[Tyrannosaurs]

You say that but it's not just Apple that's being talked about - they've pointed out that Google and Microsoft have also licensed the technology and other large companies such as HP have been contacted about the fact that they haven't.

This isn't an Apple issue, this is an industry wide issue. Apple owning the patent would make the issue go away for Apple but it might actually make it worse for other app stores (if Apple decided to be a dick about it).

On the surface this feels remarkably broad and uninnovative as patents go (similar to the Amazon one click one which I believe was recently said to be invalid - potentially pending an appeal from them).

If this is the case (and it's hard to know without knowing more detail and more law than I do) then it really needs to be fought and overturned.

It would be nice to see the big players - Apple, Google and Microsoft - setting up some sort of fund to allow the small developers to fight this properly for everyone's benefit.

The actions of patent trolls might be curtailed if they knew that there was a distinct possibility that the next letter they sent off to a one man software house was going to be met with an army of the most vicious lawyers money can buy queuing up to kick your ass from here to kingdom come.

Does US law allow for 3rd party funding of such cases?

[ZeroGravitas]

Lodsys say that Apple, Microsoft and Google are "licensed", but they don't make clear whether those companies actually paid for a licence, or if they were granted it freely by Lodsys as part of a PR campaign to make them look bad for abandoning their developers.

[Tyrannosaurs]

Lodsys don't care about making Apple look bad.

They're patent trolls, they care about making money. If anything they'd want to avoid upsetting Apple because the minute Apple's legal and financial muscle gets involved things are a lot lot harder if you're Lodsys.

[ZeroGravitas]

Not if Apple's "financial muscle" decides it's easier/quicker/cheaper to buy Lodsys out than to let the uncertainty hang over their developer community. They're fairly clearly communicating "we are only in this for the money" in their blog posts. They clearly have been thinking of the best way for them to make money from these patents (which IV used to own but clearly didn't feel they could profitably licence or sue on the basis of) and creating PR problems for Apple that can be solved at a high price seems pretty good to me.

[jonbro]

I didn't realize how true this was, in reading this page this morning, I decided that he was just lying about Google, Apple and MS licensing the patent, of course they don't need to do anything for him to grant them license. It would probably be good for him to show some proof of the license, but I don't expect him to.

Also, at the percentages that he is seeking, how much does he truthfully expect to get out of something like pCalc. I don't know how much it is selling, but I kinda expect that it is a bit south of 1Mil.

Is there any resolution to this situation in a similar way that EA games shut down the "Edge" trademark (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edge_Games). I hope so.

[dominikb]

How would it look if Microsoft and Google stood up to "help" and fight for Apple just because Apple's app ecosystem has unresolved patent issues? Hypocritical as it is, obviously they will stay quiet, they want Apple to be troubled for their benefit.

[Tyrannosaurs]

Google and Microsoft should stand up because the same issue applies to them (unless you believe that every Android developer utilising any form of in-app purchase is licensed too).

If the guy is successful with Apple then it's inconceivable that they're not next so a little proactivity is probably the best way forward.

At the very least they should be putting together a strategy,