Enough is enough: Apple files antitrust complaint against multiple Nokia privateers (FOSS Patents, December 21, 2016)
Apple sues Nokia's pet patent trolls (The Register, December 21, 2016)
在Nokia訴Apple專利侵權之後，Apple起訴了多家與Nokia相關的專利主張實體 (Patent Assertion Entity, PAE)，主張他們不公平競爭。這個40多頁的訴狀內容精彩，以下節錄一些重點供大家參考。
與Nokia相關的PAE：
(訴狀第9頁)
這些NPE的名字，台灣廠商們應該很熟悉吧。
Nokia將專利分散到多個PAE的主要邏輯：專利的數量與權利金的關係成非線性，所以分散可以收更多錢：
“[T]he relationship between the number of patents and the total royalty rate is not linear. For example, a license to a single [SEP] may be 2.5% … while a license to ten or more [SEPs] rarely exceeds 5%.”(訴狀第10頁，第18到20行)
Note：這段文字是摘錄自Nokia於2014年在巴塞隆納法院遞交的專家意見。Apple能找到這個，真的只能說是太厲害了。
Acacia在受讓Nokia的專利之前，就已經對Apple發起26件訴訟：
- Adaptix, Inc. v. Apple Inc. et al., Case No. 6:12-cv-00124 (E.D. Tex.), and transferred to Case No. 5:13-cv-01776 (N.D. Cal.);
- Adaptix, Inc. v. Apple Inc. et al., Case No. 6:12-cv-00125 (E.D. Tex.), and transferred to Case No. 5:13-cv-01777 (N.D. Cal.);
- Adaptix, Inc. v. Apple Inc. et al., Case No. 6:13-cv-00028 (E.D. Tex.), and transferred to Case No. 5:13-cv-02023 (N.D. Cal.);
- Adaptix, Inc. v. Apple Inc. et al., Case No. 3:13-cv-04469 (N.D. Cal.);
- Adaptix, Inc. v. Apple Inc. et al., Case No. 3:13-cv-04468 (N.D. Cal.);
- AutoText Technologies, Inc. v. Apple Inc. et al., Case No. 1:07-cv-03513 (N.D. Ohio);
- Brandywine Communications Technologies, LLC v. Apple Inc., Case No. 6:12-cv-00262 (M.D. Fla.);
- Brandywine Communications Technologies, LLC v. Apple Inc. et al., Case No.6:11-cv-01512 (M.D. Fla.);
- Data Engine Technologies LLC v. Apple Inc., Case No. 6:12-cv-00697 (E.D. Tex.);
- Digital Background Corporation v. Apple Inc., Case No. 5:08-cv-03639 (N.D. Cal.);
- Digitech Image Technologies LLC v. Apple Inc., Case No. 8:12-cv-02125 (C.D. Cal.);
- Efficient Online Purchasing LLC et al. v. Apple Inc. et al., Case No. 1:11-cv-00222 (D. Del.);
- Express Card Systems LLC v. Apple Inc., Case No. 6:13-cv-00136 (E.D. Tex.);
- Fast Memory Erase LLC v. Spansion Inc. et al., Case No. 3:08-cv-00977 (N.D. Tex.);
- Intercarrier Communications LLC v. Apple Inc., Case No. 3:12-cv-00764 (E.D. Va.);
- IP Innovation LLC. et al. v. Apple Inc., Case No. 2:07-cv-00146 (E.D. Tex.);
- Mobile Enhancement Solutions LLC v. Apple Inc. et al., Case No. 3:12-cv-00795 (N.D. Tex.);
- Online News Link LLC v. Apple Inc. et al., Case No. 2:09-cv-00312 (E.D. Tex.);
- Optimum Power Solutions LLC v. Apple Inc. et. al., Case No. 3:11-cv-01509 (N.D. Cal.);
- Restricted Spending Solutions, LLC v. Apple Inc., Case No. 3:08-cv-00093 (S.D. Ill.);
- Shared Memory Graphics, LLC v. Apple Inc. et al., Case No. 3:10-cv-02475 (N.D. Cal.);
- SmartPhone Technologies LLC v. Apple Inc. et al., Case No. 6:13-cv-00196 (E.D. Tex.);
- SmartPhone Technologies LLC v. Apple Inc. et al., Case No. 6:11-cv-00604 (E.D. Tex.);
- SmartPhone Technologies LLC v. Research in Motion Corporation et al., Case No. 6:10-cv-00074 (E.D. Tex.);
- Software Restore Solutions, LLC v. Apple Inc., Case No. 1:11-cv-05625 (N.D. Ill.); and
- Software Restore Solutions, LLC v. Apple Inc. et al., Case No. 1:10-cv-03628 (N.D. Ill.).
