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

H-W Technology sues Apple, 31 other companies alleging patent infringement

Thursday, March 31, 2011 · 11:24 am · 21 Comments

“H-W Technology on Wednesday filed a lawsuit against Apple, Nokia, Motorola, RIM and 28 other companies for infringing on one of its patents,” Jim Dalrymple reports for The Loop.

“Filed in the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, the lawsuit claims the 32 companies infringe on the ’955 Patent, entitled ‘Internet Protocol (IP) Phone with Search and Advertising Capability,’” Dalrymple reports. “The patent was awarded to H-W Technology in April 2009.”

Dalrymple reports, “In addition to Apple, Nokia, Motorola and RIM, other companies sued by H-W Technology include Amazon, LG, eBay, Hotels.com, Google, Priceline, Expedia, Buy.com, Samsung, Microsoft, Verizon and others. H-W Technology is asking the court for a permanent injunction against the companies, cash damages, and enhanced damages for knowingly infringing on the patent.”

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

21 Comments

opsono

Thursday, March 31, 2011 - 11:39 am · Reply

Yeah, get them suits started up before the new patent laws come on and yank out the rug.
Goatie

Thursday, March 31, 2011 - 11:40 am · Reply

Surely then every IP phone has the ‘capability’ for advertisement because you can stick a brand’s sticker onto the phone.

Like back in the day with the branded fascias for the old Nokia brick phones. Surely that was a phone ‘capable of advertisement’ and they were around a long time before 2009.
RePlay

Thursday, March 31, 2011 - 11:51 am · Reply

Rocket Docket to nowhere!
- 8^þ
  
  Thursday, March 31, 2011 - 2:40 pm · Reply
  
  There’s a reason this was filed in Texas.
- silverhawk1
  
  Thursday, March 31, 2011 - 6:43 pm · Reply
  
  It was filed in the “Northern” district versus the “Eastern” district. The Eastern district is the rocket docket.
kingmel

Thursday, March 31, 2011 - 11:53 am · Reply

Cell phones have always included a start up advertisement. I have not read the details of the patent, but I suspect that it will be judged invalid based upon its high-level description.
Jersey_Trader

Thursday, March 31, 2011 - 11:56 am · Reply

Who has the patent for using fire to heat food? The repeated lawsuits by people and groups that never had the ability to use, develop or market their ideas is getting old. What / who is H-W Technology and where / when did they bring it to market. Is that product or service still in use today?

Is this just another “give me cash” to use the patent I could never make money with and never intended to use?

Patent leaches!
Raymond in DC

Thursday, March 31, 2011 - 12:00 pm · Reply

Whatever happened to “prior art”? From this writeup he’s getting a patent for stuff others have been doing for years. The patent’s claims seem outrageously broad, almost amounting to “anything one can do on a mobile device”.
- m159
  
  Thursday, March 31, 2011 - 2:29 pm · Reply
  
  There aren’t any H-W phones that I know of.
TimD

Thursday, March 31, 2011 - 12:09 pm · Reply

A patent is worthless unless it’s been defended in court.
Prior art will kill this one dead.
leodavinci

Thursday, March 31, 2011 - 12:26 pm · Reply

From the generalized description in the article, it sounds like H-W is attempting to patent the concept of the “smart phone.”
krquet

Thursday, March 31, 2011 - 12:34 pm · Reply

I guess the point is, vague or otherwise, they have somehow managed to patent something that says ‘Internet Protocol (IP) Phone with Search and Advertising Capability.’ That’s the real contention here.
Cubert

Thursday, March 31, 2011 - 12:38 pm · Reply

Here is the patent verbatim:

“A software platform in an Internet Protocol (IP) phone having the ability to be used with different communication infrastructures such as broadband, wireless communication and Plain Old Telephone System (POTS) service. Further, the software platform in the IP phone has the ability to be used with different applications operating on the IP phone. Further, the IP phone has the ability to perform additional functionality than traditional Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN) phones, such as searches and advertising, given its ability to converge voice and data within a single terminal.”

Um, yeah. Good luck with that one.
- gksmith
  
  Thursday, March 31, 2011 - 12:55 pm · Reply
  
  Given all the prior art that’s out there, if H-W wins this suit, I’m going to patent having babies–should make for a nice continuing income stream.
- Derek Currie
  
  Sunday, April 3, 2011 - 2:44 am · Reply
  
  The outcome I’d like to see is to have the computer tech division of the US Patent Office FIRED. Any decent computer science graduate would have thrown this BS back in H-W’s face and laughed at them.
  - Patrick
    
    Sunday, April 3, 2011 - 8:51 am · Reply
    
    Derek,
    
    The text quoted by Cubert above is -not- representative of the patent claims that the USPTO eventually allowed. One needs to look at the issued patent claims to know what the USPTO allowed: http://www.applepatent.com/2011/04/h-w-v-apple-read-claims-not-complaint.html
John B

Thursday, March 31, 2011 - 1:33 pm · Reply

Doesn’t the iPhone pre-date this patent if it was awarded in 2009? The iPhone was introduced in 2007.
Ben R

Thursday, March 31, 2011 - 5:13 pm · Reply

Patents give me a stomach ache.
Patrick

Friday, April 1, 2011 - 4:56 pm · Reply

More details on this case, particularly on what the patent actually claims, here: http://www.applepatent.com/2011/04/h-w-v-apple-read-claims-not-complaint.html
Derek Currie

Sunday, April 3, 2011 - 2:39 am · Reply

The H-W Technology patent award continues the consistent fact that the US Patent Office is full of TechTards. Nothing new here. The lawyers love it.

Hey Corporate Oligarchy! A clue for you:
Toss your millions at reforming the US Patent Office! Or is it too scary for you to get involved with anything so unselfish? 80
Overcast

Tuesday, April 5, 2011 - 7:28 pm · Reply

http://blog.brightcove.com/en/2009/03/first-internet-phone-circa-1996