Apple sued over iPhone caller ID
By Nilay Patel 
posted Feb 28th 2008 7:31AM
posted Feb 28th 2008 7:31AM
Phew, we were starting to worry we'd get through the week without someone suing Apple. This time it's a patent lawsuit by a Massachusetts man named Romek Figa, who claims to have patented a caller ID system infringed by the iPhone. Figa's patent, which was granted in 1990 and references two-line LCD screens and external caller ID equipment, describes a way to associate incoming numbers with stored contact names, and he's looking to halt sales of the iPhone and have Apple pony up some hefty damages and license his patent, which the company has thus far declined to do. We wonder why. We also wonder why Figa hasn't sued Nokia, Microsoft, HTC, Samsung, LG, Motorola, and Sony Ericsson, since, you know, all those companies make phones with caller ID as well, but maybe that's coming next -- he could probably end up simply owning Moto's flailing phone division, if his lawyers play their cards right.Update: According to statements by Figa's attorneys this morning, Moto, Nokia, and Samsung have already licensed the patent, but Apple "refused to take a license on the terms offered." Interesting -- but they also said Figa sent his demand letter directly to Steve Jobs, which seems like the least efficient way possible of handling this deal.
[Via AppleInsider]
Disclaimer: Nilay is a lawyer, but he's not your lawyer, and none of this is legal advice or analysis.
FFS! All this suing Apple is getting damn boring, I must go and figure out something I thought of first in the toilet and then go sue their ass. What a twat this one is!
This is golden. Apple has been suing podcast websites and everything with the word pod, it's ridiculous. Karma is a bitch isn't it? Hahahahaha
Let Romek Figa be known as a tool.
Amen brother.
ROTFL, "Figa is a tool"... :D
ehm, explanation due here for you English guys!
Funny thing is that "figa" is a (vulgar/gross) word in Italian that means... well, "pussy". So the name of the guy was already extremely funny for me, but with your comment it was even better ;)
Then again one common name in America is Dick... ;)
LOL! How funny is this? Romek Figa sounds like a perfect Troll name (LMAO) but this guy is actually NOT A TROLL (or a tool) and does have a legitimate beef...
"Moto, Nokia, and Samsung have already licensed the patent, but Apple refused to take a license on the terms offered."
How very apple.
God! What is up with all these stupid companies and people suing everybody for money! First the stupid European Union with their antitrust crap against Microsoft, then Nuvio Corp and their name bull crap against the Nuvifone, and now some guy who was okay with companies using his "amazing" invention for years and suddenly suing Apple for using it on their iPhone!
I hate greedy money slaves.
Uh... the STUPID European Union? How about MS stop breaking rules that they knew about 4 years ago?
Honestly the EU had a fair point four years ago, but the crap they're (or we're) pulling lately is just stupid and has cost the EU almost all of the legal gravitas it might have had at some point.
Now the concept of the EU suing someone is basically just a joke.
Still, I suppose MS wouldn't have brought about the "open source" initiatives it has without the EU harassing them, so I suppose it's not pointless.
Raheem, insight me with the rules that Microsoft broke?
Be enlightened: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7266629.stm
I don't work for the EU.
The EU can suck it as well as those who want to sue other companies because their products/services have become dominant in popularity.
You accept Microsoft's terms when doing business with them no matter how shady they appear, then a couple of years down the line you notice how their software is dominant and you don't like how they aren't helping their competitors.
You have no-one to blame but yourselves.
hey does this mean that if someone patented the fact that a battery powers an electronic device 30 years ago, that they could then sue every single electronic manufacturer that uses batteries because they are using their patent???
I think the whole patent issue is getting a bit out of hand, to the point where people are probably not able to design any device due to them fearing that they would get 100's of people after royalties!
no... the patent would of expired by now :p
I do freedom to operate opinions on a daily basis. The situation is not anywhere near that bad.
When you need standards, like say USB, you just license those. They're pretty cheap.
