May 25, 2012 - 05:30 PM EDT — AAPL: 562.29 (-3.03, -0.54%) | NASDAQ: 2837.53 (-1.85, -0.07%)

Lawsuit against Nike, Apple claims patent infringement over Nike+iPod Sport Kit

Tuesday, October 2, 2007 · 3:58 pm · 32 Comments

“A little-known athletic company from Utah has filed a lawsuit that names both Nike and Apple, claiming that Nike knowingly stole its decade-old idea for the Nike+ iPod Sport Kit,” Kasper Jade reports for AppleInsider.

“Brothers Greg and Kenny Anderson of Leaper Footwear, LLC say they invented in 1995 and successfully patented in 1998 a unique breed of footwear which — like the Nike+ iPod Sport Kit co-developed by Nike and Apple — measures locomotive performance parameters such as a user’s walking or running speed and/or distance traveled,” Jade reports.

“Leaper’s complaint is the second to target both Apple and Nike over allegations that the Nike+ iPod Sport Kit makes unauthorized use of patenting technology. In January, Colorodo-based PhatRat Technology filed a similar suit, charging both companies with infringing on four of its own patents,” Jade reports.

Thank You for supporting MacDailyNews!

♥ Adobe Photoshop CS6 Extended for Mac - Student and Teacher Edition DVD (65171323) only $249!
♥ Blowout: Apple 15.4" MacBook Pro i7/4Core/2.0GHz/4GB/500GB (MC721LL/A) only $1,549.99 + Free Shipping from MacMall
♥ Mac Madness Save 25% on Parallels Desktop 7!
♥ 15% Off Compatible Ink. 10% Off All Others (excludes OEMs). Free Shipping over $55. Coupon: 123BLOSSOM, Expires 6.18.12
♥ Save up to 60% at the Hammacher Schlemmer Special Values Sale-While supplies last.
♥ Dragon Dictate for Mac 2.5 - New! Simply Smarter Speech Recognition
♥ Up to 30% OFF Accessories from Verizon Wireless
♥ Limited Time Offer: Get free ZAGGsmartbuds when you buy a ZAGGsparq!

Comment Feed

32 Comments

« Previous 1 2

Curly

Tuesday, October 2, 2007 - 10:04 pm · Reply

Hey Mo!
Just mail that idea to yourself and you’re covered.
Nyuk Nyuk Nyuk!
Steve Ballmer

Tuesday, October 2, 2007 - 11:31 pm · Reply

Just another in a long list of law suits!
http://fakesteveballmer.blogspot.com
Apple Breaking the Law Again! The PEOPLE SUE!

Third lawsuit arises over iPhone battery replacements

“In what may be the clear sign of an emerging trend, a second suit filed this past Wednesday in California’s northern district alleges that Apple and AT&T;knowingly withheld information about the iPhone’s true battery replacement costs until after the June 29th launch, effectively misleading some customers into buying the device when they would have otherwise refrained.”
It has been my contention that the Apple people have an “above the law” mentality for quite some time! Others are starting to see this pattern of deceit and treachery and sueing over it. That’s right guys hit them where it hurts, the wallets!
Remember you guys, MS is your friend, sue Apple.
PatentTroll

Wednesday, October 3, 2007 - 5:28 am · Reply

“9 years sounds like plenty of time to get your foot in the door and promote your product. I’m not familiar with patent law”

Clearly you don’t know the law. US Patents are good for 20 years from date of filing.

“So if I register this idea now does that mean that when someone smart actually builds it I can cash in?”

Absolutely. Provided you adequately describe how your device works, rightly or wrongly, that’s the way it is. Of course the infringing company can attack your patent if they feel its weak.
Mr. Peabody

Wednesday, October 3, 2007 - 9:15 am · Reply

I’m a little known… Well, I’m just little known, and I had a great idea 19.5 years ago, and I just woke up this morning and heard of a product venture by some company called Nike and another called Apple, and they’re doing this thing that I invented [like I said] 19.5 years ago and I’m P.O.’ed that they took my idea. I hear the idea is doing very well so I’m going to get what’s mine and see just how much mulla I can get a court to award me for my efforts – from 19.5 years ago. And if you’re wondering why you never heard of my product then it’s because I just haven’t gotten around to advertising it yet. I’m hoping this settlement will give the money I need to keep going with the Nike+Apple – I MEAN – MY idea.
Ray

