University of Wisconsin gets $506 million damages from Apple

[HEXUS]

Apple has been judged to have infringed on its patented 'predictor circuit' CPU technology.

Read more.

[NorBdelta]

Such broad-reaching and all encompassing patents should not be allowed. That being said I am no expert in such advanced technological speak. But it seems absurd.

[flearider]

Such broad-reaching and all encompassing patents should not be allowed. That being said I am no expert in such advanced technological speak. But it seems absurd.

?? so if you spend 2-5 yrs working on something and then someone else come along and borrows it without asking it's ok ?

[GhostSquirrel]

Such broad-reaching and all encompassing patents should not be allowed. That being said I am no expert in such advanced technological speak. But it seems absurd.

?? so if you spend 2-5 yrs working on something and then someone else come along and borrows it without asking it's ok ?

Yep, if you cant be bothered to develop or use a patent after nearly 20 years then why hold back others. The research was probably funded with public money anyway so should be available to all US companies/individuals.

[EvilCycle]

Yep, if you cant be bothered to develop or use a patent after nearly 20 years then why hold back others. The research was probably funded with public money anyway so should be available to all US companies/individuals.

Can't argue with that! But I also can't pretend it isn't nice to see apple feeling a little heat over their so called "inventions"

[peterb]

Yep, if you cant be bothered to develop or use a patent after nearly 20 years then why hold back others. The research was probably funded with public money anyway so should be available to all US companies/individuals.

True, although the whole point of a patent IS to make it publicly available, but protects the IPR for a specific period of time for the patent holder to either exploit it themselves, or allow others to exploit under the terms of a licensing agreement.

So as the UoW had a patent, they are able to dictate the terms on which their IPR is used.

The fine was doubled after Apple continued to infringe the Patent after the first court case. While its not stated, I expect the UoW informed Apple before going to court in the first place, so they would have had ample opportunity to come to a licensing agreement.

So I'm afraid no sympathy from me for Apple over this.

[stoatwblr]

Is this patent embodied in all ARM cpus, or just Apple's ones?

[peterb]

Is this patent embodied in all ARM cpus, or just Apple's ones?

reading the Reuters article, it appears to be Apple's processors only.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

I can't see why anyone feels sorry for Apple,after all they used marginal patents throughout their history to attack competing companies.

[Ross1]

Patents should only be for very specific technologies, like rounded corners.

[peterb]

Patents should only be for very specific technologies, like rounded corners.

The grant (or otherwise) of a patent is at the discretion of the patent office in the appropriate country. The actual law is complex, but basically refers to a new 'invention' or the application of an existing idea in a new or novel way. Patents and design copyright and Trade Marks are closely aligned, and in the UK handled by the same organisation.

(Disclaimer - I am not a patent lawyer! )

[elites2012]

served them right. still sad how so many people hate being monitored and spied on, yet still own an apple iphone.

[peterb]

served them right. still sad how so many people hate being monitored and spied on, yet still own a smart phone.

Just corrected that for you.