Apple infringes three patents with the iPhone, Delaware jury says

“Apple Inc. lost an infringement case brought by patent-licensing firm MobileMedia Ideas LLC when a federal jury decided the maker of the iPhone misappropriated protected technology for handheld devices,” Phil Milford and Dawn McCarty report for Bloomberg.

“Jurors in Wilmington, Delaware, deliberated about four hours after a weeklong trial before also concluding today that the three patents are not invalid,” Milford and McCarty report. “U.S. District Judge Sue L. Robinson hasn’t yet scheduled a trial on damages, which MobileMedia Chief Executive Officer Larry Horn said could be ‘substantial.'”

MacDailyNews Take: “Substantial” to whom?

Milford and McCarty report, “Horn said one patent is for the camera phone and others cover call handling and call rejection.”

Read more in the full article here.


  1. The story is more interesting since the CEO of MobileMedia is apparently also the CEO of the MPEG-LA patent pool, which Apple belongs to.

    Both Nokia and Sony assigned some of their patents to this patent troll which they now use to chase the rest of the industry.

    Nokia, as we all remember, reached settlement in their litigation against Apple.

      1. The trouble is that there are tons of patents for camera, phone call handling, etc. Apple ought to require as part of any settlement that any patents it licenses, that company must defend that patent in court should Apple be sued over another same but worded slightly different patent.

        The trouble is that the really stupid patents are winning cases while the totally new stuff (usually Apples) is getting rejected cause it was on star trek.

        OK over simplified but so darn close to the truth that its down right scary.

        Jusy a scary thought.

  2. Good grief! Did anyone READ the phone answering patent Apple is being held to infringe? It is a patent for displaying on the screen contextual options of which buttons or what actions a phone user can take in handling a phone call on a phone with non-obvious controls such as “press 2 to place call on hold” or “press 4 button to mutet” or “press 9 to hold and answer 2nd call.”

    In other words any button on a touch screen with a label would infringe this patent by labeling its purpose. . . except, the described purpose in the patent is referential to off screen controls throughout the invention and uses the screen only as a display for said instructions of what controls and what steps to take to accomplish the task needed.

    So apparently a touchscreen button you need to touch to answer the phone violates this patent if it has an on screen label, according to the interpretation by this jury. . . Even though that does not, as this invention claims, provide instructions for hard to remember button controls for phones without referring to a manual. Sheesh!

  3. It is also odd that Apple was GRANTED a patent for a multi TOUCHSCREEN version of just such contextual call controlling selection system that they DO USE on the iPhone. This patent actually cites this patent in its application.

    Ergo, Apple cannot be held to infringe this patent when they are using their own patent which cites this as prior art and shows how their patent is an improvement and is different purpose, i.e. touchscreen control, rather than off screen keypad control reference. This will be reversed as a matter of law. The existing at issue patent was essentially an on screen automatic contextual reminder or manual, while Apple’s is actually contextual controls. BIG DIFFERENCE.

Reader Feedback

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