Nokia is going after Apple for an additional 13 patents [When you can’t innovate, just sue!]

The never ending battle over patents continues in the mobile industry, more specifically the case between Apple and Nokia. Both are suing each other for infringing patents, and Nokia just announced that they’ve found even more patents that Apple has violated, bringing the total to 37.

“These actions add 13 further Nokia patents to the 24 already asserted against Apple in the US International Trade Commission and the Delaware and Wisconsin Federal courts,” said Paul Melin, Vice President, Intellectual Property at Nokia. “The Nokia inventions protected by these patents include several which enable compelling user experiences. For example, using a wiping gesture on a touch screen to navigate content, or enabling access to constantly changing services with an on-device app store, both filed more than ten years before the launch of the iPhone.”

Nokia filed a suit in the UK for 4 patents relating to touch user interface, on-device app stores, signal noise suppression and modulator structures. Then 7 patents in Dusseldorf, Germany for patents related to touch user interface, antenna structures, messaging functionality and chipsets. Another 5 patents in Mannheim, Germany related to on-device app stores, caller ID, display illumination and the integration of multiple radios. And finally in the Netherlands, 2 patents related to signal noise suppression and data card functionality.

For once I’d like to write a story about Nokia doing something other than cutting jobs or suing other companies. When are they going to make something cool again versus attacking everyone for patents that they themselves are saying are not “essential to any wireless communication standard”? There’s a promise that in 2011 we’ll see a completely new user interface be developed on top of Maemo, but then again we’re likely to see new things come along in Android 3.0, 4.0, and even the next version of iOS that will raise the bar even higher than where it is today.

  • Ohhhjohnny

    Can’t you do both? Apple is also suing htc, are they still not innovative?

  • Ohhhjohnny

    Can’t you do both? Apple is also suing htc, are they still not innovative?

    • Don’t Argue!. Stefan is always right!! Never wrong! Dare you, if you say otherwise. 🙂

      • And not just Stefan, all the IntoMobile writers, who write about Nokia are always right!!

      • And not just Stefan, all the IntoMobile writers, who write about Nokia are always right!!

      • And not just Stefan, all the IntoMobile writers, who write about Nokia are always right!!

      • And not just Stefan, all the IntoMobile writers, who write about Nokia are always right!!

      • And not just Stefan, all the IntoMobile writers, who write about Nokia are always right!!

      • And not just Stefan, all the IntoMobile writers, who write about Nokia are always right!!

      • And not just Stefan, all the IntoMobile writers, who write about Nokia are always right!!

      • And not just Stefan, all the IntoMobile writers, who write about Nokia are always right!!

      • And not just Stefan, all the IntoMobile writers, who write about Nokia are always right!!

      • And not just Stefan, all the IntoMobile writers, who write about Nokia are always right!!

      • And not just Stefan, all the IntoMobile writers, who write about Nokia are always right!!

  • innovator

    Stefan, are you really saying that stealing other’s property (using patents without permission) is innovating? You must be kidding or you’re some sort of fanboy, blinded to see what’s happening. Of course it was cheaper for Apple to concentrate creating something new after somebody else did the innovation job for antennas, for example. Apple has to play by rules, which are called the law. If you cannot comply with this, you’re usually jailed or punished otherwise. That’s what happens to guys which are too innovating trying to fight the law.

    • gdigenis

      stefan is a nokia hater. the fact that this site lets him write about them is a joke and makes the entire site look like a joke. they have zero credibility when it comes to mobile opinions as they obviously publish very biased articles. i guess thats the difference between blogging and covering news.

      just look at all of his articles and you will see the pattern.

      • innovator

        Ok, I didn’t know the standard author has in his posts. I read the comments he wrote and finally the line “…they’ve done nothing innovative for years” shows that for this guy objectivity is a dangerous little inspect which should be avoided whenever possible.

        (Well, it is better that the target of his anger is only a company, not humans…)

    • gdigenis

      stefan is a nokia hater. the fact that this site lets him write about them is a joke and makes the entire site look like a joke. they have zero credibility when it comes to mobile opinions as they obviously publish very biased articles. i guess thats the difference between blogging and covering news.

      just look at all of his articles and you will see the pattern.

    • gdigenis

      stefan is a nokia hater. the fact that this site lets him write about them is a joke and makes the entire site look like a joke. they have zero credibility when it comes to mobile opinions as they obviously publish very biased articles. i guess thats the difference between blogging and covering news.

      just look at all of his articles and you will see the pattern.

