You must log in or register to comment.
From another article I read, these patents sound extremely basic and to be simple concepts, the kind of things that shouldn’t be patentable.
Some of the listed patents included stuff like round speaker, that connects to the internet, and can be controlled by vocal commands. Not exactly innovative stuff that needs to be safeguarded against thieves.
It’s the same nonsense as the Sonos lawsuits against Google. Controlling the volume of multiple speakers playing the same content through an app is far too broad, yet here we are.
Didn’t that lawsuit get thrown out?
No. Sonos was able to prove google stole some of its patented ideas. As a result google has removed a lot of features related to that string of lawsuits. It wasn’t just one. It’s been an ongoing thing.
“Sonos first sued Google in 2020, accusing the tech giant of copying its technology in wireless audio devices including Google Home and Chromecast Audio. Sonos won $32.5 million in damages from Google in San Francisco in May after a federal jury found that Google’s devices infringed one of the company’s patents.”
https://www.theverge.com/2023/5/26/23739273/google-sonos-smart-speaker-patent-lawsuit-ruling
Google did eventually win a case and have some of the stuff walked back. https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/google-wins-reprieve-325-mln-verdict-sonos-patent-fight-2023-10-09 CV
I mean the first line in the Reuters article is:
“Oct 9 (Reuters) - A California federal judge has thrown out a $32.5 million verdict for wireless-audio company Sonos (SONO.O) against rival Google (GOOGL.O) after finding that the Sonos patents at the heart of the case were unenforceable.”
That sounds like the case was thrown out.
I put the Reuters article in to show that yes a court case was thrown out. But that’s only one case. There have been several in different jurisdictions.
“This marked the “fifth jurisdiction (including Canada, the Netherlands, Germany, and France) in which Google has sued Sonos and lost,” Sonos’ Chief Financial Officer and General Counsel, Eddie Lazarus, was quoted by Reuters as saying.”
Yeah but what are you gonna do? It’s like Limp Bizkit
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Nov 8 (Reuters) - Amazon (AMZN.O) on Wednesday was ordered to pay $46.7 million in damages by a jury in Delaware federal court that found the tech giant’s Alexa virtual assistant violates patents related to speech recognition and natural language processing.
The jury determined that Amazon infringed patents belonging to VB Assets, whose predecessor VoiceBox Technologies created voice-control software for companies including carmakers Toyota, Chrysler and Dodge and GPS makers TomTom and Magellan.
VB accused Amazon of copying its innovations and infringing four patents covering advances in voice-based search technology.
Amazon launched Alexa in its Echo smart speakers in 2014 and has since integrated the voice assistant into other devices and mobile apps.
VB said in its complaint that Amazon’s conduct “crushed” VoiceBox’s chances to “promote and build a business” around its patents.
For Amazon: David Hadden, Saina Shamilov, Ravi Ranganath, Vigen Salmastlian and Allen Wang of Fenwick & West
The original article contains 275 words, the summary contains 150 words. Saved 45%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
