ITT sues Verizon, phone makers aplenty over GPS patent
By Donald Melanson 
posted March 25th 2009 3:56PM
posted March 25th 2009 3:56PM
This one's pretty light on specifics at the moment, but it looks like manufacturing giant ITT Corp is none too happy with Verizon and a whole host of cellphone manufacturers including the likes of Motorola, Nokia, LG, and Kyocera, and it's now gone so far as to sue the whole lot over alleged patent infringement. Apparently, ITT thinks that the group of companies all violated one of its GPS patents that relates to position information being transmitted in urban areas with line-of-sight obstructions. As a result of that alleged wrong doing, ITT says it has been "irreparably harmed," and that it "has suffered, and will continue to suffer substantial damages." To remedy that situation, ITT is asking for a jury trial, unspecified royalties, and a permanent injunction against all of the defendants, although it is being kind enough to allow for an exemption for any activities necessary to support 911 emergency functions.[Thanks, Joel]
So are they trying to kill off GPS in phones?
oh.. and FIRST!
First a**hole, you mean.
I thought that the lawsuit was against them for locking the GPS, do I misunderstand? And if i understand correctly doesnt that mean that they would be wanting them to unlock it?
"Irreparably harmed?" "Has suffered, and will continue to suffer substantial damages?"
What, does it want the phone makers to pay for it's therapy bills too?
i think they mean they're not compensated for their ip... the manufacturers or big companies are pirating off their long hours of unpaid research.
So the black SUV's aren't allowed to find me in a big city without ITT's permission? I'm moving to LA.
Good idea, since you wont have to worry about black SUV's either:
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/03/25/california-to-reduce-carbon-emissions-by-banning-black-cars/
I think we need to introdice a new measure against patent trolls: if you sue over a patent and lose you automatically get the death penalty.
Hey, I took that class at Cambridge Culinary Institute!
CD100 - Introduction to Dicing, Slicing, and Splicing
We called it introdice for short.
So itt has turned to the way of the patent trolls!
I hate winey bitch patent trolls.......
jeez, how vague can that patent be? It's like filing a patent for cars to "travel on paved, unpaved, dirt, gravel, oil top, or other man made surfaces intended for automobile travel".
hmmmm.... i think I'm going to go submit a patent.
Being that verizon ransoms the gps chip in my blackberry, I find it only poetic if they in turn would have to pay one :)
Be careful little phone companies. You are playing with International Telephone and Telegraphy Corp. They were doing this before you were all incorporated.
Personally, anyone who takes that those people at Verizon to court, has my vote. They are so restrictive in their business practises that I am surprised that THEY dod not get an exclusive on the iPhone. They and Apple make a fibne pair, deserve each other really.
Eh, modern ITT has probably less relation with the old International Telephone and Telegraph than Verizon has with "the old" AT&T, which is where ITT got most of its playbook from anyway.
Its funny you should mention that they didnt get exclusivity on the iPhone, Apple actually came to them first and they rejected them because Apple wanted to have most of the control over the device and Big Daddy V didnt like that they wouldnt be the ones in control so they sent them walkin. Verizon+wanting total conrol -iPhone=FAIL
Funny seeing my company's logo on Engadget.
heh....me, you and 43,000 others
Man I HATE patents, especially vague patents. They are like frivolous lawsuits, a waste of time and the person(s) who claims to be harmed is just out to get paid. Sure some are legitimate...like 1%; almost all the patent infringement cases I've read on this blog fall into the other 99%
When will society learn that patents just stifle innovation and in the end we are stuck with products that could be better if more than ONE person could work on it. I say if you make something, it has to do at least 50% more than the original for it to not be a patent infringement (copying someone's work for profit)...then again 50% can also be considered vague.
Man, I hate patents.
At the risk of being downvoted, I'd like to respectfully disagree with parent. Patents do serve their purpose when used correctly.
