Tag: patents

Posted on

IBM was awarded the most patents in 2018, but overall grants declined by 3.5 percent

We may have passed the peak of the “patent war” in the mobile industry, but the concept of patents as power is far from disappearing, since they continue to be a strong marker for how a company is breaking new ground in technology, and do sometimes help to safeguard an inventor’s or company’s original work — even if the legal enforcement around patents sometimes gets abused.

Patent research firm IFI Claims today published its annual report on how patent grants played out in the tech industry in the past year, and it’s a mixed picture as well. It found that IBM has once again, for the 26th year running, topped the list, with 9,100 patents, followed by Samsung, Canon, Intel and LG — also the same top five as a year ago. Forty-six percent of all applications came from the US, with Asia accounting for 31 percent and the US for 15 percent.

But overall, the number of patents granted in 2018 dropped 3.5 percent over 2017, with many a company in the top 50 showing declines in their grants.

Notable declines included Sony (ranking at 15) down 21 percent; Google (number 11) down 16 percent, and Qualcomm (number 8) down 12 percent. Facebook, which last year made it into the top 50 for the first time, dropped out of the shortlist altogether. On the other hand, companies out of China on average saw overall gains across their patent portfolios.

IFI’s Larry Cady said that it’s not clear why so many companies collectively saw significant declines — whether it was due to a lull in innovation — something that I’d argue might actually be happening in the wider industry — or a new approach to how a company safeguards its intellectual property, or even a more conservative process at the USPTO.

What he does note is that there is an average cycle of two years between pre-grant applications and grants, and these were down in 2016 and 2017, meaning 2020 may also see some declines. (Applications were up in 2018 to 374,763, meaning the numbers will also bounce back for grants.)

Other notable trends: Ford has really been driving up its tech cred with its turn to autonomous vehicle technology, jumping up five spots to become the only car company in the top 10.

Apple also moved back into the top 10 ranking, even as its overall patents declined by three percent.

And IFI notes that if you combined all the subsidiaries of Samsung, it would have actually surpassed IBM this year for overall patents held, or “ultimate patent ownership,” in the words of the IFI.

Samsung Electronics has 61,608 active patent families, with Canon in second position with 34,905 and IBM rounding out the top list with 34,376.

Unlike IFI’s annual Top U.S. Patent Recipients, this broader ranking measures the size of a patent owner’s global portfolio based on the number of active patent families. A patent family is a set of patent publications filed around the world to cover a single invention.

 

Posted on

Qualcomm patent dispute forces Apple to pull iPhone 7 and 8 from its stores in Germany

In more bad news for Apple, the company’s iPhone 7 and iPhone 8 models are not currently on sale in its own retail stores in Germany.

This follows an injunction issued by a Munich court last month related to patent litigation brought by chipmaker Qualcomm that’s being enforced from today. The patent dispute concerns smartphone power management technology that’s used to extend battery life.

In December the Munich court sided with Qualcomm, finding that Apple is infringing its patented power savings technology in the two models — granting a permanent injunction.

The court ordered Apple to cease the sale, offer for sale and importation for sale in Germany of infringing iPhones.

Apple has said it will appeal.

The Apple Germany website currently offers the newest models of the iPhone, the XS, XS Max and XR; and older models from 2014 (iPhone 6 and 6 Plus); 2015 (iPhone 6S and 6S Plus); and 2016 (iPhone SE). But buyers looking for 2016’s iPhone 7 or 2017’s iPhone 8 will be disappointed.

Yesterday Qualcomm announced it had posted security bonds totalling €1.34BN required by the court, enabling the injunction issued by the District Court of Munich on December 20 to be enforced.

The bonds are required to cover potential damages incurred by Apple should the judgment be overturned or amended on appeal. Qualcomm had said on December 20 that it would post the bonds “within a few days”.

In a statement yesterday the chipmaker also claimed the court had ordered Apple to recall infringing iPhones from third party resellers in the market.

But at the time of writing the iPhone 7 and iPhone 8 models are still being offered by Apple resellers in Germany.

Amazon.de currently offers both handsets, for instance. While Gravis, Germany’s biggest reseller of Apple products, also told Reuters it was still selling all Apple products including the two models.

Qualcomm has also been pursing patent litigation against Apple in China and the U.S., and last month Apple appealed against a preliminary injunction banning the import and sales of old iPhone models in that market.

In that case the patents relate to editing photos and managing apps on smartphone touchscreens.

While, in the US, Qualcomm has most recently accused Intel engineers working with Apple of stealing trade secrets.

The feud dates back further though. Two years ago the FTC filed charges against Qualcomm accusing it of anticompetitive tactics in an attempt to maintain a monopoly in its chip business — with Apple officially cited in the complaint.

