A Reasonable Look at the Apple and AT&T iPhone4 Lawsuit.

Not surprising I suppose, the lawsuit makes no mention of the perhaps questionable judgements of the plaintiffs who bought the product(s) sight unseen.

The star witness as it turns out seem to be some unqualified blogging site diatribes as technical references.

Frankly as a former RF Engineer myself, I can tell you that the performance issues claimed are inconsistent. The demonstration tests ill-informed. And there are as many wireless network variables as there may be device variables.

The frenzy over this issue is ridiculous. How many class action suits is this for Apple this decade? 50? 100? And it’s not just Apple. 

The problem with these nonsense suits—I call this one nonsense based on their cited authorities and how they’re playing it in the media—is that sooner or later they mask legitimate ones.

One is hard pressed to believe this firm is doing anything other than chasing a buck when three of the four links used in support of their initial statement about the “iPhone 4 investigation” are from Gizmodo. Bad enough to use blogs with questionable technical expertise in the first place, but citing one with a recent and obvious axe to grind against Apple seems the height of cluelessness. Meanwhile, the only non-Gizmodo link is to a rumors site. Lovely. 

Oh well, I’ve seen stranger suits prevail (a spilled cup of coffee comes to mind). I guess that’s why firms like Ambulance & Chaser, LLC. continue to try their luck.

Advertisements

Monkey see, Monkey sue

MONKEYmedia® today filed a lawsuit against Apple, Inc.… Apple’s [alleged]
infringement involves its user interfaces for document summarization,
RSS readers and video players that can display multiple versions of text
and/or audiovisual content. The lawsuit
was filed in the Western District of Texas – Austin Division.

It must be a valid lawsuit because it meets all the necessary requirements. Company you never heard of? Check. Obscure patents dealing with commonplace tech (RSS readers, video players)? Check. Filed in a “rocket docket” in Texas? Check.

Monkey see, Monkey sue

MONKEYmedia® today filed a lawsuit against Apple, Inc.… Apple’s [alleged]
infringement involves its user interfaces for document summarization,
RSS readers and video players that can display multiple versions of text
and/or audiovisual content. The lawsuit
was filed in the Western District of Texas – Austin Division.

It must be a valid lawsuit because it meets all the necessary requirements. Company you never heard of? Check. Obscure patents dealing with commonplace tech (RSS readers, video players)? Check. Filed in a “rocket docket” in Texas? Check.

San Francisco defense attorney would go after Gizmodo

“If I were prosecuting, I’d go after (any blogger who bought the phone) vigorously,” said Michael Cardoza, a prominent San Francisco defense attorney and former prosecutor. “I’d fight them tooth and nail to see that they wouldn’t get protection under the shield law. I’d play hardball in this case. They didn’t find the phone as part of their reporting but instead bought property that they knew or should have known wasn’t the property of the seller.”

 

For all the opinions being posted about how Gizmodo should not be pursued, they can do what they want as journalists, the search warrant is illegal, etc., I thought I’d post an alternate opinion. Make of it what you will.