  • Company N innovates but fails to capitalize on those innovations. Company A comes out of nowhere and infringes on said innovations. Blogger S then claims company N can’t innovate. Reader T wonders WTF about Blogger S’s intellectual honesty.

    • kimi

      +1
      I couldn’t have said it better.

  • Company N innovates but fails to capitalize on those innovations. Company A comes out of nowhere and infringes on said innovations. Blogger S then claims company N can’t innovate. Reader T wonders WTF about Blogger S’s intellectual honesty.

  • RJC

    Stefan used to be a Nokia fanboy who wanted to work for Nokia. He eventually got a job from Nokia. Worked there for a little while and then got fired. So now he’s hating Nokia and writing anti-Nokia nonsense in revenge. Pathetic really.

    • Zef

      It’s incredible how bad he can be aobut it, but it does smell too much like a revenge to be credible and that’s the cool news about his posts. Well, i’m leaving this blog as it’s requested for thoses who dont hate Nokia as much as him. Merry christmas 😉

    • you’ve hit the nail on the head, and yet you’ve been reading my work for the past 3 years anyway. thanks!

    • you’ve hit the nail on the head, and yet you’ve been reading my work for the past 3 years anyway. thanks!

    • you’ve hit the nail on the head, and yet you’ve been reading my work for the past 3 years anyway. thanks!

  • Don’t like my Nokia articles? There are hundreds, if not thousands, of other websites on the internet that cover mobile. I call it like it is, and still have plenty of friends at Nokia who are in nothing but absolute agreement with what I say.

    • Anonymous

      So are you saying that instead of defending those patents Nokia should have stayed silent?

      Or are you saying Nokia didn’t actually invent those things?

      Or are you saying patents are not actually needed, as defending them is considered bad and time used would be better used elsewhere?

      Being “essential” is not a requirement for defending an innovation. But yes sure, let’s prevent all innovations that are not essential and therefore not worth defending.

      • “patents are not actually needed, as defending them is considered bad and time used would be better used elsewhere”

        bingo.

        • Anonymous

          You realise that what you are suggesting is totally absurd right. What would be your solution to compensate Nokia or any other company for the billions they put into R&D then? Voluntary payments through Paypal?

          Also you seem to mix legal department to r&d and manufacturing. They are not doing the same things so one doesn’t effect the other

        • Anonymous

          You realise that what you are suggesting is totally absurd right. What would be your solution to compensate Nokia or any other company for the billions they put into R&D then? Voluntary payments through Paypal?

          Also you seem to mix legal department to r&d and manufacturing. They are not doing the same things so one doesn’t effect the other

        • Anonymous

          You realise that what you are suggesting is totally absurd right. What would be your solution to compensate Nokia or any other company for the billions they put into R&D then? Voluntary payments through Paypal?

          Also you seem to mix legal department to r&d and manufacturing. They are not doing the same things so one doesn’t effect the other

          • Patents, namely the sport of building a library of patents, are used to avoid paying patent fees. “Cross licensing” in lawyer talk. Do I think the current patent system should be abolished? Absolutely. It’s whoever has the best implementation of an idea, rather the inventor of an idea, that deserves all the benefits the market can provide.

          • Patents, namely the sport of building a library of patents, are used to avoid paying patent fees. “Cross licensing” in lawyer talk. Do I think the current patent system should be abolished? Absolutely. It’s whoever has the best implementation of an idea, rather the inventor of an idea, that deserves all the benefits the market can provide.

          • Anonymous

            Cross licensing is only one side of patenting. You can only cross license if there’s 2 parties sharing the same interest. As Apple has shown, you can’t cross license if there’s one reluctant party present.

            Also patenting something really isn’t a way to avoid paying for something else, it’s a way to protect investment so that others have the possibility to take advantage of your innovation with less money than building the same innovation themselves and at the same time compensate you for your efforts. Ideally patenting encourages innovation by cutting costs for everyone. At its worst trivial things are allowed to be patented and slow down development.

            I agree that there are patents that aren’t used ideally, and there are companies that take advantage of the system solely in a way it was not meant to be used. In my opinion Nokia is not one of those companies.

          • Remember Nokia vs. Qualcomm? That half decade feud ended with Nokia saying that they’ll launch Symbian devices running on Qualcomm gear. It’s quite sad.

          • Remember Nokia vs. Qualcomm? That half decade feud ended with Nokia saying that they’ll launch Symbian devices running on Qualcomm gear. It’s quite sad.

          • Remember Nokia vs. Qualcomm? That half decade feud ended with Nokia saying that they’ll launch Symbian devices running on Qualcomm gear. It’s quite sad.

