Apple and Creative settle, Apple forks out $100m
By Ryan Block 
posted August 23rd 2006 5:47PM
posted August 23rd 2006 5:47PM
If you can't beat 'em, sue 'em, right? That's the American way, after all, and it's serving Singapore-based Creative very well. As some may well remember, not even four months ago Creative filed suit against Apple for violating their "Zen patent," which pertained to a hierarchical menu system for portable media players; Apple countersued Creative, and then in the true Jobsian style of raining down on his foes, launched a second suit pertaining to icons and data display and entry in such portable devices. (Apparently two other suits also went down behind the scenes.) Guess those didn't work too well, as today Apple announced they'd be handing over $100,000,000 US (would you look at all those zeroes?) to Creative to license the "technology" outlined in the Zen patent -- the exact amount Creative pledged to spend on advertising against the iPod in 2005. It also looks like Apple scored a deal wherein they'll recoup some of those costs if and when Creative [Thanks, pspspsp, Ryan, and Roopesh]
What's more advantegeous to Apple given the introduction of the Zune? More competitors in Microsoft's market or less? Wars by proxy aren't only fought it in the Middle East.
Oh and what's with all the geeks saying Apple = pwned. Do you want to sound even more pathetic? Get a life.
Next time some CoreGeek tells me about how innovative Apple is and how MS is big and evil and 'copied Windows from us'...
I'll be bringing this little bit of info up for them.
This all about Apple againts competitions. Apple is using Creative to legally put other mp3 market on the sideline in case the court decide that creative really own the user interface. Creative can collect royalties while Apple monopolizes the market.
AAH!
Would you people please read the damn patent!
Its a bit more than just a hierarchical menu.
also note "announced a broad settlement ending all legal disputes between the two companies" note the ALL legal disputes.
Apple's CEO. "This settlement resolves all of our differences with Creative, including the five lawsuits currently pending between the companies, and removes the uncertainty and distraction of prolonged litigation."
ie cleared slate. There are no more pending suits between apple and creative.
I also think its quite a smart move to move into accessories market for creative. 1 plastic piece of crap is 1000x more profitable than any dap on its own.
You see what I mean? I KNEW those Apple gay/fanboys, that's right..I said it GAY. So that makes me a "homo waiting to come out"??? LOL...nothing is further from the truth you dumbass. Stop making assumptions about me and/or my level of education because you DON'T know me. I'm not writing a thesis nor a term paper so I choose to use whatever writing style and language I wish on the net. If you don't like that then you can bend over for your b/f to please you. How's that for an ASSumption?
But let's get back to the FACTS shall we? This settlement is the equivalent of a LOST in the eyes of the public. Do you honestly think Steve Jobs would surrender to Creative if he thinks that he can win it in court? Apple is one of the most aggressive companies out there who will use its army of well -paid lawyers to go after anyone that might tarnish Apple in anyway, shape or form. So suck it up fanboys and admit that Apple LOST this one ..plain and simple. Otherwise Apple will fight Creative to the death and has planned to do so with all the counter suits.
What pisses me off is that you Apple fanboys think anything that have the Apple logo on it is the BEST on the market. Do yourself and your wallet a favor and do some research before you buy your next upgrade. Apple do make some of the best looking products out there but there isn't really anything so technologically advanced from Apple that you can't find or get anywhere else and usually for alot cheaper. Apple are all about style first, IMO, and unfortunately often that's what its best feature is. Ipods DON'T produce the BEST sound quality compared to some other MP3s players out there and they wont dominate the market forever. If you think it will then i have two words for you "Sony Walkman". Nothing last forever as they said. It's just another company that makes good looking products to go after your money.
Again, I'm not a PC camper or a Mac camper. I go with whichever flatform that provides me with the best products, give me the flexibility, looks and values for my money. If you only buy Apple products then you are nothing but an ignorant consumer. But hey..it's money. Do as you please ;) Adios!
You know? I hate all these patent and copyright suits that are filling up the courts nowadays, but I kind of find it hard for me to sympathize with Apple on this. They never hesitate to sic their legal teams on anyone they feel is even remotely selling somthing similar to their click wheel design.
Screw both companies. The only thing I am loyal to is the MP3 player that suits my needs best. Yesterday it was Creative. Today it's the Ipod, tomorrow, who knows? People willing to settle for less because they only like the company that is selling the product are the epitome of fanboy.
