(Image courtesy of ibtimes.com)
Enjoy this combination of tech giants while it lasts! Apple has joined up with Google, Facebook, and Yahoo among others. The cause? Trying to take down Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen’s patent infringement suit brought about last August.
If you’ll turn back the page a bit, we brought it to you that a Paul Allen-owned firm had originally claimed in a federal lawsuit that 11 companies, including the likes of Apple, Google, YouTube, Facebook, AOL and Yahoo, had all infringed upon four patents that had been awarded more than ten years ago.
One of the patents that had been described was a “news browser,” and another referred to technology that had alerted users of Web content that was related to whatever it was that they were currently viewing.
The patents had been issued between 2000 and 2004 to Internal Research, which was an Allen-funded Silicon Valley lab that closed for business in 2000. Said patents were then transferred over to Interval Licensing, which Allen also runs.
Google got the counterattack ball rolling on October 18 as it filed a motion to dismiss the claims. That motion made the assertion that Interval did not show exactly how Google had made the infringement, and it did not name any of the technologies that were used by or the services that were offered by Google that had violated the patents.
“Interval is not entitled to waste Court and party resources with a scattershot Complaint against multiple Defendants that fails to give any indication as to which products or services Interval contends are infringing and the factual basis for such a claim,” said Google.
“Interval’s Complaint is devoid of any facts to support its infringement contentions that it is impossible for Google to reasonably prepare a defense,” Google went on.
Apple then joined in on October 21st with a filing of their own.
“Interval has sued eleven major corporations and made the same bald assertions that each defendant infringes 197 claims in four patents,” Apple said. “As the U.S. Supreme Court noted in Twombly, it is in this type of situation in which courts should use their ‘power to insist upon some specificity in pleading before allowing a potentially massive factual controversy to proceed.'”
The suit is seeking unspecified damages, including injunctions that would prevent the accused corporations from continuing on to use the said patented technologies.
Whether the suit gets tossed or not, it’s certainly something to keep your eyes peeled on!