{"id":6134,"date":"2011-05-16T18:37:22","date_gmt":"2011-05-16T22:37:22","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/rbachnet.wwwmi3-ss40.a2hosted.com\/?p=6134"},"modified":"2022-12-30T16:08:15","modified_gmt":"2022-12-30T21:08:15","slug":"25-tech-firms-sued-for-breaching-3g-patents","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/rbach.net\/index.php\/25-tech-firms-sued-for-breaching-3g-patents\/","title":{"rendered":"25 Tech Firms Sued for Breaching 3G Patents"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"25TechEye<\/em><\/a> points out<\/a> a case started by Golden Bridge Technology (GBT) which lists 25 tech firms alleged to breach a number of 3G patents<\/strong>. In the case, Golden Bridge Technology (1:11-cv-00165-SLR, U.S. District Court District of Delaware)\u00a0 GBT alleges the companies have breached patents 6,574,267 B1, and 7,359,427 on standards for 3G wireless<\/strong> communications including devices and base stations. The defendants, the filing says, have refused to license the patents<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

GBT said its\u00a0developments were adopted by 3GPP “as an important and necessary part of the 3G and UMTS standards.<\/em>” GBT is seeking damages from the defendant’s alleged past and present infringement<\/strong>. All of the defendants, in one way or another, use GBT\u2019s technology, it alleges.<\/p>\n

The defendants in the case are:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Amazon<\/a> (AMZN<\/a>),<\/li>\n
  2. Acer<\/a>,<\/li>\n
  3. Barnes & Noble<\/a> (BKS)<\/span>,<\/li>\n
  4. Deutsche Telekom,<\/li>\n
  5. Dell<\/a> (DELL<\/a>),<\/li>\n
  6. Exedea,<\/li>\n
  7. Garmin<\/a> (GRMN<\/a>),<\/li>\n
  8. Hewlett Packard<\/a> (HPQ<\/a>),<\/li>\n
  9. HTC<\/a>,<\/li>\n
  10. Huawei<\/a>,<\/li>\n
  11. Lenovo<\/a> (LNVGY<\/a>)<\/li>\n
  12. LG Electronics<\/a>,<\/li>\n
  13. Novatel<\/a> (NVTL<\/a>),<\/li>\n
  14. Option NV<\/a> (OPTI<\/a>),<\/li>\n
  15. Palm,<\/li>\n
  16. Panasonic<\/a> (PCRFY<\/a>),<\/li>\n
  17. Pantech<\/a>,<\/li>\n
  18. Research in Motion<\/a> (RIMM<\/a>),<\/li>\n
  19. Sharp<\/a> (SHCAY<\/a>),<\/li>\n
  20. Sierra Wireless<\/a> (SWIR<\/a>),<\/li>\n
  21. Sony<\/a> (SNE<\/a>),<\/li>\n
  22. Sony Ericsson,<\/li>\n
  23. T-Mobile<\/a>,<\/li>\n
  24. UTStarcom<\/a> (USTI) and<\/li>\n
  25. ZTE<\/a> (783<\/a>).<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    In addition, it wants treble damages against T-Mobile, HTC, LG, Palm, RIM, and Sony Ericsson, and lawyers costs.<\/p>\n

    rb-<\/p>\n

    Like I have pointed out, again<\/a>\u00a0and again<\/a>, many firm’s business plans have de-evolved into patent trolling. <\/em><\/p>\n

    Does GBT deserve to collect a tax from every innovator?<\/strong><\/p>\n

    Related articles<\/h6>\n