For anything you're doing that might be proprietary, just look through the patents on the USPTO database or google.patents.com
Patent claims are fairly narrow, and you can usually just design around any patents you come across. If not, you can negotiate a license.
However, when you ignore someone demanding a licnese without evaluating the merits of their claim, then tell them to piss off, you're probably going to be sued.
The patent system protects inventors. Being a web designer I can appreciate how valuable it would be to protect something you've worked long and hard to develop. I don't fault the guy for wanted his due (assuming he WAS first and really DID get signoff from the other major players), but for sending the letter directly to Mr. Jobs - total Tool (capital "T").
I don't think the patent passes the non-obvious test.
Jeebus,
The patent fails the non-obviousness test based on what references, and under what reasoning are you combining the references to obtain the invention as taught?
Please keep in mind that unless you references are more than 20 years old, you're bringing the fail to this thread.
The Patent Office is overdue for an overhaul.
So is the mac mini
So is the rest of the US Goverment.
D) All of the above
This patent was filed about 18 years ago. Where was the iPhone 18 years ago?
"Patent reform" is only pushed by peope who have never read the bills and don't understand the patent system. It is designed by big corporations to make it easier for them to steal other people's ideas and not have to pay them.
May you come up with an idea some day, have it stolen, and not be able to get anything for it.
The only reform the patent system is in need of is new leadership at the PTO. With the new rules being pushed, very soon they're going to send the cost of an application from about 10k (20k including prosecution) to around 50-60k just for filing. Then where will the small inventor be?
@Andy
I think what people really mean when they say patent reform is to get rid of ridiculously obvious and vague patents like this one. This guy got an obvious feature patented when it should not have been. Then he sues knowing that it is cheaper for Apple to settle than fight. It is an easy payday for something that should not be patentable.
When i call, or receive calls my screen doesn't display the screen saver background like in the above photo or the commercials. It displays the assigned photo for the contact in the background under the window in the center. Is it just me, or am i missing a setting somewhere? I've been wondering this since i got my phone but have yet to find an answer....?
Same here - I've been trying to figure out why mine does the same.
Someone please answer this question, i cant figure it out either!
Don't know if anybody's answered yet. But if the pic associated with the caller id was either taken with the phone's camera or taken from the phone's photo app, then you get a full screen pic. If you copied the contact over from your computer with the picture already attached, then you only get the small icon? Savvy?
tried visiting a Genius Bar in an Apple store? assuming there is one somewhere near you... or even just calling Apple?
I wondered the same thing when I got my phone last summer. I read on a random blog (while searching for this answer) that this has to do with mac-specific functionality. Something about their .mail application allows those tiny thumbnails+background instead of full screen pics.
Personally I would like the option of doing either. Some of my contacts I just want a thumb of, but I've got a couple folks who have hilarious pics I like to see fullsize.
This is just another example of the inconsistent apple software for this phone. Which is weird, as apple is known for UI. Oh well. heh.
@Brian: "I read on a random blog (while searching for this answer) that this has to do with mac-specific functionality."
Seriously? How did you miss the comment that explained it almost an hour before you posted?
It has to do completely with photo size. If it's a transfer from contacts it will be small and if you took it with your phone it will fill the screen. That's all she wrote.
http://www.apple.com/feedback/iphone.html
Just let them know directly how you feel and that you want it changed. The Engineers are not going to look engadget for these things.
You get the small photo if the person's photo was added to the contact on the computer, such as in Mac OS X's Address Book. This is because that photo is usually tiny, and would look dumb on a big screen.
If you added the photo to the contact on the iPhone, it will show full-screen.
If you want to make the tiny photo show full-screen in the background, just go to the contact, tap Edit, tap the photo and tap "Edit Photo". You can then adjust the size and position and save.
Trolls love delicious, nutritious spam: 24stocks@gmail.com
Don't read it then. You bore me. But I just read your comment... damn, I'm a hypocrite. I'll live.
Engadget please stop wasting out time with idiots like MC!
So you want engadget to post something gadget related...
