Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > News > Mac News > Caltech suing Apple, Broadcom over Wi-Fi patents

Caltech suing Apple, Broadcom over Wi-Fi patents
Thread Tools
NewsPoster
MacNN Staff
Join Date: Jul 2012
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 30, 2016, 02:58 PM
 
The California Institute of Technology has filed suit against Broadcom and Apple over four specific and highly-technical Wi-Fi patents, accusing Broadcom of infringement -- and thus Apple, which uses Broadcom Wi-Fi radios in most of its products. At present, Caltech is seeking a jury trial and both a sales injunction on possible infringing products and "adequate" damages for the alleged infringement.


The four patents -- US Patents 7,116,710, 7,421,032, 7,916,781, and 8,284,833 -- cover encoding/decoding circuitry that utilize IRA/LDPC (Irregular Repeat Accumulate and Low-Density Parity Codes) to improve data transmission rates. The technologies, which were patented between 2006 and 2012, are incorporated into the 802.11n and 802.11ac Wi-Fi standards. Thus, it is at present unclear how Broadcom and its customers could be infringing them.

"Apple manufactures, uses, imports, offers for sale, and/or sells Wi-Fi products that incorporate IRA/LDPC encoders and/or decoders and infringe the Asserted Patents. Apple products that incorporate IRA/LDPC encoders and/or decoders and infringe the Asserted Patents include, but are not limited to, the following: iPhone SE, iPhone 6s, iPhone 6s Plus, iPhone 6, iPhone 6 Plus, iPhone 5c, iPhone 5s, iPhone 5, iPad Air, iPad Air 2, iPad Pro, iPad Mini 4, iPad Mini 3, iPad Mini 2, MacBook Air [and] Apple Watch," Caltech said in its complaint, reported MacRumors.

While Apple is one of Broadcom's primary customers in recent years (accounting for about 14 percent of Broadcom's net revenues), it is not its only customer, and it is again unclear why Broadcom's other buyers haven't been named as of yet -- though others may have licensed the technology from Caltech separately, thus avoiding litigation. "Broadcom and Apple are jointly and severally liable for infringement of the Asserted Patents," Caltech said in its complaint.

While Caltech is seeking a preliminary and permanent sales injunction in the US against the enumerate products, it has also asked for damages and other relief "that the court deems just and equitable." It did not specify an amount.
     
prl99
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: pacific northwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 30, 2016, 03:34 PM
 
Looks like CalTech needs to go back to school and understand how patents incorporated into standards are handled. You can't expect to get revenue from patents when you agree to include them in standards where everyone has to comply. I guess Caltech is losing money from a lack of enrollment so they're going after everyone they can.
     
twolf2919
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: May 2013
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2016, 10:30 AM
 
As I asked in another forum (no answer), why is Apple being sued. Just as we assume that a widget we buy at a store isn't stolen, so must a manufacturer (Apple) assume that the chips it buys are legal too. It seems an unreasonable burden on a manufacturer to have to independently establish the intellectual rights behind every chip it buys from third parties.
     
twolf2919
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: May 2013
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2016, 10:42 AM
 
As I asked in another forum (no answer), why is Apple being sued. Just as we assume that a widget we buy at a store isn't stolen, so must a manufacturer (Apple) assume that the chips it buys are legal too. It seems an unreasonable burden on a manufacturer to have to independently establish the intellectual rights behind every chip it buys from third parties.
     
sgs123
Junior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2016, 01:14 PM
 
@ prl99 -- I don't believe your assertion "You can't expect to get revenue from patents when you agree to include them in standards" is correct -- look at the H.264 patents and MPEG-LA that handles the royalties.

However, "standards-essential" patents are required to have FRAND licensing terms.
     
   
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:36 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,