Appletell

According to Henry Milan, owner of patent number 6,991,483, Apple is infringing on his patent for a method to connect a Flash memory device to a connection port on another device, such as a computer.  This would affect devices such as the iPod Touch and iPod Nano, but Information Week has mentioned that, surprisingly, the iPhone is not mentioned in this report although it could be added.  The lawsuit wants to receive damages for the infringement as well as an injunction against the sales of the devices.  However, the law firm, Butzel Long, is not sure whether or not they want to pursue the injunction yet.

I’m sure Apple’s lawyers are busy over in Cupertino trying to get this straightened out, and I hope the lawsuit is settled quickly and efficiently for both sides.  I find it highly unlikely that the iPods will have to stop being sold, but that’s fairly obvious.  What are you thoughts on this patent dispute?  Is Mr. Milan on to something here?

Apple is now threatening legal action against 11 UK e-tailers, unless they agree to stop selling iPods imported from outside the UK. Apple has complained to many well-known online retailers which were buying iPods in the United States (where they sell for £15 less than in the UK), and then selling them at a lower price to customers.

The lawsuit issued by Bird & Bird, a London law firm, demand e-tailers to stop selling what they described as “Grey iPods” anywhere in Europe. The Cupertino-based law firm also threatened to sue any e-tailer that “infringes” Apple’s rights.

Apple also requested that the details of suppliers who provided the “Grey iPods” be given to the law firm. Companies which have cooperated must now also pay a sum to cover Apple’s legal expenses and damages.

A Bird & Bird spokesman announced that the firm was unable to comment on details of the lawsuit because it is a “sensitive, ongoing legal matter.”

Via [Channel Register]

Last week, BlueAir Inc. filed a 4-page complaint against Apple in the Illinois district court. BlueAir accuses Apple for bad sales last summer, and blames it on using their trademark term “airPOD”. BlueAir are charging that Apple is creating the controversy here between the parties - and causing harm by threats of trademark infringement and unfair competition. ”There is no reasonable likelihood of confusion, mistake or error in the marketplace for persons of even the lowest perceptive capabilities who are seeking an iPod music player considering or buying an airPOD desktop air cleaner instead” said BlueAir’s attorneys. They then continued to argue “’AirPOD’ and iPod are distinct in sound, appearance, and connotation as applied to their respective goods,” they add. “Although the ending --POD portions are identical, the initial portions AIR-- and i-- are distinct in appearance and connotation and distinguishable in sound as well to any ordinary observer.”

If you look at the photo of an airPOD on the right, it may resemble an iPod - slightly. Sure, there is a black circle that looks very much like a clickwheel. But there is absolutely no way that anyone can possibly get confused between an air conditioning unit and a personal music player. This is one of those stupid attempts to sue Apple. We all know that they always fail. Good luck, BlueAir - you’re gonna need it.

Via [AppleInsider]