          • Anonymous

            Then how can you be so negative towards Nokia, when what they hold are real & solid innovations in wireless technology, when they are going after a company that tries to patent generic things like touching a screen? The level of the patents they just added to the fold is about on the same level as anything apple has in this battle.

            Why do you think Apple should not pay Nokia royalties, just like everyone else needs to do?

          • Anonymous

            Then how can you be so negative towards Nokia, when what they hold are real & solid innovations in wireless technology, when they are going after a company that tries to patent generic things like touching a screen? The level of the patents they just added to the fold is about on the same level as anything apple has in this battle.

            Why do you think Apple should not pay Nokia royalties, just like everyone else needs to do?

          • It’s a case of Nokia wanting to license some of Apple’s patents, Apple saying no, so Nokia goes after them with a nuclear weapon. That’s all this legal battle is about.

          • Anonymous

            It’s more about not giving Apple a free from jail card contrary to everyone else. Cross licensing is just one way of paying for it. Apple has just decided not to pay in any form.

            Also you should not accuse patent system because US justice system is slow to process them.

            QC vs Nokia was more about what is fair price for the technology and not if Nokia used the patented technology without permission or not. In the end it was a win-win or loose-loose depending on what side you looked at it. Nokia already used QC’s technology in their products. They just payed less licensing fees after the trial. They would have like to pay even less but as far as I remember the end result was somewhere middle.

            But I expect you to write similar article, preferably with bit more analysis when Apple, Motorola or SE sues another company. Or is it just Nokia you want to write articles like this?

          • I shit on patents regardless of who sues and who is being sued. As you’ve said, the system is broken. People just like to point out that I never have anything nice to say about Nokia because frankly … they’ve done nothing innovative for years.

          • Anonymous

            It’s more about not giving Apple a free from jail card contrary to everyone else. Cross licensing is just one way of paying for it. Apple has just decided not to pay in any form.

            Also you should not accuse patent system because US justice system is slow to process them.

            QC vs Nokia was more about what is fair price for the technology and not if Nokia used the patented technology without permission or not. In the end it was a win-win or loose-loose depending on what side you looked at it. Nokia already used QC’s technology in their products. They just payed less licensing fees after the trial. They would have like to pay even less but as far as I remember the end result was somewhere middle.

            But I expect you to write similar article, preferably with bit more analysis when Apple, Motorola or SE sues another company. Or is it just Nokia you want to write articles like this?

          • Anonymous

            It’s more about not giving Apple a free from jail card contrary to everyone else. Cross licensing is just one way of paying for it. Apple has just decided not to pay in any form.

            Also you should not accuse patent system because US justice system is slow to process them.

            QC vs Nokia was more about what is fair price for the technology and not if Nokia used the patented technology without permission or not. In the end it was a win-win or loose-loose depending on what side you looked at it. Nokia already used QC’s technology in their products. They just payed less licensing fees after the trial. They would have like to pay even less but as far as I remember the end result was somewhere middle.

            But I expect you to write similar article, preferably with bit more analysis when Apple, Motorola or SE sues another company. Or is it just Nokia you want to write articles like this?

          • It’s a case of Nokia wanting to license some of Apple’s patents, Apple saying no, so Nokia goes after them with a nuclear weapon. That’s all this legal battle is about.

          • It’s a case of Nokia wanting to license some of Apple’s patents, Apple saying no, so Nokia goes after them with a nuclear weapon. That’s all this legal battle is about.

          • Anonymous

            Then how can you be so negative towards Nokia, when what they hold are real & solid innovations in wireless technology, when they are going after a company that tries to patent generic things like touching a screen? The level of the patents they just added to the fold is about on the same level as anything apple has in this battle.

            Why do you think Apple should not pay Nokia royalties, just like everyone else needs to do?

          • Patents, namely the sport of building a library of patents, are used to avoid paying patent fees. “Cross licensing” in lawyer talk. Do I think the current patent system should be abolished? Absolutely. It’s whoever has the best implementation of an idea, rather the inventor of an idea, that deserves all the benefits the market can provide.

        • Anonymous

          You realise that what you are suggesting is totally absurd right. What would be your solution to compensate Nokia or any other company for the billions they put into R&D then? Voluntary payments through Paypal?

          Also you seem to mix legal department to r&d and manufacturing. They are not doing the same things so one doesn’t effect the other

  • Anonymous

    You are full of shit Stefan. I cannot believe you are allowed to write drivel like this.

  • Anonymous

    You are full of shit Stefan. I cannot believe you are allowed to write drivel like this.