Just my personal observation, keith waddington, tends to "pwn" himself within his own posts, especially when he tries to sound somewhat intelligent; as an example, read the post below where he mentions illiteracy yet his own post has grammatical errors.
"I've noticed 2 things:
1. there are a surprising number of legal experts that read Engadgets. I have been truly educated by some of the comments in this thread and feel almost ready to take the Bar exam myself.
2. the angriest people, those you really don't to meet in real life, for example Burroughs802, Tnyc, Jiggsaw, are also the most illiterate.
Just my observations
Peace
waddo
http://www.waddo.net/ " [sic]
Revrant said:
"Oh, there's plenty to deny ron g, that's just one thing, no matter what spin Apple put on it the interface existed before they ran with it, no matter the claim to fame, you can find MP3 players using it far before the iPod(If poorly by comparison) and I hope you don't go "Patent" on me, because Apple patents just about everything the eye can see, I'm talking about who had and used it first."
Are you ignoring the facts on purpose to anger those that favor Apple? Apple isn't putting any "spin" on it. If you haven't noticed, they just settled... giving Creative the rights to the patent when everyone in the tech world knows that it was Apple and NeXT who first used (and designed) this column based navigation. Then they used it for the iPod's interface. THEN Creative has the gall to patent it, then they start to use it 2 years later.
I'm not going "patent" on you. I'm talking about who "used" it first (AND who actually designed it). Yeh, it was Apple. I know this is hard for you to accept but that is the way it is.
Oh, and in regards to Apple patenting everything. Yes, that is pretty lame but the industry has forced them to do this. You can thank the Microsofts and Creatives for that.
Hey Creative, why don't you make some accessories for your own players first! Geez.
The Creative patent is pretty weak. Cursory examination, not enough prior art cited, and none before 1997. For your only patent, it's not a work of art. Apple brought in a whole bunch of them in three different fora.
$100M will turn out to be, this year, less than a percent of one year's revenue from the iPod. $100M is never trivial, but it is way cheap for a paid up license. Apple is defending probably five or six other patent lawsuits for similar stakes, and some with less upside. The wrinkle was the ITC, and making that go away fast was a good idea.
Creative now has a litigation war chest to go against Zune, iRiver, SanDisk, etc., and while they will not be obligated to do so on paper, they will do so. Every license will lend some credibility to their patent. This is pretty much the same as if Apple had the one Creative patent themselves, but better - they have just loaned Creative the money to dog their competitors, will get it back, and they don't have to look like greedy monopolists - they look like a gracious, thoughtful company that respects other companies' intellectual property.
The accessories - Creative is not privileged to make them, they are obligated to make them. And will be paying Apple for that obligation. Which, if I had to guess, will also be Mac accessories like ATI video cards and SoundBlaster, even though that was not announced.
Steve Jobs' release is no less than smug, and he should be. They'll get the money back, now have ammunition against the inevitable antitrust suit, have let loose Creative on their enemies, etc.
@John
That is the most insightful post I've read in this post. I agreed with you regarding Steve Jobs. He is one of the most brilliant business men of our time and this is another reason why he is well respected in the business community. Alot of these Apple fanboys are clueless as to how the company they adore so much really works under SJ's, the commader-in-chief. These Apple fanatics that you read about on the net are almost cult-like. They are hypnotized by style and hype but often forget to ask for substance in what they purchase.
I'm glad somebody knows what they're talking about.
The whole thing is total BS, Apple does the whole GUI thing with the Mac OS etc, and the iPod even came out quite a while BEFORE Creative made anything similar (They did make the Creative Nomad Jukebox aka HUGE ASS CD PLAYER LOOK-ALIKE W/ HARD DRIVE, but the menu interface wasn't nearly as great) And then Creative decides to try and patent technology that was being used by Apple years before they even touched it... they got lucky this time, but oh well, Apple is filthy rich and their products own compared to Creative..
Creative's just jealous. They should stick to the sound card business, they're good at that.. and they're speakers aren't bad either.
"Smart move on their part because Microsoft will waste a fortune trying to make the Zune platform a competitor to the iPod (regardless of low probability of success)"
People also thought the xbox would fail. They were last to market, had no experience in the market, and and had higher costs. That's no less than what they're looking at now. jeez. I feel like a fanboy now.