On UrbanBaby: I won't vaccinate my daughter!
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet

By Ina Fried
Posted on ZDNet News: Aug 12, 2005 4:58:00 PM

While Microsoft has struggled to challenge the iPod in the market, the software giant's lawyers have managed to slow Apple Computer's attempt to patent its digital music technology.

In a ruling issued last month, a patent examiner rejected Apple's attempt to patent some of the user interface concepts behind the popular digital music player, noting that Microsoft developer John Platt filed for similar claims five months before Apple did.

A Microsoft executive noted on Friday that the company is always open to licensing its technology.

"In general, our policy is to allow others to license our patents so they can use our innovative methods in their products," David Kaefer, Microsoft's director of intellectual property licensing, said in a statement. "Microsoft and Apple have previously licensed their respective patent portfolios to one another and we maintain a good working relationship with Apple."

But in an interview, Kaefer agreed that it may be a bit premature to speculate that Apple will have to send Microsoft a check for each iPod.

Although the decision is considered "final" in patent office terminology, Apple will have the opportunity to try and redefine the scope of its patent so it does not overlap with Microsoft's patent application.

It is also unclear what, if any role, a 1997 agreement between Apple and Microsoft will have. Although the five-year deal has expired, it is theoretically possible that the claims raised in the patent applications might somehow be covered.

Also, Kaefer notes that the two companies are both developing technology in the same areas and both know their way around the patent office.

"We're innovating around sort of parallel paths," Kaefer said. "At least from our perspective, we are both in it together."

Kaefer said he could not say whether Apple and Microsoft are in talks over a broader cross-licensing arrangement. Microsoft has said it is seeking to strike such deals with a broad range of large technology companies.

In a statement, Apple noted that the company "has received many patents for inventions related to iPod, and has many more patents pending."

"The U.S. patent process is often a lengthy one, involving much back and forth with the U.S. patent office," Apple said. "Apple will continue to pursue this patent application, as well as the many others covering iPod innovations."

Apple also stated that it "invented and publicly released the iPod interface before the Microsoft patent application cited by the examiner was filed."

Kaefer said that although Microsoft's patent application does predate Apple's, what could ultimately end up being most relevant is which company first jotted down the basic idea behind the patents.

Attorney Mark Goldstein of the SoCal IP Law Group said that some sort of a licensing deal between the two tech giants might make sense.

"Microsoft and Apple could soon cross paths in court if they don't cross license," he said in an e-mail interview. "As the competition between Apple and Microsoft heats up with Apple's switch to Intel processors, the possibility of suit, rather than a cross license, increases."

Apple's patent office setback was first noted earlier this week by Mac enthusiast site Apple Insider.

  • Talkback
  • Most Recent of 72 Talkback(s)
Patents
It is interesting to see such a row over patents. The patent process is obsolete. There is no need to castigate Apple for letting M$ jump them. There is no need for the business/engineering unit t... (Read the rest)
Posted by: merlion Posted on: 12/13/05 You are currently: Logged In | Log out
I don't think either should pass.... el1jones   | 08/12/05
What is innovative about it? voska   | 08/12/05
In other words... BitTwiddler   | 08/12/05
That may be true voska   | 08/12/05
It's one of those "look and feel" deals tic swayback   | 08/12/05
Just because the Ipod was ... ShadeTree   | 08/15/05
Does that matter? tic swayback   | 08/15/05
Actual rules in question tic swayback   | 08/15/05
There is a file date and an approval date. osreinstall   | 08/15/05
Yes you can. ShadeTree   | 08/16/05
Should be interesting to see.... tic swayback   | 08/16/05
This is so screwed up... BitTwiddler   | 08/12/05
Your assuming that Microsoft doesn't have ... ShadeTree   | 08/15/05
Doesn't matter voska   | 08/15/05
This isn't Canada and yes you can ... ShadeTree   | 08/16/05
MS vs Apple garyr_z   | 08/12/05
It's hard to think of a better example... native alien   | 08/12/05
So how do YOU define it? slingzenarrowzuvowtrayjissforchin   | 08/12/05
Simple... native alien   | 08/12/05
WUH! slingzenarrowzuvowtrayjissforchin   | 08/12/05
Bingo! native alien   | 08/12/05
Excuse me? rapson   | 08/12/05
Just a matter of time voska   | 08/15/05
voska: M.A.D. rapson   | 08/15/05
Not wrong voska   | 08/15/05
Microsuck "Innovates" Again! itanalyst   | 08/12/05
Crapple Stole from Microsoft ab@...   | 08/12/05
As usual, he hasn't the first clue... No_Ax_to_Grind   | 08/12/05
See post below for some education Jeff Spicoli   | 08/12/05
No, you are wrong tic swayback   | 08/12/05
Thank You Tic itanalyst   | 08/12/05
That's what makes this whole thing so amazing... BitTwiddler   | 08/15/05
Yeah, that Microsoft iPod came out WAY before Apple's did... BitTwiddler   | 08/15/05
********!!! degger007   | 08/17/05
Does it matter who wins? It's still a patent. No_Ax_to_Grind   | 08/12/05
What matters tic swayback   | 08/12/05
It sure does matter, No_Ax - you don't want to pay that price zdnetPatrick   | 08/14/05
Pay it to MS, pay it to Apple. It's all the same. No_Ax_to_Grind   | 08/15/05
I'm confused No Ax tic swayback   | 08/15/05
6 of one, 1/2 dozen of the other... Spoon Jabber   | 08/15/05
And that's a bad thing? tic swayback   | 08/15/05
Perfect example Yagotta B. Kidding   | 08/15/05
hmmmmm gary.douglas@...   | 08/15/05
First to file Yagotta B. Kidding   | 08/15/05
I believe the rules give them 1 year to patent tic swayback   | 08/15/05
The fee increases voska   | 08/15/05
Applesauce late to the pot Boot_Agnostic   | 08/12/05
Ugh. Ugh. Ugh. More proof the system is broken... HypnoToad   | 08/12/05
Dont worry Google will beat them jimk_z   | 08/12/05
Not sure about that... ab@...   | 08/13/05
Remember Apple's GUI and Windows Lawsuit? zdnetPatrick   | 08/14/05
Worse yet... BitTwiddler   | 08/15/05
Read the history of the GUI voska   | 08/15/05
In total agreement with that timeline, Voska zdnetPatrick   | 08/15/05
Theft and legal trickery - is this really a business strategy? YuridaMan   | 08/14/05
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha Reverend MacFellow   | 08/15/05
Install OSX on any PeeCee! Reverend MacFellow   | 08/15/05
Why bother? voska   | 08/15/05
Indeed tic swayback   | 08/15/05
Stupid and careless dzash2000   | 08/15/05
Yeah, that was a dumb move tic swayback   | 08/15/05
Atleast iPod does serve as Prior Art nucrash   | 08/15/05
5 months earlier, 5 months, hmmmmmm Reverend MacFellow   | 08/15/05
Does nobody pay attention to facts openMind   | 08/15/05
No extra money needed tic swayback   | 08/15/05
No quibbles there openMind   | 08/15/05
Why the iPod is a problem for MicroSoft zdnetPatrick   | 08/15/05
Microsoft and the American Way Ziek   | 08/17/05
Tread lightly Apple.... benf_z   | 08/17/05
Thiefs... degger007   | 08/17/05
Inept versus evil leodavinci   | 09/13/05
Patents merlion   | 12/13/05

What do you think?

advertisement
advertisement