Klausner Technologies, Inc. announced today that it has filed a patent lawsuit under its visual voicemail patents against Apple Inc. and AT&T Wireless regarding the iPhone, with damages and future royalties estimated at US$360 million (according to Klausner’s press release).
The lawsuit asserts that Apple’s iPhone Visual Voicemail and other visual voice messaging services implemented by ATT infringe upon Klausner Technologies’ U.S. Patents 5,572,576 and 5,283,818. These patents have already been licensed to various other companies that provide visual voicemail, including Time Warner’s AOL for its AOL Voicemail services, Vonage Holdings for its Vonage Voicemail Plus services as well as others, under the Klausner Patents.
Klausner Technologies was founded by Judah Klausner, the inventor of the PDA and electronic organizer. Apple’s original groundbreaking PDA, the Newton, was, in fact, covered under an OEM patent license granted by Judah Klausner over twenty years ago under his landmark US Patent 4,117,542.
The iPhone violates Klausner’s intellectual property rights by allowing users to selectively retrieve voice messages via the iPhone’s inbox display. Apple, in their marketing materials, has called iPhone’s Visual Voicemail “one of the greatest advances in the history of mankind … without question.”
The suit has been filed by the California law firm of Dovel & Luner in a federal court in the Eastern District of Texas. “We have litigated this patent successfully on two prior occasions,” said Greg Dovel of Dovel & Luner, counsel for Klausner Technologies, in the press release. “With the signing of each new licensee, we continue to receive further confirmation of the strength of our visual voicemail patents.”
Klausner Technologies owns U.S. and international patents covering visual voicemail products and services which allow users to selectively retrieve individual voice messages via their cell phones and PCs.
fart
That’s a pretty difficult patent for Klausner to prove. I think it falls in the realm of obvious technology.
I mean who did not think of saving voicemail in a file. THis is like the digital voice memo recorders or like saving audio files on your computer… Apple did that since ever.
Now if the method of saving the music is the same as Klausner (I highly doubt it) hten it’s anotehr story.
“Eastern District of Texas” once again. I hope the new U.S. Attorney General can put a stop to shopping in Texas.
I also hope Apple arrived at something unique on their own.
Presumably this is a patent on the business model rather than the software which is not patentable anywhere outside the US. The business model patent fails the obvious test and you don’t even have to be skilled in the art.
The only thing in this legal action that a jury ought to address is this:
“Apple, in their marketing materials, has called iPhone’s Visual Voicemail “one of the greatest advances in the history of mankind … without question.”
It would be very interesting to see that claim stand the test of mankind’s history.
Like it was a surprise that they were going to use visual voice mail – they announced it from day one in January and now they come forward and sue. They should have made an injunction to have them not use it if they were concerned. Yeah wait until the phone is popular then sue – bunch of idiots..
The only winners here are the lawyers.
“Hola, AT&T;, and hello, Apple. Welcome back to East Texas. We have your mail waiting for you….”
Y? Oh! Y? do we all have to be subjected to all this Bull Shit?
If this patent truly does belong to them as they imply, why didn’t they raise their claim as soon as VVM was displayed In January?
CISCO raised their claim upon the unvailing of the name “iphone”, they came to an agreement with Apple inc.
What was preventing KT from raising an objection then? I certainly haven’t had the experience of being offered VVM on any electronic product PDA or not, I wouldn’t even call email on a PC VVM if that is what they are implying!!!!!
Y? Oh Y??????
Apple steals yet another idea and pretends that they invented it. They should just shut up and pay the man.
Crabapple
“What was preventing KT from raising an objection then?”
Because they hoped the iPhone would sell a million. That takes a while. Now they want to license the patent for $36. per iPhone.
Bottom Feeders!
@Pay Up
You can’t steal an “idea,” sir or madam. You can steal only the implementation thereof, via code or mechanism. Otherwise, I would like to patent the idea of time travel right now. And turning lead into gold. And making things invisible. And reversing the aging process. And flying to the moon on gossamer wings.
Grow up (and go to law school).
Isn’t there a time limitation on technical patients? like 7 years or so? I’m not a patient lawyer, just curious.
Regardless of the (questionable) merits of the patent, isn’t “Visual Voicemail” a trademark of Apple, and isn’t Klausner infringing that?
“Bottom Feeders!”
2Girls/1cup?
@ MikeR, If that is the main reason why, then the simplest way to nullify this claim is for both companies to release the programming documentation of the software.
That way, very clearly without any doubt whatsoever, the coding finger print will point out as to what is really what.
Since Apple’s OS has always been opensource, it can be said that ( I hope) that if an infringement was in the making, the opensource community would have picked that up and pointed it out sooner rather than later, which they still haven’t.
Further more, Apple inc. have over two hundred patents associated with the iphone. What is the Patent Office’s job? if not to protect patents by preventing infringement before it occurs by denying a patent were one already exists?
If the Patent Office have cross checked VVM against all other possible VVM type patents and have examined the documentation & execution of the application & have granted or not opposed the patent, and the opensource community whose job it is, is to make sure that any opensource implementation falls within the classification of opensource before being granted that status, (phew)
What ground does KT stand on? apart from the possibility that some sub-routine they implemented many years ago could possibly be called Visual VoiceMail? Or if indeed they have used the title VVM on some sub-routine, the fact that that sub-routine has never been visual or implemented as a visual does not fall in their favour, if anything my humble thinking is that CISCO had more of a claim on the name “iphone” than Apple inc. did even though Apple inc. gave the prefix ‘i’ to the World with the advent of the iMac. Is that why CISCO settled so quickly?
Going even further back, without Apple Computers, Computing would probably still have been in the Dark Ages of a literary dark screen called DOS.
Without Next Computers & NextStep software, the internet would only just be available now to the masses, (You & I).
Without Sir Tim Banners Lee & his team, the internet would have developed like MOTOR DRIVING, when once you did not need a driving licence if you could afford a car, when motoring rules did not exist, when people drove anywhere a car could go, when Roads, Freeways & Motorways did not exist, and when they finally did exist, each country set about creating its own incompatible system.
So, what claim can KT really make in the light of all that history?
I wonder?
@MacFhearghaile, Death! is the time limit on all patients!!! Aaaah ha! ha! haaaa!!!!!!
Thanks for the laugh!!!
PS. Doctors for patients & Lawyers for Them Greeedy Baastards!
@Pay Up,
I don’t think Apple has pretended to invent most of what they are being sued over. I’m pretty confident they weren’t with the VVM anyway. They were just stating it’s a great technology and it’s in their phone. At least that’s how I understood it anyway.
Last I checked it was 17 years for patents before they expire.
Crabapple
Perhaps KT wants their 10 million like the last company who sued Apple.
@ silverhawk,
You could be right! not that Apple inc. has their 10 million!
If Apple inc. chose not to fight, but to negotiate, then KT would have the club with the proverbial nail they could use to whack all the other companies with.
Thanks for sobering me up after all that ranting blather I engaged in!!!
Bye yawl!!!!
Klausner… what a lame attempt.
Klausner is probably familiar with that “Doug – Mankind” commercial because he is the guy that owes Doug money.