iPod click-wheel target of latest Apple lawsuit

They're a little slow out of the gate with this one, but U.K.-based Quantum Research Group has decided to get litigious with Apple nonetheless, claiming that the familiar iPod click-wheel violates its patent on "charge-transfer technology." Apparently, the legal action actually got going all the way back in December of 2005 but has only been made public now. While the merits of the claim remain to be seen, unlike some lawsuits we've covered, Quantum Research at least actually makes regular use of its various patents, providing its capacitive sensor technology to a wide range of companies, including Logitech, Meizu, Samsung, and Sony, among others. For its part, Apple unsurprisingly denies the company's allegations, also going so far as to file counterclaims for "non-infringement and invalidity." It's apparently not all animosity between the two companies, however, with Quantum CEO Hal Philipp telling Electronics Weekly that he "respects Apple products," also adding that he "expects Quantum to gain from the buzz around its iPhone" and hopes that it doesn't contain "Quantum-patented charge-transfer technology."

[Thanks, gamebittk]

[retro @ Jan 23rd 2007 6:35PM]

Haha, oh wow

[LukeA @ Jan 23rd 2007 6:40PM]

"expects Quantum to gain from the buzz around [Apple's] iPhone"

That's the only reason for this suit. Not necessarily that they planned their suit around the iPhone, but they definitely planned it around Apple's popularity with the iPod. This lame-ass company mas to resort to litigation to become known.

[Dean Lowe @ Jan 23rd 2007 6:48PM]

So, just because a company's lesser known it has to give up it's patents to a bigger, more popular company?

The business world doesn't work like high school.

[Cardbored @ Jan 23rd 2007 6:55PM]

@LukeA

well obviously they must be somewhat well known since they're licensing their technology to big whigs like Logitech, Meizu, Samsung, and Sony. just because you've never heard of them doesn't mean their a "lame-ass company" that is just trying to protect their property/invention

[2Perfect @ Jan 24th 2007 12:14AM]

"That's the only reason for this suit. Not necessarily that they planned their suit around the iPhone, but they definitely planned it around Apple's popularity with the iPod. This lame-ass company mas to resort to litigation to become known."
Did they disgrace your god? Bring out your swords and defend the [Apple] Kingdom!

Besides, it's money. If you were given the option between $100 and $1000, what would you take? Would you take the $100 just because some people will call you "lame-ass" if you didn't? lol.
---
"hundreds of frivolous patent suits - such is the cost of being wildly successful i suppose."
Don't you mean it's the price to pay for using patented technology? Microsoft (whether you like it or not) is a successful company (the CEO is the richest person) but you don't hear this many lawsuits.

And when they do get lawsuits, it's not because they're successful. Odd reasoning there bud.
---
Sucks that Apple is getting all these lawsuits. Perhaps we'll see more overpriced gadgets :0 Oh well, they're rich. They can handle it.

PS: I'm not an Apple hater/Microsoft fanboy. I just comment on stupid things I see :P

[Jonathan Keim @ Jan 23rd 2007 6:43PM]

I would have been very surprised and feel afraid for apple, but don't forget that apple is trying to get away from the scroll wheel.

[Jeff @ Jan 23rd 2007 6:50PM]

hundreds of frivolous patent suits - such is the cost of being wildly successful i suppose.

[LPXXFAINTXX @ Jan 23rd 2007 7:00PM]

Seems like Apple's lawyers are pretty busy lately.

[Foof @ Jan 23rd 2007 7:07PM]

Hey Engadget, non-infringement and invalidity are the two standard defenses against a claim of patent infringement.

You always start with the biggest defense, by saying the patent is invalid. When the court rules that it's not, you then say "we're not infringing." When that fails, you then rely on any affirmative defenses you have (ok we're infringing, but you should allow us to continue to do so for these reasons, e.g., fair use).

[gxti @ Jan 23rd 2007 7:12PM]

I thought Synaptics made the clickwheels for iPods - not Apple. Shouldn't they be suing Synaptics instead?

[andy @ Jan 24th 2007 9:16AM]

You sue the deep pockets. Apple is selling the infringing device, as is that other company you mentioned.

