Apple sued over iPhone caller ID

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.

[Marc @ Feb 28th 2008 7:45AM]

Let Romek Figa be known as a tool.

[Izzy @ Feb 28th 2008 9:39AM]

Amen brother.

[mendo @ Feb 28th 2008 9:45AM]

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... ;)

[Frankenstein Black @ Feb 28th 2008 10:42AM]

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...

[fanman @ Feb 28th 2008 2:49PM]

"Moto, Nokia, and Samsung have already licensed the patent, but Apple refused to take a license on the terms offered."

How very apple.

[Saad Rabia @ Feb 28th 2008 7:51AM]

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.

[Raheem @ Feb 28th 2008 8:13AM]

Uh... the STUPID European Union? How about MS stop breaking rules that they knew about 4 years ago?

[Hace @ Feb 28th 2008 8:31AM]

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.

[Saad Rabia @ Feb 28th 2008 8:42AM]

Raheem, insight me with the rules that Microsoft broke?

[Raheem @ Feb 28th 2008 11:46AM]

Be enlightened: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7266629.stm

I don't work for the EU.

[E71 @ Feb 28th 2008 2:00PM]

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.

[mymaclife @ Feb 28th 2008 7:53AM]

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!

[daedric @ Feb 29th 2008 1:52AM]

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

[gerbick @ Feb 28th 2008 7:59AM]

The Patent Office is overdue for an overhaul.

[ColonelSmith @ Feb 28th 2008 8:04AM]

So is the mac mini

[Chuck @ Feb 28th 2008 8:56AM]

So is the rest of the US Goverment.

[Nick @ Feb 28th 2008 9:44AM]

D) All of the above

[andy @ Feb 28th 2008 11:17AM]

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?

[cashmonee @ Feb 28th 2008 8:36PM]

@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.

[Mike @ Feb 28th 2008 8:00AM]

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!

[Leoedin @ Feb 28th 2008 9:28AM]

no... the patent would of expired by now :p

[andy @ Feb 28th 2008 11:21AM]

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.

[Jake @ Feb 28th 2008 12:19PM]

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").

[Jeebus @ Feb 28th 2008 12:52PM]

I don't think the patent passes the non-obvious test.

[andy @ Feb 28th 2008 1:17PM]

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.

[justin @ Feb 28th 2008 8:03AM]

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....?

[mymaclife @ Feb 28th 2008 8:27AM]

Same here - I've been trying to figure out why mine does the same.

[Dan @ Feb 28th 2008 8:26AM]

Someone please answer this question, i cant figure it out either!

[Uche Amaechi @ Feb 28th 2008 9:04AM]

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?

[Chris @ Feb 28th 2008 9:38AM]

tried visiting a Genius Bar in an Apple store? assuming there is one somewhere near you... or even just calling Apple?

[brian welch @ Feb 28th 2008 10:00AM]

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.

[T-Bone @ Feb 28th 2008 10:23AM]

@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?

[Bob Newhart @ Feb 28th 2008 11:36AM]

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.

[Wil @ Feb 28th 2008 2:40PM]

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.

[MC @ Feb 28th 2008 8:04AM]

Trolls love delicious, nutritious spam: [e-mail]

[Raheem @ Feb 28th 2008 8:10AM]

Don't read it then. You bore me. But I just read your comment... damn, I'm a hypocrite. I'll live.

[mymaclife @ Feb 28th 2008 8:27AM]

Engadget please stop wasting out time with idiots like MC!

[TedB @ Feb 28th 2008 8:18AM]

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

[MC @ Feb 28th 2008 8:20AM]

Trolls love delicious, nutritious spam: [e-mail]

[MC @ Feb 28th 2008 8:22AM]

Trolls love delicious, nutritious spam: [e-mail]

[mymaclife @ Feb 28th 2008 8:38AM]

More accurately we are connected by our dislike of your arrogant and tiresome post. Keep talking the hole is getting bigger!

[Raheem @ Feb 28th 2008 8:28AM]

Lmao, MC your best bet right now is to apologise for your stupidity, not make yourself seem even stupider... uh... stupider is a word.

[MC @ Feb 28th 2008 8:44AM]

Trolls love delicious, nutritious spam: [e-mail]

[Semi @ Feb 28th 2008 8:28AM]

theres' an idea for a new blog.. engadgetfanboy.com

[MC @ Feb 28th 2008 8:36AM]

@Raheem

i am so sorry for being so stupid + some..please except my apologies Obi-Wan.

[drzeller @ Feb 28th 2008 8:42AM]

Just a thought about why he hasn't sued the others... maybe they already licensed it?

D.

[Tombio @ Feb 28th 2008 9:03AM]

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.

[Hung @ Feb 28th 2008 5:55PM]

@ 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."

[Aaron Cunnington @ Feb 28th 2008 9:00AM]

i wonder why this geezer didn't pick up on this oh so cherished patent a year ago...

[sully @ Feb 28th 2008 10:32AM]

Or several smartphone cyles ago