Cupertino also filed a billion-dollar royalty lawsuit against the chipmaker at the same time, accusing it of charging for patents “they have nothing to do with”.

The legal battle between the pair shows no signs of fizzling out, and has led Apple to reduce its reliance on Qualcomm chips — with Intel the short term beneficiary.

An Apple spokesperson declined to comment on the latest litigious development in Germany but pointed to its statement from December 20 in which it takes a broad swipe at Qualcomm’s “tactics”.

In the statement Apple also said resellers in the market would continue to stock all models.

It writes:

Qualcomm’s campaign is a desperate attempt to distract from the real issues between our companies.  Their tactics, in the courts and in their everyday business, are harming innovation and harming consumers.  Qualcomm insists on charging exorbitant fees based on work they didn’t do and they are being investigated by governments all around the world for their behavior.
We are of course disappointed by this verdict and we plan to appeal. All iPhone models remain available to customers through carriers and resellers in 4,300 locations across Germany. During the appeal process, iPhone 7 and iPhone 8 models will not be available at Apple’s 15 retail stores in Germany. iPhone XS, iPhone XS Max and iPhone XR will remain available in all our stores.

The sideswipe at Qualcomm’s “tactics” is perhaps also a tactic reference to the use of a controversial PR firm, Definers, which — as we reported in November — had sent pitches slinging mud at Apple seemingly on Qualcomm’s behalf.

Late last year Facebook confirmed it had severed its own business relationship with the PR firm after it was revealed to have used antisemitic smear tactics to try to discredit Facebook critics.

We’ve asked Qualcomm for comment on its use of the PR firm.

Posted on

AR glasses startup North picks up Intel’s Vaunt patents

Intel’s loss, it seems, is North’s game. As first noted by The Verge, the startup has picked up the “technology portfolio” behind Vaunt, the AR glasses shuttered by the chipmaker in April year after a couple of glowing previews.

North (nee Thalmic Labs) debuted its own take on the category around six months after Intel abandoned its efforts. Focals have been positioned as a kind of Warby Parker-esque take on the category. They’re essentially customizable glasses with a built-in head’s up display looking to finally deliver on the unfulfilled promise of Google Glass.

Intel’s own tech works in a similar matter, reflecting a laser projection back into the wearer’s eye. For Intel, however, Vaunt always felt like a pet project from a company that generates most of its revenue supplying components for other brands. Notably, Intel Capital has invested in North, so this deal could finally help some of its own vision finally come to fruition.

North is certainly viewing the application purchase as more a partnership than anything, referring to it as such in a tweet. “So proud to grow our business with such a great partner,” the company writes. “Stay tuned, this is just the beginning.”

Details of the deal haven’t been disclosed, but North notes that it contains “hundreds of patents and patent applications.” Given how closely the two companies appear to be working here, it seems like a pretty safe bet they got a sweetheart deal for the portfolio.

Posted on

Jury finds Samsung owes Apple $539M in patent case stretching back to 2011

A patent case that began back in 2011 has reached a conclusion, with Samsung ordered to pay about $539 million to Apple over infringements of the latter’s patents in devices that are now long gone. The case has dragged on for years as both sides argued about the finer points of how much was owed per device, what could be deducted and so on. It’s been eye-wateringly boring, but at least it’s over now. Maybe.

The patents in question are some things we take for granted now, UI cues like “rubber-banding” at the bottom of a list or using two fingers to zoom in and out. But they were all part of the “boy have we patented it” multi-touch gestures of which Steve Jobs was so proud. In addition there were the defining characteristics of the first iPhone, now familiar (black round rectangle with a big screen, etc.). At any rate, Apple sued the dickens out of Samsung over them.

The case was actually decided long ago — in 2012, when the court found that Samsung had clearly and willfully infringed on the patents in question and initial damages were set at a staggering $1 billion. We wrote it up then, when it was of course big news:

Apple Awarded $1.049 Billion In Damages As Jury Finds Samsung Infringed On Design And Software Patents

Since then it’s all been about the damages, and Samsung won a big victory in the Supreme court that said it only had to pay out based on the profit from the infringing component.

Unfortunately for Samsung, the “infringing component” for the design patents seems to have been considered by the jury as being the entire phone. The result is that a great deal of Samsung’s profits from selling the infringing devices ended up composing the damages. It sets a major precedent in the patent litigation world, although not necessarily a logical one. People started arguing about the validity and value of design patents a long time ago and they haven’t stopped yet.

CNET has a good rundown for anyone curious about the specifics. Notably, Samsung said in a statement that “We will consider all options to obtain an outcome that does not hinder creativity and fair competition for all companies and consumers.” Does that mean they’re going to take it as high as the Supreme Court (again) and drag the case out for another couple of years? Or will they cut their losses and just be happy to stop paying the legal fees that probably rivaled the damages assigned? Hopefully the latter.