Neil Hughes
Apple was named along with a host of other wireless advertising companies in the lawsuit from StreetSpace, including Quattro Wireless, which was purchased by Apple earlier this year and is now being phased out in favor of iAds. Other defendants include Google, AdMob, Nokia, Navteq, Millenial Media and Jumptap.
StreetSpace is headquartered in Malaysia, and the company is the creator of a remote Internet terminal known as the Web Station. Users can walk up to one of these terminals to access the Internet, and are delivered targeted advertisements in the process.
Related to that invention is U.S. Patent No. 6,847,969, which StreetSpace has alleged Apple and others are in violation of. Named "Method and System for Providing Personalized Online Services and Advertisements in Public Spaces," it was granted on Jan. 25, 2005.
The lawsuit notes that StreetSpace's mobile terminal products were available in the late '90s at bookstores, retail stores, cafes and restaurants in Berkley Calif., and had more than 30,000 registered users. The "Street Line" terminal, as it was then known, was also used during in the Olympic Village at Salt Lake City, Utah, during the 2002 Winter Olympics.
Now known as the Web station, the product is said to be used by a number of leading banks in Malaysia, including Maybank, CIMB Bank and AFFIN Bank.
The suit alleges that Apple's iAds service, launched in iPhone applications on July 1, is in violation of its patent because it delivers personalized advertisements based on a user's location, profile and usage history. The delivery of ads on the iPhone, iPod touch and (eventually) the iPad is infringing on the '969 patent owned by StreetSpace, the company claims.
The complaint was filed last week in a U.S. District Court in the Southern District of California.
Wesley Hilliard
Malcolm Owen
Christine McKee
Andrew Orr
William Gallagher
37 Comments
I patented a way for lawyers to sue rich companies over patents. Now, lawyers, pay up.
Does Apple ever sue to protect its patents? God knows they file a lot of them. Seems like the only time they sue is a countersuit in response to someone else. Just wondering.
You know it's nice to see someone starting a patent infringement action when they themselves actually have a product based on the patent. What I can't stand is people who have a patent, have done nothing with it, then sue to make money.
That said, this does seem to be a spectacularly broad patent, which irritates me as well.
Does Apple ever sue to protect its patents? God knows they file a lot of them. Seems like the only time they sue is a countersuit in response to someone else. Just wondering.
Um...yes. HTC (or, the "Google phone maker" according to most media outlets so that it appears that Apple sued Google) comes to mind. Psystar as well.
Does Apple ever sue to protect its patents? God knows they file a lot of them. Seems like the only time they sue is a countersuit in response to someone else. Just wondering.
In addition to the aforementioned HTC and Psystar suits, Apple has recently filed a number of design-related suits against various accessory manufacturers.
Their lawyers probably send a lot of cease-and-desist letters which presumably are complied with.
You can see a select list of litigation right here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_lawsuits
When Apple is listed first, they are the plaintiff.