  • newguy

    I think the best assumption here is that neither nokia nor apple is right, neither of them is wrong and both of them are pretty stupid. apple has previously filed a patent infingement law suit against Motorola in a pretty obvious jab at its nearest competitor, google’s Android os. was apple wrong to file a lawsuit against a rival company that infinged its patents? in the eye of the law, the answer is no. but the current system is indeed screwed up. either a company files patents, or they risk being pummeled by the competition at a later date over some simple thngs. things might not have to be this way, but, well, that’s what the world is like. thus, while it isn’t inherently ‘evil’ to file patents, it is pretty evil to take advantage of the flaws in the system and sue a rival over ridiculously simple stuff or things that are more or less common sense. a company, for instance, could come up with an unique idea, but whether that idea deserves a patent depends on how specific and encompassing the idea actually is. lets face it, both apple and nokia have been dix in the past, but that doesn’t mean that apple deserves to be sued into oblivion over ridiculous things. is it right for nokia to protect its accomplishments? absolutely they should. but, if stephan’s claim is to be accepted, how many of those patents nokia sued over could be attributed to serious efforts undertaken by nokia? sure, nokia has the technical right to sue over patents that pertain to UI, but IMO that would not be a very ethical nor mature thing to do, especially since nokia is (according to an entry in wikipedia) seeking to bar imports of all apple import into the us, which would effectively hamper apple’s capability as a major player in the electronics industry if the request is, however unlikely, granted. that seems somewhat evil. nokia almost certainly has filed suits over less stupid stuff than what was described in the post, but it’s possible that apple has reached similar solutions on their own. after all, just as cars are streamlined to increase efficiency and that in the past bows and arrows look pretty much the same no matter the origin, technologies used in mobile phones could be similar to the restrictions of the laws of physics and human behavior. as long as apple didn’t intentionally steal, sueing apple to take advantage of the situation is not justified ethically. of course, if apple DID knowingly rip off of nokia then it deserves to be peeled, although I wouldn’t go as far as to bar all apple products from the US. so there, it’s settled(?).

    one more thing, I am not an apple fanboy, as I personally dislike steve jobs quite a bit and I have never owned an iproduct despite having had the opportunity to do so. I am also clearly not a nokia hater, seeing that this comment was made on my n8.

  • newguy

    I think the best assumption here is that neither nokia nor apple is right, neither of them is wrong and both of them are pretty stupid. apple has previously filed a patent infingement law suit against Motorola in a pretty obvious jab at its nearest competitor, google’s Android os. was apple wrong to file a lawsuit against a rival company that infinged its patents? in the eye of the law, the answer is no. but the current system is indeed screwed up. either a company files patents, or they risk being pummeled by the competition at a later date over some simple thngs. things might not have to be this way, but, well, that’s what the world is like. thus, while it isn’t inherently ‘evil’ to file patents, it is pretty evil to take advantage of the flaws in the system and sue a rival over ridiculously simple stuff or things that are more or less common sense. a company, for instance, could come up with an unique idea, but whether that idea deserves a patent depends on how specific and encompassing the idea actually is. lets face it, both apple and nokia have been dix in the past, but that doesn’t mean that apple deserves to be sued into oblivion over ridiculous things. is it right for nokia to protect its accomplishments? absolutely they should. but, if stephan’s claim is to be accepted, how many of those patents nokia sued over could be attributed to serious efforts undertaken by nokia? sure, nokia has the technical right to sue over patents that pertain to UI, but IMO that would not be a very ethical nor mature thing to do, especially since nokia is (according to an entry in wikipedia) seeking to bar imports of all apple import into the us, which would effectively hamper apple’s capability as a major player in the electronics industry if the request is, however unlikely, granted. that seems somewhat evil. nokia almost certainly has filed suits over less stupid stuff than what was described in the post, but it’s possible that apple has reached similar solutions on their own. after all, just as cars are streamlined to increase efficiency and that in the past bows and arrows look pretty much the same no matter the origin, technologies used in mobile phones could be similar to the restrictions of the laws of physics and human behavior. as long as apple didn’t intentionally steal, sueing apple to take advantage of the situation is not justified ethically. of course, if apple DID knowingly rip off of nokia then it deserves to be peeled, although I wouldn’t go as far as to bar all apple products from the US. so there, it’s settled(?).

    one more thing, I am not an apple fanboy, as I personally dislike steve jobs quite a bit and I have never owned an iproduct despite having had the opportunity to do so. I am also clearly not a nokia hater, seeing that this comment was made on my n8.

Back to top ▴