If I am not mistaken, this is a post of a lawsuit that relates to a gadget...
Check your logic, since what you want is what you don't want.
You = Fail
Trolls love delicious, nutritious spam: 24stocks@gmail.com
Trolls love delicious, nutritious spam: 24stocks@gmail.com
More accurately we are connected by our dislike of your arrogant and tiresome post. Keep talking the hole is getting bigger!
Lmao, MC your best bet right now is to apologise for your stupidity, not make yourself seem even stupider... uh... stupider is a word.
Trolls love delicious, nutritious spam: 24stocks@gmail.com
theres' an idea for a new blog.. engadgetfanboy.com
@Raheem
i am so sorry for being so stupid + some..please except my apologies Obi-Wan.
Just a thought about why he hasn't sued the others... maybe they already licensed it?
D.
Or maybe other manufacturers, like most of the people I suppose, have never even heard of patent like this. Also if all other manufacturers had licensed this, the owner of the patent would have so much money already that he wouldn't care for infringments anymore.
@ Tombio
"the owner of the patent would have so much money already that he wouldn't care for infringments anymore."
Is this some sort of joke? What rainbow/lollipops fueled economy do you live in? I'm pretty sure Carlos Slim didn't think "Hey, I've got a billion dollars; I'm apathetic now."
i wonder why this geezer didn't pick up on this oh so cherished patent a year ago...
Or several smartphone cyles ago
Nilay, I might have missed it before but nice revision to your disclaimer.
This is one of his more boring ones. Bring back the "snappy dresser" line.
If this was issued in 1990, didn't the patent expire last year?
Great question! I was thinking the same thing. From what I recall of patents, they can be given in either 17 yr or 14 yr terms with a possibility of extending for a total of 28 yrs. So more information would be required to determine if it expired. If he had a 17 yr, the iPhone could have came out in the expiration year. If he had a 14 yr, it would have expired a while ago. If he extended, then it's obvious.
I might get sued for this but:
SELECT name FROM contacts WHERE number=$incoming_number;
or
foreach ( %contacts ) { print "$_\n$incoming_number" if ( $contacts{$_}{'number'} =~ m/$incoming_number/ ); }
Isn't this the basis of data structures and databases? Have we not been doing this kind of association for damn near 50 years now???
Well, obviously, all you iphone users are blind. Clearly, its also a two-line lcd external caller ID device you can plug into your landline. Apple must have forgot to ship the proper quick start guide with yours... Now, if I can only get my Prodigy account configured, I'll be able post this on our alt.bin.engadget forum.... wait I need my Compuserve for that....
Engadget, please get your story right. Reference this link:
http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2008/02/28/mass_man_suing_apple_over_patent/
Your comment about him not suing anybody else, is because the big name people already license from him!
Good Call!
I like this: "Apple has refused to take a license on the terms offered."
Terms Offered = Shitload of Cash
Endgadget, correct your story!
This is hilarious. My past 4 phones have all done the same thing, yet Apple gets sued for it. You dumb-ass anti-Apple zealots are everywhere huh?
no most other manufacturers has licenced this tech from him, He send ol' stevo a letter before the iphone went on sale, he ignored it and when on about his day, then once it came out he contacted Apple again, again they ignored him, so to get their attention he is suing them, and he has every right to protect his IP. If this was Microsoft everyone would be calling for their heads on a stick, but no if its someone is suing apple they are deemed to be in the wrong right away.
Yes, for a company which purports to be so focused on the individual and his/her creativity, Apple has historically done a terrible job of crediting or supporting the people they steal from. Just reference the advertisement campaigns they have copied in the past, or the fact that they allow anyone to pretend the iphone is a new invention. Apple is just as bad, if not worse, to the little guy than Microsoft is. At least MS does not pretend to be your best friend while stealing out of your back pocket.
I am more surprise that it tool this long for someone to sue Apple over iPhone caller ID. It was the hottest product for 2007. Honestly, where are the three billy goat gruff.
That's because he was trying to negotiate last year while Apple was stonewalling hoping he would go away.
