Business Tech

The legal back-and-forth between Nokia and Apple over patents, and who might be abusing them, continued Tuesday as Nokia lodged a complaint with the U.S. International Trade Commission.

In its complaint to the USITC, the Finnish company alleges that Apple infringes seven Nokia patents "in virtually all of its mobile phones, portable music players, and computers."

The alleged patent infringement is connected to key features in Apple products including user interface, camera, antenna, and power management technologies. Their value to Nokia, the company says, comes in allowing better user experience, lower manufacturing costs, smaller size, and longer battery life for Nokia products.

In October, Nokia filed a lawsuit against Apple in U.S. District Court in Delaware regarding 10 patents related to wireless handsets, which Nokia says Apple has refused to license. Every iPhone model since the original, introduced in 2007, infringes on those patents, Nokia has charged.

Apple filed a countersuit earlier this month, charging Nokia with infringing 13 Apple patents related to the iPhone.

"While our litigation in Delaware is about Apple's attempt to free-ride on the back of Nokia investment in wireless standards, the ITC case filed today is about Apple's practice of building its business on Nokia's proprietary innovation," Paul Melin, general manager of patent licensing at Nokia, said in a statement.

"Nokia has been the leading developer of many key technologies in small electronic devices," Melin said. "This action [Tuesday's complaint to the USITC] is about protecting the results of such pioneering development."

Apple was not immediately available to comment on Nokia's filing with the U.S. International Trade Commission. The USITC is an independent federal agency that looks at issues including unfair trade practices involving patent, trademark, and copyright infringement.

Nokia says that over the past two decades it has spent some 40 billion euros ($57.5 billion) on R&D and has amassed "one of the wireless industry's strongest and broadest IPR portfolios, with over 11,000 patent families."

In November, research firm Strategy Analytics reported that Apple had surpassed Nokia in quarterly mobile phone profits, bringing in $1.6 billion from the iPhone, compared with Nokia's $1.1 billion in cell phone profits.

A single Europe-wide patent plan is a step nearer, after EU member states agreed the main elements, including a unified European patent court.

Intellectual property (IP) experts praised the agreement, announced on Friday by the Swedish presidency of the EU, but warned that the biggest obstacle to the scheme--who will pay for patent translation--remains unresolved.

"I am very pleased that we have finally seen a political breakthrough in these difficult negotiations that have gone on for so long," Swedish trade minister Ewa Bjorling said in a statement.

According to the EU, getting patent protection in 13 EU states costs 11 times as much as getting a patent in the U.S.

Read more of "Single European patent moves closer to fruition at ZDNet UK.

Microsoft and a former employee have settled litigation involving allegations of patent infringement and trade secret theft.

Microsoft sued a former employee earlier this year for allegedly stealing trade secrets that were later used in a patent lawsuit against Microsoft partners, in which Microsoft later intervened as a party-defendant.

All parties deny any liability in the settlement, the terms of which were not disclosed, Miki Mullor, founder of Ancora Technologies, said in a statement.

Microsoft's lawsuit alleged that Mullor took a job at Microsoft in 2005 while he was still chief executive at Ancora. While working on the Windows team, Mullor allegedly downloaded confidential documents, according to the suit. Shortly thereafter, Ancora sued Dell, HP, and Toshiba claiming that their use of Microsoft technology violated a patent held by Ancora. Microsoft fired Mullor last year.

"I am pleased with this resolution and wish my friends at Microsoft's Windows division nothing but success with Windows 7 launch," Mullor said in the statement.

A Microsoft spokesman confirmed the settlement but said the company had no further comment.

A senior lawyer at Microsoft is calling for the creation of a global patent system to make it easier and faster for corporations to enforce their intellectual property rights around the world.

In a blog posting on Tuesday, Microsoft's Deputy General Counsel Horacio Gutierrez said that a backlog of patent applications internationally was needed to tackle the 3.5 million pending patent applications around the world--including around 750,000 in the US.

"In today's world of universal connectivity, global business and collaborative innovation, it is time for a world patent that is derived from a single patent application, examined and prosecuted by a single examining authority and litigated before a single judicial body," said Guiterrez. "A harmonized, global patent system would resolve many of the criticisms leveled at national patent systems over unmanageable backlogs and interminable pendency periods."

Guiterrez went on to praise efforts to harmonize international patent systems through projects such ad the Patent Prosecution Highway and the "IP5" partnership but said more needed to be done to allow corporations to protect their intellectual property.

"By facing the challenges, realizing a vision, overcoming political barriers, and removing procedural obstacles we can build a global patent system that will promote innovation, enrich public knowledge, encourage competition and drive economic growth and employment," he added. "The time is now--the solutions are in reach."

Microsoft's calls to speed up the issuing of patents come shortly after the company was prosecuted in Texas for patent infringement concerning its Word application. In August, US District Court for the Eastern District of Texas issued a permanent injunction that "prohibits Microsoft from selling or importing to the United States any Microsoft Word products that have the capability of opening .XML, .DOCX or DOCM files (XML files) containing custom XML", according to a statement released by attorneys for the plaintiff, i4i.

