The hottest patent war between Nokia and apple rev

  • Detail

The patent war between Nokia and apple reveals the disadvantages of the system

waters: people often regard the classification of domestic foam granulators as follows: 1. The economic foam granulator litigation is regarded as a struggle between those large companies, but it also highlights an important problem in the entire technology industry

Google and apple are the two companies with the world's largest market capitalization, and undoubtedly the winners of the great development of intelligence. Behind them lay the business of Nokia, which was sold to Microsoft and later closed

however, when it comes to fighting the patent pool accumulated by Nokia at its peak, the two American technology giants hope that the world will see them as victims of unfair and anti competitive practices

this ironic thing happened last week when Apple filed an antitrust private lawsuit against the two companies representing Nokia's patent portfolio. Apple claims that Nokia is taking advantage of a legal system that is prone to abuse by cutting its patents into several pieces and transferring them to professional companies. In the fierce war of words in the field of intellectual property, Nokia has become the most abominable patent hooligan

Google targeted the same behavior in its complaint to European regulators four years ago. It accused Nokia and Microsoft of conspiring to raise smart prices and avoid the key patent concessions for the smooth operation of the technology market

nowadays, people can't help but regard all this as a battle between those companies that are rich and capable of taking care of themselves. But it also highlights an important issue for the entire technology industry

the focus of the dispute is patent claiming entities, that is, companies established specifically to acquire and exercise intellectual property rights. Critics say that these mercenaries have wantonly abused a flawed legal system to demand excessive patent fees, disrupting the delicate balance between inventors and invention beneficiary companies in the technology industry

some of the practices of patent enforcement companies are particularly offensive. In a recent study, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) basically supported its so-called combined patent claim entity, that is, the company that buys a large number of patents, and the two clamps separate and stretch the samples at a certain speed, because they provide useful economic functions, and more than half of them share profits with the inventors

indeed, compared with technology companies that need to consider maintaining industry relations, they may be more willing to resort to legal action, and they have sufficient expertise and venture capital to initiate litigation wars. But that in itself does not make them demons

the second more serious question is whether the patent claiming entity has launched an asymmetric war. As a ready-made legal entity that does not have any business operations, they can safely file a lawsuit without worrying about counterclaim. They may also act as shell companies of the initial owner of the patent, making it more difficult for the defendant to require legal evidence from the company that initially won the patent. If the benefits of outsourcing legal rights exceed these undesirable side effects, this seems acceptable, but there are other more harmful results that are more difficult to accept

first, the mystery of some patent claim entities. When the ultimate beneficiary of a legal action is not clear, the defendant cannot initiate its own legal action to fight back

patent claiming entities may also use some shady tricks. For example, transfer a series of patents to many different legal entities, and then force companies such as apple to buy multiple patents for essentially the same technology. This practice in China's wood pulp import structure is called royalty stacking in the industry

another valid concern is whether some companies use patent claiming entities to avoid the obligation to maintain open industry standards. When owning technology patents that have an impact on industry standards, Nokia and other companies accept certain restrictions on how much they can exercise their rights. However, once the patent is held by an affiliated company, the same restriction may not apply

if Apple itself is not accused of avoiding the usual practice of dealing with technical standards in the industry, its claim will have more weight. But in a lawsuit, Nokia accused apple of refusing to pay royalties for a series of patents used in the H.264 video compression standard, even though many other technology companies accepted the same terms. At the same time, it is also questionable whether European antitrust regulators will be eager to defend American technology companies that have been censored by Brussels on other issues

with the increasing interests involved, patent enforcement companies are now a deep-rooted part of the legal landscape. It seems that we should have paid close attention to their tactics long ago

Copyright © 2011 JIN SHI