Apple loses, challenges patent verdict surrounding Cover Flow and Time Machine
In this article: apple, court, cover flow, CoverFlow, Eastern District of Texas, EasternDistrictOfTexas, GUI, infringement, interface, lawsuit, legal, mirror worlds, MirrorWorlds, patent, patent infringement, patent troll, PatentInfringement, PatentTroll, software, suit, texas, time machine, TimeMachine, UI, user interface, UserInterface
Remember that one random company who sued Apple back in March of 2008 for ripping off its display interface patents? Turns out it was filed in the Eastern District of Texas, a hotbed for patent trolls who know that they stand a better-than-average chance of winning simply because of where their issues are being taken up. Sure enough, Cupertino's stock of lawyers is today being forced to challenge a loss after a jury verdict led to Apple being ordered to pay "as much as $625.5 million to Mirror Worlds for infringing patents related to how documents are displayed digitally." Ouch. Naturally, Apple has asked U.S. District Judge Leonard Davis for an emergency stay, noting that there are issues on two of the three; furthermore, Apple has claimed that Mirror Worlds would be "triple dipping" if it were to collect $208.5 million on each patent. In related news, the Judge is also considering a separate Apple request (one filed prior to the verdict) to "rule the company doesn't infringe two of the patents" -- if granted, that would "strike the amount of damages attributed to those two patents." In other words, this whole ordeal is far from over. We can't say we're thrilled at the thought of following the play-by-play here, but this could definitely put a mild dent in Apple's monstrous $45.8 billion pile of cash and securities. Or as some would say, "a drop in the bucket."
All products recommended by Engadget are selected by our editorial team, independent of our parent company. Some of our stories include affiliate links. If you buy something through one of these links, we may earn an affiliate commission. All prices are correct at the time of publishing.