(訴狀14-15頁)
Acacia在受讓Nokia的專利之後，又對Apple發起多件訴訟：
- On January 27, 201410 and April 7, 2014, CCE filed its first suits against Apple, asserting patents acquired from Nokia;
- On April 8, 2014, Innovative Display Technologies LLC sued Apple;
- On May 16, 2014, Adaptix filed its first suit against Apple in Japan;
- On January 26, 2015, Adaptix filed a second wave of suits against Apple;
- On April 30, 2015, CCE sued Apple four more times, again asserting patents acquired from Nokia;
- On May 1, 2015, Parthenon Unified Memory Architecture LLC sued Apple;
- On July 8, 2015, Adaptix filed its second suit against Apple in Japan;
- On August 10, 2015, Limestone Memory System LLC sued Apple;
- On December 17, 2015, CCE Germany sued Apple in Germany;
- On December 30, 2015, SLC Germany sued Apple in Germany; and
- On January 27, 2016, SLC sued Apple, asserting patents acquired from VoiceAge.
我覺得Apple內部負責專利訴訟的主管，應該已經覺得非常煩了吧。我都可以想像他要求律師，不管有沒有理由，都給我砲轟一下Nokia !
Apple有簽Sipro Lab的WCDMA pool license：
75. Apple had previously licensed the VoiceAge patents through the W-CDMA patent pool administered by Sipro Lab Telecom....(訴狀第26頁)
Note：我不記得Sipro Lab有講過這件事耶......。
Conversant用19件專利告Apple，只有2件地院認定侵權，且判賠金額不到原告請求的1/3：
86. To date, Conversant has obtained an infringement verdict on just two patents out of 19 it has asserted in the two cases that proceeded to jury trials; and for the two patents on which it succeeded at trial, it obtained a jury verdict of less than a third of the royalties Conversant sought.(訴狀第29頁)
Vringo告ZTE，結果被中國反壟斷主管機關調查中 (三個機關哪一個啊) ：
Vringo sought excessive royalties on former Nokia SEPs, and obtained injunctions against ZTE practicing the UMTS and LTE standards based on ZTE’s alleged infringement of SEPs in several jurisdictions. Vringo’s enforcement strategy and violation of bedrock FRAND principles have led to investigations by competition authorities in Europe and China.(訴狀第31頁)
Note：連ZTE自己的新聞稿，都只提到歐盟的反壟斷調查，好像沒提到中國的反壟斷調查耶 (只提到Interdigital之前被發改委調查)。Apple是怎麼知道的......？
Sisvel用工業標準專利在德國地院拿到Injunction，而且打算對其他公司也這樣做：
Sisvel sought and obtained an injunction from the Düsseldorf Regional Court in Germany preventing a Chinese cellular handset manufacturer from selling its devices based on alleged use of SEPs relating to GPRS and UMTS. Sisvel similarly obtained injunctions against other companies that sought to exhibit their cellular handsets at a convention in Germany.(訴狀第31頁)
這個injunction (請參考這邊) 很重要，已經被上訴法院駁回了 (請參考這邊，英文說明請參考這邊) 。地院准許Injunction的理由，以及上訴法院暫停injunction的理由，都值得管理專利爭議案件者注意。
Apple 列出的訴因：
- BREACH OF FRAND CONTRACT
- ACACIA-NOKIA, CORE WIRELESS-NOKIA AGREEMENTS TO RESTRAIN COMPETITION IN CELLULAR TECHNOLOGY LICENSING (SECTION 1 OF THE SHERMAN ACT)
- UNLAWFUL ASSET ACQUISITION (SECTION 7 OF THE CLAYTON ACT)
- CONSPIRACIES TO MONOPOLIZE THE SEP TECHNOLOGY MARKETS (SECTION 2 OF THE SHERMAN ACT)
- UNFAIR COMPETITION UNDER CAL. BUS. & PROF. CODE § 17200
沒有留言:
張貼留言
注意：只有此網誌的成員可以留言。