Wednesday, October 3, 2007 - 9:51 am · Reply

Before the Supreme Court went on break the last time…they made a little known ruling. Patents now have to show real innovation. Just because you have red paint and blue paint, and you paint a wall red and blue, you can’t patent the red and blue wall. The comment from the legal experts was a lot of companies were granted patents for non-innovating ideas. That is why Apple better not be banking on all 200 of their iPhone patents to hold water. And…Leaper Footware better not buy that new world HQ just yet. Because the fact of the matter is, the Nike+iPod is just an accelerometer on a shoe. Both accelerometers and shoes have been around for a long long while. In fact, I am willing to go as far as to say; Nike and every shoe company has probably mounted accelerometers to shoes before 1995 to test sole designs in the lab. Unfortunately the judge who hears this case may have a brilliant judicial mind, and will also be a moron when it comes to technical issues. In the technical world there is nothing dazzling about this technology. The miracle here is that the manufacturing engineers finally made it cheap enough to sell to the public. So unless Leaper invented the particular sensor technology to make the kit affordable, they really did not do anything.
Could you imagine the chaos if every time you checked a different kind of tire with a tire gage, you had to pay royalties to some hack inventor.

Just my $0.02
tt

Wednesday, October 3, 2007 - 10:37 am · Reply

Patents are stupid.

If you can figure it out / reverse engineer it… do it…. This is where communism would shine… (unfortunatly.. its the only place it would)
Bobsyeruncle

Wednesday, October 3, 2007 - 3:55 pm · Reply

Just a few comments on the various comments:

1. If they have a valid patent since 1998 (and I said IF), the fact that you’ve never heard of them makes no difference. If (and again, I said IF) their patent represents a new invention or process, then they have protection even though no one has heard of them and Apple/Nike came up with their idea without any knowledge of the earlier invention.

2. Patent cases are heard in a special court that hears nothing but patent cases and where the judges have a high degree of technical expertise. Patent cases are also “loser pays” although a losing defendant probably will be assessed legal fees and court costs if their claim was frivolous.

3. You can’t sue the Patent Office for issuing an invalid patent, and, moreover, nothing in the piece says that Apple/Nike have a patent on this process. The Patent Office merely evaluates the invention or process, sees whether it meets the requisite requirements for originality and non-obviousness and gives the inventor a piece of paper essentially saying that. The piece of paper allows them to stop anyone else from using the invention without permission, but if a person uses a patented invention or process, the government won’t step in and stop them. There is no patent police. If you have a patent that you think was infringed, you have to sue and one big part of the case will be that you will have to prove the validity of your patent.

4. Either the patent is valid or it isn’t. If it isn’t then Apple/Nike are in the clear. If it is, then it makes no difference whether or not the iPod was invented in 1998. If the patent covers sending exercise data from a shoe to a portable device, it makes no difference which shoe or which portable device is invloved.
Bobsyeruncle

Wednesday, October 3, 2007 - 3:57 pm · Reply

I mistyped above. When I said “a losing defendant” I meant “a losing plaintiff.”
Whatever

Wednesday, October 3, 2007 - 4:51 pm · Reply

You would think that if you are smart enough to come up with the idea you would be smart enough to sell it to a large company like Nike or Reebok
Back to Reality

Wednesday, October 3, 2007 - 6:42 pm · Reply

Remember Nike+Philips, brought out an MP3 player and shoe sensor long before Apple was even in the picture with this product.

Apple wasn’t even the innovator here, just a follower using Nike technology.
Carl

Wednesday, October 3, 2007 - 6:47 pm · Reply

“If you can figure it out / reverse engineer it… do it…. “

Yeah, property rights suck. If you see a nice house you like, just move in, if you see a car you like, take it…

Patents exist to allow companies to innovate without the fear that some-body’s going to capture all the benefit of their effort.

Imagine if everybody sat around waiting to copy other people, where would the ideas to copy come from?

It’d be exactly like communism where everybody sits around expecting that somebody else will work hard…
Tyler

Tuesday, November 2, 2010 - 4:48 am · Reply

Well actually the ancient Greeks, Romans, Chinese & Egyptians invented half of everything first, modern man just re-invented it. Like the pedometer. The Romans invented a gear powered wheeled device that traveled down their roads and dropped pebbles into a tray when it traveled a physical distance of 1 mile, each pebble counted as 1 mile in distance.