How many Apple and Microsoft patents has Google’s Android infringed?

“In July, FOSS Patents‘ Florian Mueller looked at the number of major publicly traded companies that have filed patent infringement suits against Google’s Android (seven with a total market cap of $1.06 trillion) and the number of Apple and Microsoft patents Android had been found by a court to infringe (11 as of July 1),” Philip Elmer-DeWitt reports for Fortune.

“On Wednesday, Mueller updated his list of Apple and Microsoft patent infringements,” P.E.D. reports. “The total, adjusted for rulings that have gone both for and against Android, is now 17.”

Read more in the full article here.

Florian Mueller reports for FOSS Patents, “Only a minority of all patent assertions brought against Android-based devices have been adjudicated so far. The number of patents held to be infringed will keep growing, and I’ll probably have to update this list a couple of times before the end of the year.”

See the full list of Apple and Microsoft patents that Google’s Android has been found to have infringed here.

[Thanks to MacDailyNews Readers “Fred Mertz,” “Edward W.,” and “Jay in DC” for the heads up.]

13 Comments

    1. They do sometimes come up with good ideas, and sometimes those ideas even make their way into OSX-based products. Where Microsoft always fail is in pulling all their good ideas together into something that works seamlessly for users in a way that makes you wonder how you did without it before, but each idea alone is still something worth patenting.

      1. Do any of you know anything about Windows? The OSX advantage albeit nowhere near as intuitive as Windows is the perfectly matched hardware to OS. Microsoft… not so much as every PC company with a pulse builds PCs in some many different configurations several of which do not even meet the minimum OS requirements that Windows needs to run properly.

        Those of us who spend equal dollars on a PC that we do on a MAC rarely have issues with our PC. Learnt a long time ago to never compare a $400.00 PC to a $2000.00 MBP.

        This said, running a MAc with Parallels does cover off things nicely for those of us who continue and will continue to require Windows in our day to day lives. 1.9 billion Windows users are not about to dry up anytime soon.

        1. On a MAC? Really? Running a MAc? How about just “Mac.”

          Are there really 1.9B Windows users? Or are there many millions of Window-based point of sale devices, servers, workstations, etc. in addition to Windows users who use Wintel computers at work and also at home (thus occupying more than one license)?

          I don’t know why you pretend to get so offended at comments against Microsoft in this forum. This is MDN, after all, and the long term Mac users on this forum have lived through a *lot* of Microsoft crap over the past couple of decades. I battled at work for my Mac, and I had to work around the roadblocks that Microsoft intentionally inflicted on Mac users. Even today, I still have to deal with Exchange/Outlook and a few remaining web sites that were designed for IE.

          I do not doubt that the high end PCs are reliable. The point that most people miss in their PC/Mac cost comparisons is that cheap PCs are cheap for a reason and are not comparable to the higher quality Macs. The myth of an Apple premium still exists, but Macs have been cost-competitive for the last decade.

          Parallels is fine – the latest version is reputedly better than Fusion – and a virtualization environment lets you copy and paste between Windows and OS X. Other options exist, too, such as Wine and Crossover that work well for many people with simpler needs. And you can always install Windows using Boot Camp to get the best native Windows PC around.

  1. That’s what gets me about these so-called “fandroids” who tout Google’s innovation . . . How can they ignore the fact that just about every nook and cranny of the concepts behind the OS — and even the code that supports it — is stolen?

    And it’s not just Apple crying foul, obviously.

    The best analogy I can think of is someone steals the plans to another person’s very innovative and uniquely designed house and builds one just like it (except that they change the color and change the landscaping up a bit, add a bigger deck, etc.) . . . and then when it comes time to name the best designed house in the neighborhood in some contest like 50 percent of the judges heap praise on the copycats and tout those colors and slight changes as so damn “innovative.”

    I can’t figure out what part of human nature would allow so many people to be that dense. And not just that dense, but also emotionally motivated to cheer on the cheaters and disparage the people who actually did the real work.

  2. Eric Schmidt:
    “Patent wars prevent choice, prevent innovation and I think that is very bad. … So ultimately Google stands for innovation as opposed to patent wars.”

    So Schmidt says he is in favour of innovation instead of patents (patent wars).
    Thus Schmidt feels that innovation does NOT equal creating Google’s own, distinctive hardware and software.
    (And with no distinctive hardware and software to offer the consumer, how exactly is Schmidt promoting “choice”?)

    Schmidt says that innovation = stealing another company’s IP and presenting at as Google’s property.

    And the Fandroids happily lick this crap up off the stable floor.

  3. So at what time do they start to bring out the gallows? Sure Andeoid is a mass infringer, but it means nothing if there’s no spankings. When does the lesson become “learned”?

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.