Apple to pay royalties on iPod? Don't bet on it

Iria · Aug 17, 2005, 06:24 AM

SAN FRANCISCO - Given the intense rivalry between Apple Computer Inc. and Microsoft Corp., this recent revelation had a comedic tinge: Apple took too long to file a patent on part of its blockbuster iPod music players, so Microsoft beat Apple to it.

Bloggers and other tech pundits snickered at the prospect of Steve Jobs having to pay Bill Gates royalties on the beloved iPods, which account for more than one-third of Apple's revenue. One Web columnist even dubbed the patent office the "iPod killer."

But that scenario is unlikely.
__________
Read More / Source: MSNBC

EcPercy · Aug 17, 2005, 10:30 AM

Well from looking at the article Apple released the iPod in October 2001. Microsoft filed the patent in May 2002. Then in October 2002 Apple filed for their patent.

Now, the question arises. How can Microsoft obtain a patent on something that they clearly did not make???

Microsoft trying to state that they are willing to license it's patents to others just shows me how shady Microsoft really is.

I don't know a lot about the patent laws, but I am betting that prior art would come into play here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prior_art

pr0digal jenius · Aug 17, 2005, 02:58 PM

I think that before we can even go into prior art, we'll have to see what the hell took apple so long, and discover that the iPod interface actually went through some changes when the iPod hopped from generation one to gen II (currently, gen 4 was just released)...in which case....microsoft may yet win.

EcPercy · Aug 18, 2005, 02:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pr0digal jenius

I think that before we can even go into prior art, we'll have to see what the hell took apple so long, and discover that the iPod interface actually went through some changes when the iPod hopped from generation one to gen II (currently, gen 4 was just released)...in which case....microsoft may yet win.

Possibly, but if I read the wiki right the US uses a first-to-invent system. Considering apple was already selling the iPods before Microsoft filed their patent prior art may still come into the equation.

Aug 17, 2005, 06:24 AM	#1
Iria DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 7,275 Rep Power: 89	Apple to pay royalties on iPod? Don't bet on it SAN FRANCISCO - Given the intense rivalry between Apple Computer Inc. and Microsoft Corp., this recent revelation had a comedic tinge: Apple took too long to file a patent on part of its blockbuster iPod music players, so Microsoft beat Apple to it. Bloggers and other tech pundits snickered at the prospect of Steve Jobs having to pay Bill Gates royalties on the beloved iPods, which account for more than one-third of Apple's revenue. One Web columnist even dubbed the patent office the "iPod killer." But that scenario is unlikely. __________ Read More / Source: MSNBC

Aug 17, 2005, 10:30 AM	#2
EcPercy HardwareHeaven Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Iraq Posts: 1,535 Rep Power: 0	Well from looking at the article Apple released the iPod in October 2001. Microsoft filed the patent in May 2002. Then in October 2002 Apple filed for their patent. Now, the question arises. How can Microsoft obtain a patent on something that they clearly did not make??? Microsoft trying to state that they are willing to license it's patents to others just shows me how shady Microsoft really is. I don't know a lot about the patent laws, but I am betting that prior art would come into play here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prior_art

Aug 17, 2005, 02:58 PM	#3
pr0digal jenius Delete Me Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 14,648 Rep Power: 0	I think that before we can even go into prior art, we'll have to see what the hell took apple so long, and discover that the iPod interface actually went through some changes when the iPod hopped from generation one to gen II (currently, gen 4 was just released)...in which case....microsoft may yet win.