1 / 9

Mirror Worlds v. Apple

Mirror Worlds v. Apple. Case Overview. In 2008, the technology company Mirror Worlds, LLC filed suit against Apple, Inc . for patent infringement in the US District Court in Tyler, Texas.

paloma
Télécharger la présentation

Mirror Worlds v. Apple

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Mirror Worlds v. Apple

  2. Case Overview • In 2008, the technology company Mirror Worlds, LLC filed suit against Apple, Inc. for patent infringement in the US District Court in Tyler, Texas. • Mirror Worlds claimed that three of Apple’s Mac computer programs (Cover Flow, Time Machine, and Spotlight) infringed patents that Mirror Worlds had registered for a way to display documents on a computer screen. • Apple challenged the validity of these patents and claimed that they had not been infringed.

  3. The Arguments Mirror World’s Arguments: • That Apple’s programs Spotlight, Time Machine, and Cover Flow infringed patents that Mirror World’s had filed for its software, Scopewarewhich organizes a user's files into time-based "streams" and make such data more easily accessible across networks • “That Apple both directly and indirectly infringed its patents and that the infringement was willful” Apple’s Arguments: • That Apple’s programs did not infringe the patents in question (“the ’227 patent”, “the ’313 patent”, and “the ’427 patent”) because the patents are invalid and that in using Apple’s programs (Spotlight, Time Machine, and Cover Flow), users do not necessarily follow the steps outlined in the patented processes

  4. Did Apple’s three programs actually infringe three registered US patents - (“the ’227 patent”), (“the ’313 patent”), and (“the ’427 patent”)? Did Apple “automatically” infringe the patents since the accused Spotlight feature is “built into the core” of Apple’s operating systems that “are always on and necessarily practiced by Apple’s computers.” Mirror World’s patents protected the following functions: 1) the documents are stored in one or more chronologically ordered streams; 2) the location and nature of file storage is transparent to the user; 3) information is organized as needed instead of at the time the document is created; 4) sophisticated logic is provided for summarizing a large group of related documents at the time a user wants a concise overview; and 5) archiving is automatic. Central Dispute

  5. Functions Protected by Patents • As illustrated here, the three patents registered by Mirror Worlds describe displaying a stream of data, documents, or pictures as stacked images so the images appear to be receding Image from U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas Tyler DivisionCase Materials, Case No. 6:08 CV 88

  6. The three Apple Mac OSX and iOS programs in question are the following: Spotlight: function that searches the computer’s hard drive Cover Flow: function that lets users scroll through album cover art when browsing for documents, pictures, and music in their iTunes libraries. Time Machine: function that automatically backs up system files, applications, accounts, preferences, music, photos, movies, and documents on a Mac computer Programs in Question

  7. 2010 US District Court Decision in Texas: the jury ruled that Apple had infringed all three patents and awarded Mirror Worlds, LLC $625.5 Million in damages ($208.5 million per infringement) 2010 Appeal: Apple appeals decision and judge stays the ruling 2011 Final Court Decision: U.S. District Judge Leonard E. Davis of Tyler ruled that Apple did not infringe on the patents (based on insufficient evidentiary support), and overturned the jury verdict but did uphold the validity of Mirror World’s three patents Court Decision

  8. The court proceedings can be found here: http://patent-damages.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/pdf.pdf

  9. About IPR Plaza IPR Plaza is a web-based platform that bridges the gap between IP law, accounting, tax, transfer pricing and valuation by providing general and profession-specific information on intangibles, as well as, quantifiable valuation models. IPR Plaza is empowered by different leading IP advisory firms. IPR Plaza is headquartered in the Netherlands with representation in other major countries.

More Related