First, kill all the lawyers

Palm has trou­ble, right here in River City. Apple’s COO and interim CEO said on their recent earn­ings call that they would aggres­sively defend their intel­lec­tual prop­erty. He didn’t call out the Palm Pre by name, but the sub­text was there.

Palm needs to be ready for this. Apple files for every patent they can think of, and they believe they have defend­able patents on mul­ti­touch and using a prox­im­ity sen­sor on a smart­phone to turn off the screen (which is why you don’t see that fea­ture on HTC devices). Apple also has lots of land sharks, I mean lawyers, and a lot more cash than Palm to han­dle legal fees.

I know Ruben­stein saw this com­ing, he’s too smart to have missed it and he knows well how his old com­pany oper­ates. So he imple­mented those two fea­tures on the Pre know­ing Apple would come after him. Why? What does he know that we don’t?

This entry was posted in Technology and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

7 Responses to First, kill all the lawyers

  1. Well, Palm did pretty much invent the PDA.

    Who’s to say they might not have some dusty old patents socked away that they could pit against Apple in a flurry of Mutual Assured Patent-​Obstruction?

    (Or per­haps they’re bank­ing on using Minor­ity Report as prior art. :)

  2. rcartwright says:

    Apple suing Palm would be like the guy who parks next to the hand­i­cap spot over the line and then sues the per­son get­ting into their van for rub­bing the paint job with his wheel­chair while strug­gling to get in. While the prior poster may have been kid­ding about “Minor­ity Report” prior art, bear in mind that the waterbed could not be patented because Robert Hein­lein described the waterbed in the novella “Waldo”. While its entirely pos­si­ble they will go after Palm if the prod­uct takes off, its equally likely that Palm will not have any prob­lem find­ing the funds to defend the suit, prob­a­bly from some folks up Red­mond way on the the­ory of “the enemy of my enemy is my friend”

  3. Harold Goldner says:

    I wish you hadn’t used that head­line. It’s a quote from a Shake­spearean play in which a con­spirer to over­throw the throne of Eng­land pos­tu­lates that if one wants to ensure anar­chy fol­lows, “first kill all the lawyers.”

    I agree with your sen­ti­ment, how­ever, and com­mented over on Palmin­fo­cen­ter sim­i­larly to you.

    If Apple wishes to ‘patent’ how I use my fin­gers, then I’ll hold one fin­ger up for them.

    Harold

  4. Harold: in re plot­ter wish­ing to ensure anar­chy fol­lows by killing lawyers: <a href=“http://www.spectacle.org/797/finkel.html” rel=“nofollow”><b>FALSE.</b></a>

    (See also, <a href=“http://www.terrania.us/journal/2006/10/gk-chesterton-was-right.html” rel=“nofollow”>why so many peo­ple still believe it to be true anyway.</a>)

  5. Marc Rosen says:

    Jeff–
    I’m really dis­ap­pointed in the dis­parag­ing remarks you’ve made about lawyers. Adding fuel to the non­sense about lawyers is beneath you. Lawyers are no worse than the peo­ple they represent.

    Please think before you make state­ments like that. Thank you.

  6. Jeff says:

    It was a lit­er­ary allu­sion, not an indict­ment of lawyers. Some of my best friends are lawyers. I’ll try to be more on the nose with my head­lines… Sheesh.

  7. Brad Green says:

    It would be inter­est­ing to see if prior art does exist for one of the main tenets of the “mul­ti­touch patent”, that being, the abil­ity to deter­mine if the user is attempt­ing to make a ver­ti­cal or a hor­i­zon­tal swipe on the screen. I would think that some devel­oper would have imple­mented it at some time in the his­tory of touch screen pdas. That said, I think Palm stays safe due to MAD. An arti­cle on a web­site (I think it may have been Engad­get) shows that Apple’s iPhone clearly vio­lated many of Palm’s patents when it was first released (and still vio­lates them now). I think both com­pa­nies know what they are doing, and that at least again a patent pow­er­house like Palm these patents are unen­for­ca­ble (which is to say other com­pa­nies might not be so lucky, or may be shielded by Palm out of necessity).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>