Commenting on Microsoft's appeal of the ruling late last month. i4i chairman Loudon Owen told ZDNet UK's sister site, CNET News, that the software giant's attitude was "extraordinary." "It captures the hostile attitude of Microsoft toward inventors who dare to enforce patents against them," Owen said. "It is also blatantly derogatory about the court system."

Microsoft's stance on stronger software patents has attracted opposition from the open-source community and other antipatent campaigners.

The founder of the GNU Linux project Richard Stallman, recently warned against the use of Mono software tools as they exposed users to potential patent violation accusations from Microsoft. In an article published by the Free Software Foundation, Stallman said that "only fools would ignore" the threat poised by Microsoft's patents.

The UK Pirate Party, which was registered by the electoral commission last month, is also opposed to the current patent system--especially in the area of health care--and has put reform of the process at the center of its campaign for the next election. "Monopolies maintained by companies producing life-saving drugs mean people are dying, as they can't afford (treatment)," the party's leader Andrew Robinson told ZDNet UK last month.

Microsoft's backing for greater cooperation on the issue has the backing of other organizations. The World Intellectual Property Organization is planning to hold a conference on global enforcement of intellectual property rights in Geneva on the 17th and 18th of September. "IP systems need to keep pace with globalizing trends in innovation and business practices," the organization said in a statement. "The symposium offers stakeholders an opportunity to explore how existing highly diverse national and regional IP infrastructures can be developed to support the dynamics of innovation which is increasingly transnational and borderless."

FSF Europe and the UK Pirate Party were approached for comment but did not reply in time for this story.

Andrew Donoghue of ZDNet UK reported from London.

According to Nvidia on Tuesday, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has initially rejected an additional eight Rambus claims that Nvidia challenged.

The additional eight claims are based on two patents that Rambus has asserted against Nvidia in litigation. This follows the USPTO's rejection last month of 41 other claims in seven patents that Rambus had asserted, Nvidia said.

Rambus filed patent claims against Nvidia in an International Trade Commission action in November. The ITC litigation involves memory controllers--which handle communications between memory chips and other silicon--related to graphics processors.

"We are pleased that the USPTO decided to review the patentability of these two additional Rambus' patents and continued to agree with Nvidia's challenge to these eight claims," said David Shannon, Nvidia executive vice president and general counsel, in a statement.

Rambus, which develops high-speed memory chip technology, also commented on the announcement.

"As part of the multi-pronged approach to delay paying Rambus for our patented inventions, our litigation opponents have filed requests with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to bring into question the validity of some of our patents. We have seen this tactic for years," according to a Rambus statement Tuesday. "This is a very long process, and the patents remain valid during the whole process," Rambus said.

Rambus is seeking to block importation and sale of Nvidia products that it claims infringe on its patents.

The ITC case goes to trial in August and a final determination is expected in 2010.

Ever since Microsoft dropped its bombshell on Linux, claiming that the open-source operating system violates 235 of its patents, the Linux community has responded with a cogent counterargument: "If we're, in fact, infringing, point out the infringements and we'll simply code around your patents."

With Microsoft's lawsuit against GPS device manufacturer TomTom, Microsoft gave the community what it wanted, which has now resulted in the Linux community coding around Microsoft's two FAT file-system patent claims against Linux.

Two down, 233 more to go?

In 2008, Microsoft filed suit against TomTom for patent infringement related to GPS technology and its FAT file-system patents, allegedly infringed by TomTom's use of Linux. The two parties eventually settled, but Microsoft gave enough of a clue as to its patent claims that the Red Hat-sponsored Open Invention Network and others set off to sift through the merits of Microsoft's patents and, if possible, code around them.

As Andrew Tridgell recently explained to the Linux kernel mailing list, it would appear that the Linux community has accomplished exactly that, providing a workaround to Microsoft's patent claims.

The reasons are somewhat technical, but the approach seems to pass muster, as Ars Technica reports:

The Linux Foundation arranged for the patch to undergo extensive review by patent lawyers. They are confident that the patch will effectively evade the common namespace method described by Microsoft's patents. It will also function properly in virtually all cases. The only situation in which it will be problematic is when the data on the filesystem is accessed from old versions of DOS or Windows that still require the 8.3 filenames. Tridgell believes that such a scenario is rare enough that it will not impact a significant number of users. Those who require compatibility with those older versions of DOS or Windows can use the Linux "msdos" filesystem, which enforces 8.3 names and doesn't use Microsoft's patented dual-naming convention.

In early 2009, open-source luminary Larry Augustin urged the Linux community to "get the FAT out." While Tridgell's approach doesn't quite do this, it does appear to obviate Microsoft's patent claims.

This should make Linux users happy. Whether it will make Microsoft happy to see how trivial it is to code around its patent claims remains to be seen. That's the problem with launching nuclear marketing attacks against the legal integrity of open-source code: given enough eyeballs, all patent claims are shallow.

Follow me on Twitter @mjasay.

Rambus has asked the International Trade Commission to terminate an investigation of Nvidia relating to four patents as part of a November 2008 complaint.

Rambus provides high-speed memory interface technology, though in recent years the company has become better-known for intellectual property litigation practices. Rambus has sued many of the world's largest chip manufacturers.

