit_Apple_HTC_Dell_Toshiba_others/1214341924' target='_blank'>http://www.betanews.com/article/Tou...hers/1214341924</a><br /><br /></div><em>&quot;Now that the Patent Reform Act (S. 1145) has been pulled from the Senate floor schedule, it looks like business as usual for patent litigants, as a holder of touch screen patents has launched a carpet-bombing assault.Re-tooling a patent infringement suit aimed at Dell from 2007, Typhoon Touch Technology and co-plaintiff Nova Mobility Systems have added Apple, Fujitsu, Toshiba America, Lenovo U.S., Panasonic Corp. of North America, HTC America Inc., Palm Inc., Samsung Electronics America, Nokia Inc, and LG Electronics USA to its list of defendants.&quot;</em><br /><br />I'd comment on this, but I am busy preparing my lawsuit to sue companies with touch-sensitive keybaords.<br /><br />

[moaske]

Is this insanity ever gonna stop...?

(hate te say this; but why does this seem to be a typical US twitch of the mind?...you never hear about this stuff in europe...)

[Jason Dunn]

Is this insanity ever gonna stop...? (hate te say this; but why does this seem to be a typical US twitch of the mind?...you never hear about this stuff in europe...)

I agree it's ridiculous and it needs to stop. Regarding why it happens more in the US, based on what I've read there are vast differences in the European/Asian economies versus North American economies specifically related to start-up companies, patents, intellectual property development, etc. North America as an economy generally has more risk-takers, more people creating things and patenting them...and I think that's why you see things like this.

Or maybe we just have more lawyers. I'm not an economist though, so don't take me too seriously. :D

[martin_ayton]

It may also have something to do with the way European Patent Law is framed. As I understand it (and I'm not a Patent Attorney), it is quite difficult to get a patent here: An applicant has to prove that there is no prior art and that what they are trying to patent is both genuinely innovative and actually realisable. Any subsequent discovery of prior art will result in the patent being revoked through a pretty speedy tribunal process. That seems to contrast starkly with the apparent picture of the US Patent Office granting patents with next to no checks on prior art or practicability and then relying on people who might want to use (or already be using!) the idea to attack the patent through an expensive legal process which uses 'standard' courts (and all the costs they entail) rather than specialist tribunals.

Lest it sound that I am rabidly pro the European situation, I'd like to be clear that it brings its own problems: Since the costs and the problems are here loaded on the applicant's side, it can be quite difficult for the individual inventor / innovator to protect his or her idea whilst bringing it to market. So, my comment on Jason's comment would be that perhaps it is the US patent system - with all its obvious faults - that generates the perceived greater creativity.

Somewhere in the middle ground there has to be a better solution, but better minds than mine are failing to find it. :(

In the meantime, large companies like Dell, HP et all might do well to instruct their legal departments to monitor the patents being granted and challenge anything that looks like it might conflict with what they are doing / planning to do. A few serious pre-emptive strikes might give the patent squatters pause for thought.

[Paragon]

I'd comment on this, but I am busy preparing my lawsuit to sue companies with touch-sensitive keybaords.

Sorry Ed, I think RIM beat you to it. ;)

[Pony99CA]

I thought at one time you had to have a model of a device to get a patent. Maybe I was wrong.

However, I don't have a problem with patent lawsuits -- if the company suing is actually using the patent to make a product. If they just file patents and hope somebody will try to invent something similar or (almost worse) buy up patents to use as hammers, I think that's wrong and should be prohibited.

I'm generally pro-capitalism, and understand that companies want to get a return on their investment, but buying a patent to make a device is one thing; buying it to prevent others from making one (at least without paying for the privilege) is another. If you buy a gun from me to hunt for food, that's great; if you buy a gun from me to threaten other people, that's wrong.

Steve

[Jason Dunn]

Somewhere in the middle ground there has to be a better solution, but better minds than mine are failing to find it. :(

Indeed, I think a middle ground between the European and US systems would be ideal.