Just let this run out till 2010 when the patent runs out!
apple probabily had that license from someone else already and that's why they told him to take a hike, or just kept ingnoring him
Every company nowadays should know by now that if they make a popular product, they will be sued. It's sad really......but thats the world we live in.
I have to agree with most everyone here. These patents are completely stupid. There needs to be a law made that no one can patent something like this?
Crap, I better go patent the idea of displaying contact information on some odd surfaces. Like a wall or a floor - because you know some day I might be able to sue someone for building the technology that lets you do that. Oh, I know, the patent of having an interface appear on your skin. You know that is coming some day.
I wonder why science fiction writers just don't patent everything they think up for their books. Might as well.
If you can come up with a useful, novel, and non-obvious way of displaying the contact information on your wall, I'll write your patent.
Give me a call when you've accomplished it.
Science fiction writers can't patent those ideas because the patent application has to enable one skilled in the art to make and use the patented method, apparatus, or article of manufacture without undue experimentation.
Since the writers don't know how to make the idea work, they can't patent it.
The cell phone is based off of the star trek communicators. The cell phone guys got a patent because they figured out how to make a cell phone.
Too late. Digital tattoo already in progress. Caller id next:
http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/22/digital-tattoo-enables-arm-based-conversations-constant-health/
Apple, most sued company of the year ?
how convenient on the timing... his patent (according to my calculations assuming this patent: http://www.google.com/patents?id=84IjAAAAEBAJ&dq=Romek+Figa) is set to expire in May of this year...
Was he supposed to sue them before the iPhone was announced? Is he supposed to ignore Apple because his patent has less than a year left? How do you know that he hasn't pursued the case since the very beginning?
The only odd timing here is that Apple chose to enter the market near the end of his patent life. Another Apple apologist...
@craig
yeah, but the iphone has been out for awhile... he could have sued whenever... but his patent life is coming to an end, so he better do it soon! so he did...
maybe apple should have licensed it. i'm not arguing that. but to me, all this patent junk is annoying... lets make the length of patents shorter. Come up w/ something cool? good, we'll award you a patent for a handful of years, then come up w/ something new or make your product even better to differentiate it from the rest.
Asking for a shorter patent time is fine.
However, you must remember that companies have to recoup R&D costs at some point. Drug companies usually spread R&D costs of new drugs over the remaining patent term when calculating the price of new drugs.
So if you cut the recovery time in half, you're going to double the price of new perscription drugs. That's probably not good for individual, insured, uninsured, or universal healthcare, no matter how you slice it.
There's a balance to be struck. If you want to make it 5 years, then you're going to have to make a drug exception, because the FDA trials are typically longer than that. And if not, can you get a loan for over a million dollars? Because if you take that billion that it cost them to develop and try to recoup that in a single year, that's what someone is going to have to pay for that drug.
The same will be true for technology.
@andy,
you make a good point. the drug industry is definitely a bit different and should have different rules, and to an extent i guess technology is the same way. maybe the answer is to study how long it takes, on average for a tech company to recuperate R&D costs... and tack a few years on to the end of that. Maybe thats a good measurement. but its definitely not that simple to just say 5 years, I agree.
Growing up outside of the USA I was always led to believe that Baseball was the American national past time.
It certainly appears that Litigation is giving it a run for it's money.
Sounds to me like he might actually have a legit case here. It doesn't seem like he patented the idea of caller ID but rather the exact means of doing that - that something that could and should be patented (don't see anyone complaining that apple is patenting every possible iteration of touch screen tech so no one can use it without coughing up the doe). It also seems that Moto and Nokia recognized the patent and it's entirely possible that the other companies do it in a slightly different way that's not covered by the patent.
In any case, given Apple's recent attitude towards... well everyone actually, I wouldn't be surprised if they are knowingly violating a patent.
"Interesting -- but they also said Figa sent his demand letter directly to Steve Jobs, which seems like the least efficient way possible of handling this deal."