Apple may have an indemnification provision with the supplier, but if you're successful, you'll like exceed the capitalization of the parts supplier. Therefore you sue the deep pockets, let them implead the supplier under the indemnification clause of the contract, win the lawsuit, and get your money from anyone you can any way you can.

[itsonlycap @ Jan 27th 2007 1:12AM]

If you read the article completely on Electronics Weekly, Hal specifies that Apple does not infringe on i-pod's with Synaptics Touch Wheel.

Apple has taken away Synaptics and went to Cypresses technology in the last couple of years.

Also not that initial version of ipod's dont have a Touch wheel at all but only a Mechanical Wheel.

[Foof @ Jan 23rd 2007 7:23PM]

gxti: IIRC, Apple did use Synaptics before for Mac laptops, but they've since decided to either switch manufacturers or do it themselves (either way, they no longer use Synaptics).

[thegoodoldkicker @ Jan 23rd 2007 7:55PM]

"And in related news...Steve Jobs denied that the AppleTV is an overpriced , crippled , wannabe Slingcatcher."

LOL.

jobs probably think the iPhone will reinvent the CELPHONE, he also said it will be on a G2 networks while most phone in japan are on G3. A $50 in Japan can do a lot more than a $600 overprice dead beat iPhone. LOL

I would hate to the loser who pay $600 on a G2 networks. Drop calls anyone?

[XGM @ Jan 23rd 2007 9:44PM]

OMG enough of the lawsuits people, please enough already... Ok thats it, ill sue the next company that fills a lawsuit, for filling a lawsuit :P.

On the serious side, is it just me or in the recent years there has been a huge ammount of lawsuits coming out ?

[DM @ Jan 23rd 2007 9:56PM]

Breaking News: Steve Jobs quits as Apple CEO, now works for Microsoft as a janitor.

[jorge @ Jan 23rd 2007 9:57PM]

Man,
Everyone is suing apple!
Let's all sue them!

[kev @ Jan 23rd 2007 10:23PM]

This is just some more of that regular bs that happens in this country every day...more litigation for anything, some gets press, others just slip by. The reason? We have too many lawyers (not including criminal defense and legitimate personal injury) and firms dedicated only to feeding their greed for money and not a life in something useful to society...

[applesucksLeo @ Jan 24th 2007 2:57AM]

Slingcatcher does more than AppleTV for $100 less.
http://www.twit.tv/dgw232
Nice try Stevie !

[ed dekker @ Jan 24th 2007 7:17AM]

Geez, back in the 70's we a TV that already had technology like this.
Would that qualify as prior art, or was that under the same patent?

[Jasen @ Jan 24th 2007 9:22AM]

This is the way the patent system works in the US. The USPTO hands out patents like a PEZ dispenser. Then companies use the court system to figure out what patents are actually valid. Nothing to see here. Business as usualy. Move along.

[yessindeed @ Jan 24th 2007 12:47PM]

"This lame-ass company mas to resort to litigation to become known."

Small companies are where innovation happens. This is why larger companies buy them. So that they can pretend to be developing new ideas. Ever heard of a small company called FingerWorks? Where do you think Apple got multitouch. Not from their in-house people.

If you have an innovative new idea you don't want to work for a large company because you can't get anything done there. Can you see someone with a great new idea going to work at Apple and having to fight Steve Jobs to get their idea noticed? And if it does get noticed you know you'll never get more than a coupon for the company cafeteria for it. And even that will be limited to stuffed peppers day.

[Technophile @ Jan 25th 2007 7:33AM]

Isn't funny the tremendous litigation hitting Apple lately? I mean come on, this is the most influential and innovative computer company of all time. (That's not fanboy talk either) It seems strange to me that all of a sudden a company that has created so many technologies found throughout the technology and computer sectors (not to mention artistic involvement) would suddenly start screwing the little guy and stealing ideas and technology. Doesn't add up. I wonder if certain companies / people are behind this twisting some arms to make it hotter for Apple now that they have a very real possibility of gaining ground as a defacto player in technology. I hope all of this gets spanked and let Apple continue doing what they do...invent.