News
Apple in legal dispute with Burst over digital media patents
Burst.com, which develops video and audio delivery software, said it was sued by Apple on Wednesday for declaratory relief, alleging patent invalidity or non-infringement. The suit, filed in U.S. District Court in San Francisco, follows “a breakdown in protracted negotiations for issuance of a license of Burst’s patents to cover Apple’s iPod and iTunes products,” according to the company.
“Burst anticipates responding to the complaint and filing a counterclaim for patent infringement shortly,” the company said in a statement late Thursday. “Burst remains committed to the enforcement of its intellectual property and looks forward to successfully resolving this litigation through a license covering Apple’s Quicktime, iPod and iTunes products, including Apple’s iTunes Music Store.”
In March of last year Burst settled a major patent and antitrust suit against Microsoft. The software giant paid Burst $60 million to license its patents. “Since the Microsoft settlement, the company has been in patent licensing discussions with several companies engaged in the distribution of audio and video content on computer networks,” Burst said.
Related Stories
- Apple exec Cue accepts Grammy honoring Steve Jobs
- Apple requests audits of Foxconn by FLA
- Apple sues Samsung, seeks to block Galaxy Nexus in U.S.
- Apple sues Motorola in U.S. over Qualcomm patents
- Motorola loses third patent case against Apple in Germany
- Apple airs new Siri-focused iPhone 4S ads
Comments
If you have a comment, news tip, advertising inquiry, or coverage request, a question about iPods/iPhones/iPad or accessories, or if you sell or market iPod/iPhone/iPad products or services, read iLounge's Comments + Questions policies before posting, and fully identify yourself if you do. We will delete comments containing advertising, astroturfing, trolling, personal attacks, offensive language, or other objectionable content, then ban and/or publicly identify violators.
Recent News
- Apple exec Cue accepts Grammy honoring Steve Jobs
- ThinkGeek intros iCade 8-bitty game controller
- Apple requests audits of Foxconn by FLA
- Apple sues Samsung, seeks to block Galaxy Nexus in U.S.
- AT&T doubles upgrade fee to $36
- Apple TV supplies constrained, hint at new model?
- 16GB iPad 2 sees deep discount ahead of new model
- Apple sues Motorola in U.S. over Qualcomm patents
- iLounge Weekly coming early Monday, giveaway reminder
- iBackFlip launches Somersault case for iPad
Recent Reviews
- FLOS / Philippe Starck D’E-light
- Twelve South HoverBar for iPad 2
- Cygnett Apollo for iPhone 4/4S
- Case-Mate Pop! ID for iPhone 4/4S
- Case-Mate Pop! for iPhone 4/4S
- Case-Mate Pop! With Stand for iPhone 4/4S
- Solid Line Products RightShift 2 Removable Keyboard Case for iPad 2
- Spigen SGP Kuel F60Q Battery Pack
- Just Mobile Highway + Highway Pro for iPod, iPhone + iPad
- Speck CandyShell and CandyShell Satin for iPhone 4/4S
Recent Articles
- iOS Gems: Adventures of Tintin, Reckless Racing 2 + Scramble With Friends
- Ask iLounge 2-3-12
- Making The Case For - And Against - An Apple iTV Television
- Instant Expert: iTunes U for iPad, iPhone and iPod touch
- Instant Expert: Secrets & Features of iBooks 2.0
- iLounge’s 2012 CES Best of Show Awards: Honorable Mentions
- iLounge’s 2012 CES Best of Show Awards: iPod, iPhone, iPad + Mac
- iOS Gems: Bug Princess, Dora Hops Into Phonics, It’s A Small World, Sleepy Jack + X Is For X-Ray
- The Complete Guide to Managing iTunes Videos
- Editorial: As CES Grows, Will Microsoft’s Loss Be Apple’s Gain?
1
Interesting…can’t agree on a price, even after all that time negotiating? Then sue the a** off the other guy and hope the courts find in your favor. What’s that argument, again? We’re Apple, the ‘GOOD’ guys, and therefore we shouldn’t be bothered with paltry things like patent infringements; however, we’re not sure if it’s non-infringement or invalid patents, so we’ll sue for one or the other. Please, Your Honor, select what you feel is best (for us).
Also interesting that MSFT didn’t bother to fight and just settled with Burst.
Posted by flatline response on January 6, 2006 at 3:46 AM (PDT)
2
Wow, this is BIG news! It means Apple IS working on a streaming movie store, as that’s what the Burst patents are about, streaming media.
Posted by KenC on January 6, 2006 at 4:10 AM (PDT)
3
Good deduction kenc. We just might have a pay per play movie network on iTunes in the next 2 years
Posted by Jonathan Keim on January 6, 2006 at 5:51 AM (PDT)
4
@flatline response
The interesting thing is that Burst apparently holds a patent on streaming audio/video over a network. Something that I remember doing in the late 80s/early 90s.
As for Apple suing for both non-infringment or invalid, that’s normal. Basically what they’re saying is that they don’t believe the patent is valid, but even if the court determines that it is, they don’t believe they are infringing on the patent. If they don’t sue for both, they’d loose the opportunity to sue for the other one if they lost because both are directly related to the same action, so they are required to be litigated together.
Posted by Theo on January 6, 2006 at 6:49 AM (PDT)