Why do Engadget editors feel entitled to make such biased, inflammatory comments? This is nothing but an Apple apology. No patent holder would deliberately make it difficult for a company to pursue a license. Funny how the other companies reach license agreements with the same idiot. The difference here is Apple.
Seriously engadget, please grow a brain.
If I'm going to serve Apple with a formal letter demanding that they license a patent, do I send it to the registered agent of the corporation, or do I hand it to the dude at the local Apple store?
Who in the hell else would you send such a formal notice to other than Steve Jobs, the registered agent for Apple, Inc.?
Seriously?
I would send the letter to the person in charge of patents at Apple, you know someone at their patent department, like with the e-mail: iplaw@apple.com.
http://www.apple.com/legal/contacts.html
PS, regarding timing:
These things don't just "pop up" at a company. He probably sent them letters for over a year. Someone then called him and told him to piss off. He sent a couple more letters, called some people, and then retained counsel for litigation. Then, they needed a while to review the case, prepare a complaint, and file.
These things don't just pop up out of the blue.
By the way, this patent
http://www.google.com/patents?id=84IjAAAAEBAJ&dq=romek+figa
whose first claim states:
1. An automatic incoming telephone call number display device comprising:
a directory of telephone numbers and parties associated with those numbers;
means for detecting the origin telephone number of an incoming telephone call;
means for comparing the detected incoming telephone number with said directory of telephone numbers to identify the party associated with the incoming call number;
display means for displaying the incoming call number or the incoming call number and the identified associated party before the incoming call is answered;
means for logging the detected incoming telephone number;
means for retrieving telephone numbers of incoming calls logged by said means for logging; and
means for automatically entering telephone numbers retrieved by said means for retrieving into said directory.
IS "the caller ID" patent.
Patent number: 4924496
Filing date: May 12, 1988
Issue date: May 8, 1990
For patents filed prior to June 8, 1995, the term of patent is either 20 years from the earliest claimed filing date or 17 years from the issue date, whichever is longer. There are no extensions.
So, the patent expires on May 12, 2008.
Apple (and the other companies) only owe royalties under this patent for infringement occuring up to May 12, 2008.
That doesn't change the fact that they owe it though.
Only if the patent applies. The patent is pretty specific with the hardware. Probably will all be decided by a judge.
Others may have licensed it simply because the license may have been cheaper than potential litigation.
I very much dislike "means for" claiming. It just opens up the claims to too much arguing. It also means that your specification had better be rather broad, and very lengthy.
It's much tidier to just name each part and describe its interaction. It will almost always make for a stronger claim at trial.
Ummm.... don't patents last for 17 years? Let me see, 2008 - 1990 = 18. WTF
You fail. See my previous post:
Patent number: 4924496
Filing date: May 12, 1988
Issue date: May 8, 1990
For patents filed prior to June 8, 1995, the term of patent is either 20 years from the earliest claimed filing date or 17 years from the issue date, whichever is longer. There are no extensions.
So, the patent expires on May 12, 2008.
The reason apple keeps getting sued is because they keep stealing other peoples designs and then try and patent them as their own. Multi-touch - not theirs, but the whole world thinks it is. And the "Pinch" has been used and demonstrated long ago, just on a larger scale, so the patent whereby the claim that the zoom is equivalent to the distance of two chosen points is null and void. Developers created this and gave it freely to the world to use and develop further in their own products. Not to claim it as their own. They are filing a patent for a keyboard with screens on each key - not theirs, but have more money to develop it slightly differently and will squash the others in court if they fight back.
If you want credit for it, file a patent instead of "giving it to the world".
and this is news because?
haha!
dude got others to pay up, what's wrong with paying up Apple? the man is waving a patent in your face, pay the man.
I doubt this would affect the profit margins at all for AAPL, I'm beginning to think the prices are that high in case someone figures out their patent has been infringed upon.
But I like how the new lawsuits are picking up the "halt all sales" feature with the "past damages" caveat :] and the ever awesome "suspend imports".
Apple Fanboy