“In his first public comment on the suit, HTC chief Peter Chou said the company ‘disagrees with Apple’s actions,’ though he did not go into specifics,” The Associated Press reports.
“Apple says HTC’s phones — several of which use Google Inc.’s Android mobile operating software — infringe on 20 of its patents,” AP reports. “The patents cover technology like iPhone two-finger screen recognition, which allows users to perform multiple functions on the gadget.”
AP reports, “The suit, filed earlier this month, served as a warning to rivals that Apple Inc. is ready to aggressively defend its technology amid intensifying competition in the smart phone market.”
Full article here.
Brad Stone reports for The New York Times, “In an interview, Jason Mackenzie, vice president of HTC America, said that ‘HTC disagrees strongly with Apple’s actions and we plan to use all the legal tools we have at our disposal to defend ourselves, as well as to set the record straight.'”
“Mr. Mackenzie would not say whether HTC plans to countersue Apple, or how much legal help it can expect from its partner, Google, which may be the real target of Apple’s ire,” Stone reports.
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Note: HTC’s press release, verbatim:
HTC Corporation today outlined its disagreement with Apple’s legal actions and reiterated its commitment to creating a portfolio of innovative smartphones that gives consumers a variety of choices. Founded in 1997 with a passion for innovation and a vision for how smartphones would change people’s lives, HTC has continually driven this vision by consistently introducing award-winning smartphones with U.S. mobile operators.
“HTC disagrees with Apple’s actions and will fully defend itself. HTC strongly advocates intellectual property protection and will continue to respect other innovators and their technologies as we have always done, but we will continue to embrace competition through our own innovation as a healthy way for consumers to get the best mobile experience possible,” said Peter Chou, chief executive officer, HTC Corporation. “From day one, HTC has focused on creating cutting-edge innovations that deliver unique value for people looking for a smartphone. In 1999 we started designing the XDA and T-Mobile Pocket PC Phone Edition, our first touch-screen smartphones, and they both shipped in 2002 with more than 50 additional HTC smartphone models shipping since then.”
The industry has recognized HTC’s contributions through a variety of awards including Fast Company’s 2010 Top 50 Most Innovative Companies and MIT Technology Review’s 2010 50 Most Innovative Companies. The GSMA also recently awarded the HTC Hero as the “Best Phone of 2009.” Some of HTC’s technology firsts include:
• First Windows PDA (1998)
• First Windows Phone (June 2002)
• First 3G CDMA EVDO smartphone (October 2005)
• First gesture-based smartphone (June 2007)
• First Google Android smartphone (October 2008)
• First 4G WIMAX smartphone (November 2008)
In 2009, HTC launched its branded user experience, HTC Sense. HTC Sense is focused on putting people at the center by making phones work in a more simple and natural way. This experience was fundamentally based on listening and observing how people live and communicate.
“HTC has always taken a partnership-oriented, collaborative approach to business. This has led to long-standing strategic partnerships with the top software, Internet and wireless technology companies in the industry as well as the top U.S., European and Asian mobile operators,” said Jason Mackenzie, vice president of HTC America. “It is through these relationships that we have been able to deliver the world’s most diverse series of smartphones to an even more diverse group of people around the world, recognizing that customers have very different needs.”
Source: HTC Corporation
John Paczkowski writes for AllThingsD, “The implication here seems to be that these ‘firsts’ somehow negate Apple’s claims that the company violated 20 of its patents. And while it’s certainly possible that might be the case, it’s hard to accept that argument without a list of patents to back it up. Harder still, when HTC says nothing about its legal strategy for dealing with Apple’s assault.”
Paczkowski asks, “Does HTC plan to countersue? Does the company have any IP of its own with which to mount a viable defense? Or will it simply take Apple to the mat with its ‘strong disagreement’ and toothless positioning statements like the one above?”
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: ‘Tis highly likely that Apple would not have launched concurrent lawsuits with the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) and in U.S. District Court, if they didn’t believe they had a strong case against HTC et al.
Good luck HTC, now you have two 800 pound gorillas looking at you, Apple and Microsoft.
All lesser phones shall pay tithe to the King of All Phones!
“Google, which may be the real target of Apple’s ire,”
————————
F*#k Google.
good luck Apple… HTC is the touchscreen smartphone pioneer!
Slater
Apple is the “multitouch” pioneer.
@ Slater
except the first touchscreen cell phone was the IBM Simon in 1992. Apple prototyped a landline touchscreen phone in 1984.
“Disagrees strongly?” Yeah, I’ll be they do.
Slater get your infomation correct, it is a
Apple that has the Patents not Htc and be correct Htc will lose allot more then you think they will.
Facts are patents are used in lawsuits and will prevail Htc has a very WEAK Patent list and even if Apple gets them on one infrigment of the 20 Htc is done for.
Odds are with Apple not with Htc.
I bet Steve really regrets trumpeting Picasso’s “Good artists copy, great artists steal” comment now, doesn’t he? It’s all well and good when Apple takes, say, an idea from Xerox, and puts them in their own products, isn’t it?
‘Intellectual property’ is a misnomer as property is its true sense only applies to physical, tangible things – <u>not</u> ideas and concepts, such as a multi-touch gesture…
Consider these for thought:
What if Karl Benz patented the combustion engine? Or Henry Ford the mass production process, or even the components that formed the model T? What if the guy who invented the screw patented the twisting motion…?