Nvidia's David Shannon

(Credit: Nvidia)

The Los Altos, Calif.-based company conceded before the ITC that Nvidia products do not infringe on its four patents, and also asked for termination of several claims from a fifth patent in the ITC action, according to an Nvidia statement.

"We are pleased Rambus has recognized the weakness of these patents and claims," said David Shannon, Nvidia executive vice president and general counsel in a statement. "These withdrawals represent essentially half of the patents and one third of the claims asserted against us, and we look forward to addressing the remainder of the case."

The current ITC litigation originally included nine patents involving memory controllers related to graphics processors.

In June, Nvidia announced that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office had rejected 41 claims, in seven patents, which Rambus had asserted in the ITC action against NVIDIA.

Rambus has a checkered track record on lawsuits. The European Commission launched antitrust investigations against Rambus in 2007, alleging intentional deceptive conduct in the context of the standard-setting process, citing its behavior as "patent ambush."

In January, a Delaware federal judge ruled that Rambus could not enforce patents against Micron Technology. Judge Sue L. Robinson, in the U.S. District Court in Delaware, ruled on January 9 that evidence "spoliation" occurred when Rambus allegedly destroyed important information related to the case that could be used against it. Robinson's decision rendered Rambus' patents unenforceable.

Advanced Micro Devices is "not concerned" over rival Intel's threat to pull out of a patent cross-licensing agreement between the two chipmakers, says an AMD Asia-Pacific executive, even as the Intel-issued deadline for supposed action looms.

According to Intel, GlobalFoundaries, AMD's manufacturing spinoff and a joint venture with the Abu Dhabi government, is not a subsidiary of AMD and cannot be accorded the same rights under the cross-licensing pact. Intel said it would terminate all rights and licenses under the agreement if AMD does not correct the "alleged breach" by the given deadline, which expires Saturday.

In an interview Friday with ZDNet Asia, Benjamin Williams, AMD's corporate vice president and Asia-Pacific general manager, dismissed Intel's actions as a media blitz and said the issue has since "died down."

"It's one of those areas that we weren't concerned with, (and) we obviously would not have done and structured the deal the way we had, thinking there was some challenge with the licensing and structure," he noted. "You're not hearing anything about (the issue) now; we're not concerned with it."

Adding that "the license goes both ways," Williams said the agreement also impacts, among others, Intel's Nehalem architecture and integrated memory controller. "What (Intel) neglected to (say) is that it's a cross-license agreement, not a one-way agreement."

AMD previously said Intel's claims were an attempt to distract the public from its antitrust battle with the European Commission. The EC this week ruled that Intel engaged in anticompetitive practices and fined the chipmaker 1.06 billion euros ($1.45 billion). Market observers, however, said the antitrust ruling is unlikely to dramatically alter the balance between the two companies.

Intel was unable to respond at press time.

Vivian Yeo of ZDNet Asia reported from Singapore.

Qualcomm and Broadcom announced Sunday that they have agreed to end patent litigation between the companies worldwide, with Qualcomm paying Broadcom $891 million, according to the announcement.

On Wednesday, Qualcomm delayed its second-quarter earnings statement, citing advanced settlement discussions with Broadcom.

Qualcomm made this statement Sunday: "Qualcomm and Broadcom today announced that they have entered into a settlement and multi-year patent agreement. The agreement will result in the dismissal with prejudice of all litigation between the companies, including all patent infringement claims in the International Trade Commission and U.S. District Court in Santa Ana, as well as the withdrawal by Broadcom of its complaints to the European Commission and the Korea Fair Trade Commission."

Qualcomm will pay Broadcom $891 million over a four-year period, according to the San Diego-based company. The terms of the agreement will not result in any change to Qualcomm's 3G (CDMA2000, WCDMA, and TD-SCDMA technologies) and 4G (LTE and WiMAX technologies) licensing revenue model, Qualcomm said.

The agreement stipulates, among other things, that Broadcom and Qualcomm agree not to assert patents against each other for their respective integrated circuit products and certain other products and services and Broadcom agrees not to assert its patents against Qualcomm's customers for Qualcomm's integrated circuit products incorporated into cellular products.

"We believe that this resolution is positive for both Qualcomm and Broadcom, our customers, our partners and the overall industry," Paul E. Jacobs, chairman and CEO of Qualcomm, and Scott A. McGregor, president and CEO of Broadcom, said in a joint statement.

"The settlement will allow us to direct our full attention and resources to continuing to innovate, improving our competitive position in this economic downturn, and growing demand for wireless products and services," Jacobs said.

The agreement ends longstanding litigation between the companies. For its part, Broadcom had argued in one case that Qualcomm was unfairly limiting competition by putting onerous conditions in its patent licensing agreements. Qualcomm licensed its chipset patents to other chip suppliers with the stipulation that they must limit sales of their products to mobile handset makers that also have Qualcomm patent licenses.

Broadcom had also asserted that the cloud of litigation hanging over it was a sticking point for prospective customers--and did win a judgment against Qualcomm in 2007. Qualcomm, however, had won court rulings of its own, having suits against it dismissed.