Siri patent infringement settlement to cost Apple $24.9M

Apple will pay out $24.9 million to settle a long-running lawsuit alledging that its Siri voice assistant violated a patent licensed by Dynamic Advances, according to an announcement by the latter firm on Tuesday.

Under the terms of the agreement, the Marathon Patent Group — which controls Dynamic Advances — will be entitled to $5 million immediately after dropping its case with the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York, and the remaining $19.9 million after later conditions are met. In exchange, however, Apple will receive a patent license, and a promise that it won't be sued again for the next three years.

Dynamic Advances suggested that about half of its gross proceeds will probably go to New York state's Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. The contended patent — "Natural language interface using constrained intermediate dictionary of results" — was originally developed by an RPI professor, but licensed exclusively to Dynamic Advances.

RPI has not, however, agreed to the royalty rate proposed in the settlement. That issue "may have to be resolved in arbitration," Dynamic Advances said, although it allegedly "will not deter the resolution" with Apple.

The lawsuit dates back to October 2012, almost exactly a year after Apple introduced Siri with iOS 5 and the iPhone 4S. Apple has since brought Siri support to all of its iOS product lines, as well as the Apple TV, though the technology is still conspicuously absent from Macs.

8 Comments

wonkothesane 12 Years · 1738 comments

About 8 years ago

"it won't be sued again for the next three years"? what is this, right for seconds?
Something is either legal/in alignment with IP law, or it isn"t. Where does this three years come from and for what purpose is this part of the agreement?

adrayven 12 Years · 460 comments

wonkothesane said:

"it won't be sued again for the next three years"? what is this, right for seconds?
Something is either legal/in alignment with IP law, or it isn"t. Where does this three years come from and for what purpose is this part of the agreement?

I think it has to do with getting the professor on-board.. Dynamic Advances seems to want time to arbitrate with the professor on the royalty rate.. Sounds like Dynamic Advances isn't going to just hand over money, probably wants to re-negotiate their terms with the professor. Apple is probably saying, "Fine, but if you end up wanting more because you cannot talk him into a reasonable rate, we want you to wait at least 3 years." Which is what the $5 million is buying, basically.

adrayven said:

wonkothesane said:

"it won't be sued again for the next three years"? what is this, right for seconds?
Something is either legal/in alignment with IP law, or it isn"t. Where does this three years come from and for what purpose is this part of the agreement?

I think it has to do with getting the professor on-board.. Dynamic Advances seems to want time to arbitrate with the professor on the royalty rate.. Sounds like Dynamic Advances isn't going to just hand over money, probably wants to re-negotiate their terms with the professor. Apple is probably saying, "Fine, but if you end up wanting more because you cannot talk him into a reasonable rate, we want you to wait at least 3 years." Which is what the $5 million is buying, basically.

Ok. Makes sense.

Thx