What if Marx had a team of lawyers who set upon you everytime you uttered ‘communist manifesto’ or ‘socialism’ etc; or alternatively ‘the invisible hand’, the ‘division of labour’ (and so on), in the case of Adam Smith?
What if Merck patented the digestive process? Would you pay a royalty to them for every meal you eat? Or, stop eating? Or ask their permission to eat?
The iPhone <u>shouldn’t need lawyers</u> to protect it from the competition when its own brand name and quality of design can do that more than adequately. That’s my central point here.
When companies spend money attacking each other in court, remember that the money they pay the lawyers could have gone into capital investment, research, product development, wages, facilities…
HTC is certainly in a difficult corner, but the guys at google have also illustrated their lack of diligence in their planning. Apple brings revolutionary products to market by painstakingly crossing the “t”s and dotting the “i”s. HTC doesn’t have a large patent portfolio, and Google shoots from the hip. Who do you think is more likely to have made a fatal mistake here?
Seems to me that the Newton predated HTC.
What if Andy had a clue?
What if Andy had a clue?
What if Andy had a clue?
What if Andy had a clue?
What if Andy had a clue?
What if Andy had a clue?
@ Andy,
Patents expire idiot.
Andy,
You can’t patent things you didn’t invent (like the digestive process) And lets say Merk spent 10 years and hundreds of millions of dollars researching a drug to prevent indigestion. and brought that drug to market.
Now, in your little world, all AndyPharma has to do is analyze (or reverse engineer) what is in the drug, produce a low quality knockoff and sell it for half. And you think that is ok?
LOL… @Slater put both foot in your mouth. Think before you comment.
HTC is heading for a big fall.
They may be “toothless positioning statements,” and the press release would have been a good opportunity to “set the record straight,” the reality is they are facing a major lawsuit and can’t be blamed for not going into details.
@Andy Please learn the history of the Apple-Xerox deal.
@Uncle Fester’s Cousin
Thanks for your sensible counter-point. I agree that IP law is quite murky and open to interpretation, but my original point still stands: <u>You do not need lawyers to ‘defend’ the superior product when the market will do just that.</u>
“Producing a low-quality knock-off” is entirely a subjective, personal judgement on your part, first of all. Have you ever bought a ‘cheap knock-off’ before? Has anyone forced you too? Where does your objection come from?
When given the choice between a iPhone or a competing device, have you opted for, or considered, the non-iPhone because <u>it’s not made by Apple</u> or is <u>priced differently</u>? (Or some other criteria)
Supposing you were given a choice between an Apple iPhone and an HTC iPhone. What would you choose and why? Once you answer that, you’ll see why patents and lawyers are arguably unnecessary…
Do you consider yourself incapable of differentiating between two devices? Do you believe other Apple users will be similarly afflicted?
Moreover, what does the popularity of the iPod tell anyone? Or the phenomenal marketing cache of the Apple brand? How many people are going to opt for the ‘poor man’s alternative’ device in light of those facts?
(I note that you don’t talk about my other example, the guy who invents the screw and then patents the twisting motion…)
And why exactly is it ‘bad’ to sell competitively priced products anyway? (What person willingly pays more than they have to?) Apple can afford to charge what it likes because it has a captive, affluent audience (us), where-as many ‘tech-illiterate’/disinterested people will focus almost entirely on price – therefore – the market provides similar products in all kinds of prices ranges for that purpose.
As for Merck, read some of the late Michael Crichton’s essays about pharmaceutical companies and patents.
@Nashgul
Fair enough. However, even if Apple did not directly ‘steal’ Xerox’s ideas, what if Xerox wasn’t willing to share/trade the GUI concept with anyone?
That’s where my objection comes from. Apple have every right to protect their physical property but an idea is merely an idea – or are you telling me that Apple owns the cognitive processes (the arrangement of synapses in your brain) that form the idea of multi-touch gestures?
Apple’s competitive advantage comes from Steve’s visionary mindset and ability to create markets and products; why else would we be fans? Are you an Apple user because Steve patented multi-touch gestures or the finger motion used to operate the click-wheel?
I’ll make it really simple: I believe that companies attacking each other in the courts is a complete waste of time, money and effort and ultimately hurts us, the users.
@Andy
It a perfect world, you would be right – quality would rule. However, in the real world some people who otherwise might have purchased an iPhone will end up buying an HTC phone or other handset. If those handsets infringe on Apple’s patents and those patents are valid, then they are stealing revenue.
There is another case – what is someone builds on Apple’s technology and actually makes something a little better (nearly inconceivable, but theoretically possible
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” /> ). Then lots of people might buy that new product rather than the iPhone and the company that actually developed most of the innovations would lose out. In the worst case, the innovative companies disappear and the predators suck up the profits in the near term, leading to technological stagnation in the long run.
I am a fan of competition. I do not believe that Apple is infallible or its products without flaws. And I am not a fan of lawsuits. I have posted enough on MDN to make my positions on those issues clear to the regulars. But there is a place and a time for lawsuits, and this may be such an instance. I am not interested in attempting to litigate the issue in this forum. The courts and/or the ITC will take care of it eventually.