The Mac Observer

Skip navigational links

You're viewing an article in TMO's historic archive vault. Here, we've preserved the comments and how the site looked along with the article. Use this link to view the article on our current site:
$10M Says Apple Can Use Burst Patents

$10M Says Apple Can Use Burst Patents

by , 10:45 AM EST, November 26th, 2007

Apple and Burst finally settled their two-year long patent infringement battle. Apple got a non-exclusive license for Burst's patent portfolio, and Burst got a check for US$10 million.

Burst originally filed a lawsuit against Apple claiming the company was infringing on its patents with technology used in the iPod, QuickTime, iTunes, and the iTunes Store. Earlier in November 14, of the 36 claims were thrown out leaving 22 claims for Burst to pursue in court sometime in 2008.

Burst's legal fees in the case, however, will eat into the settlement Apple is paying. About $5.4 million of the $10 million will be used to cover the company's legal costs.

Apple isn't the first company Burst has sued over patent infringement. The company previously went after Microsoft which ultimately led to a $60 million lump sum license settlement from the Redmond company.

Observer Comments

Show: Subjects Only | Full Comments
Close Name:Guest
Subject: great use...

of cash. Put it behind you. Burst is a nuisance, but they're making money the American way...lawsuits!

Close Name:Terrin Posts: 414 Joined: 29 Jan 2006
Subject:

Well, Apple must have thought Burst owned legtimate patents. It approached Burst multiple times to license Burst's patents. However, Burst didn't like the price Apple was offering. So what did Apple do? It did what any big company in it's position does: just use the patented ideas anyway. It will worry about paying later.

Close Name:Guest
Subject:

Chicken feed.

Close Name:Sir Harry Flashman Posts: 792 Joined: 08 Feb 2007
Subject: Market Share

Quote
Anonymous wrote:
Chicken feed.


Yes, Apple's settlement is chicken feed compared to the 60 million MicroSoft paid to Burst. Of course MicroSoft's market share is larger so it only makes sense that they pay more.

Seriously 10 million isn't a lot of money in a situation like this, especially considering the iPod market share. I wonder just how much of Burst's infringement claim was valid.

Close Name:Guest
Subject: next time...

Apple: Next time, just buy the company. Get all their "holdings" at one time instead of being nickeled and dimed to death by them (not to mention if the claims really are valid, how many other companies would suddenly be beholden to you for the technology...)

Comment on this Article


You cannot edit your comments.   You cannot delete your comments.

Comments are currently closed. Please email the author instead.


Recent Headlines - Updated February 9th

Tue, 9:09 PM
Games - Gameloft’s GT Racing Motor Academy Arrives at App Store
6:27 PM
iPad - Apple Job Posting Hints at a Camera in Future iPads
6:22 PM
Product News - Apple Releases Digital Camera RAW Compatibility Update 3.0
6:18 PM
Product News - Apple Updates iLife ‘09 with Aperture 3 Support, Slideshow Performance
4:53 PM
News - Google Introduces “Buzz” Social Information Sharing Service
4:19 PM
Just a Thought - iPad: A Reason For Being
3:28 PM
News - Google Lowers Nexus One “Equipment Recovery Fee” to $150
2:27 PM
Deal Brothers - Refurbished 13” MacBook 2.13GHz Intel Core 2 Duo:  $749
1:31 PM
Jeff Gamet's Blog - Macworld Expo: It’s Our Show, Not Apple’s
10:38 AM
Quick Look Review - Texas Tea for the iPhone and iPod touch
10:25 AM
News - Apple Rolls Out Aperture 3 Video Tutorials
10:00 AM
Hot Forum Topic - Backing Up Your iPhoto Library

The Mac Observer Reader Specials

  • __________
  • Buy Stuff, Support TMO!
  • Podcast: Mac Geek Gab
  • Podcast: Apple Weekly Report
  • TMO on Twitter!