Imagine that you one day you were sitting in a restaurant and thought of a way to make fossil fuels obsolete. You go home, right it out, throw some money at it, convince others of its awesomeness, and convince them to help you out with it. You now have the foundation for a small business with something new to offer the world at large. Finally, after 5 grueling years of hard work and putting all of your time and resources into it, you are ready to go public.
You release and the world is awed by your leetness. Then Ford comes along and reverse-engineers your tech. They sell at a loss just to steal your market share, and you are forced out of business.
This is something that patents try to prevent. (Yeah, I know, sometimes it doesn't work right, but that's what it tried to do). I agree that most news articles regarding patents cast them in a negative light, but that's only because they don't make the news when they're working correctly.
Ok. Back to work. Sud sud.
@ Drew
I agree with you, patents do serve their purpose when used the right way. In your example, there is a clear understanding of what the product is and because it's so ground breaking, anything that comes after it would be easily scrutinized as a copy. But patents begin to fail when they are granted for vauge descriptions: "device that illustrates an image in a way that makes user easily view it" or "device that allows users to interact with the screen with a pointing device" (how in the world can you patent gestures, that to me is beyond ludicrous) - these patents could refer to anything and I think it's patents that fall into this category that should not exist or be granted.
If you patent doesn't spell out what it does in such a way that it could not be misconstrued to mean something else it should be denied.
@Dee
Ummm.... yeah. Couldn't agree more.
Nothing more to say.
Oh, here you go -- when you can't innovate, LITIGATE. Has ITT done anything really noteworthy in, like, the last ten years? Besides Sheraton hotels, I mean?
Since when did lawsuits become a business plan? Shame on ITT!
You mean like this? http://www.ssd.itt.com/navigational/
charles_stox you ignorant slut! Lets see in addition to fricking GPS, how about all the button on cell phones, most of the world's pumps, night vision goggles, battlefield communications ... shame on you for posting while being stupid.
I've never even /heard/ of ITT.
Mabye it was popular a while ago? I'm pretty young, so that would explain...
At the 5;07pm post on 3/25/09:
"You go home, right it out"
You mean WRITE it out??
"...awed by your leetness"
What in the world is LEETNESS??
Why can't I-T professionals spell and write better than anyone else? I've never understood this! What's happened to education? Is it just about making piles of money and spelling phonetically now? Whatever happened to getting it right??
Sheesh...
Yep, chuck, you nailed some people on their spelling. You must be real smart. Or just an anal retentive asshat. I'm guessing it more of the second.
Here's a thought (something foreign to you), do some leanrin on the purpose of a patent. And until you actually understand their purpose, go to work for free cause thats what you think these companies should be doing. For crapsakes this is a website dedicated to crap that wouldn't exist without patents.
Me so sorry I offended u.
Whatever gave you the idea that IT pros should be able to spell and write better than everyone else? Are we the golden standard for this sort of thing? Maybe in addition to an IT guy, I should become a linguist!
As for "leetness", the word has entered the geek lexicon, if not the common, to such a degree that I thought it acceptable to right(!!!) on a blog meant for geeks. Even still, whatever happened to deciphering the definition of a word based on context?
Chill the hell out. You used a semicolon in the place a colon, added an unnecessary hyphen, and used a word not found in the dictionary though its definition is obvious.
Why can't grammar-nazis spell and write better than anyone else? I've never understood this! What's happened to education? Is it just about surfing the interwebbietubes (I made that up just to piss you off) to correct the comments left by others while completely disregarding what the post is actually about? Whatever happened to getting it write?
Gworp...
That's 5:30, not 5;30.
L337NESS, not LEETNESS.
see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leet for a definition.
And I-T is actually IT.
Don't use double question marks.
And notice the text below the input box:
"Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry."
And before you flame back, (as is inevitable) this /is/ a joke.
Oops, Drew got there before me...
And I'm terrible at posting, meant to add a reply an added a new post!
Whoops, I meant "5:07", not "5:30".
;)
Don't forget all of the pumps in pepsi and coke fountains, Koni shock absorbers, and basically part of everything that you use every day.
Funny. ITT is a bit player in the automotive brakes industry too.