[SoftwareMaven]

From the letter:

Apple intends to share this letter and the information set out herein with its App Makers and is fully prepared to defend Apple’s license rights.

The letter explicitly states they think their rights include being able to let developers use the technology.

Because Lodsys’s threats are based on the purchase or use of Apple products and services licensed under the Agreement, and because those Apple products and services, under the reading articulated in your letters, entirely or substantially embody each of Lodsys’s patents, Lodsys’s threatened claims are barred by the doctrines of patent exhaustion and first sale.

At this point, isn't Apple saying there is nothing to hold developers blamess for?

Apple intends to share this letter and the information set out herein with its App Makers and is fully prepared to defend Apple’s license rights.

This seems pretty clear (if not within full legalese) that Apple will go after Lodsys if they don't retract the letters.

Bigger question for me (as a legal noob): What is Apple's recourse? Is it to sue Lodsys for breach of contract? Would a cease and desist request be part of that?

[grellas]

Apple likely can sue Lodsys for declaratory relief if Lodsys persists in its claims against developers. This would be an action by Apple against Lodsys seeking a court judgment that its license covers the challenged activities and a related declaration that no infringement exists by reason of such activities. Developers clearly benefit from any such action by Apple but this is a little different from committing to hold the developers themselves harmless from any legal action. A "hold harmless" would mean that Apple commits to defend any developer who is sued and, further, agrees to pay any damages suffered should that developer be found to infringe. Since Apple has not yet committed to do this (indeed, I believe its contract terms say that it will not do this), in theory, the developers might still be sued and have to defend their individual cases even if Apple does bring a declaratory relief lawsuit against Lodsys. Of course, a court in any such action might act to consolidate the various lawsuits and stay those brought against the developers pending resolution of Apple's primary suit. My point is not that developers are not helped by Apple's stance, as they plainly are. It is only to state that Apple has not yet committed to cover them against all harm here, regardless of what Lodsys might do. Apple might choose to take this further step as events develop but the letter as worded is more guarded than that. I think Apple is waiting to see if the in terrorem effect of its letter will solve this before considering further options.

[SoftwareMaven]

Thanks for clarifying! You are a great asset to the community here.

[andybak]

Yes that was great.

You might want to consider hitting the return key a few more times with posts of that length though. :)

[Tyrannosaurs]

Are hold harmlesses common?

I'd have thought they'd be exceedingly rare in cases like this given the open ended liability that could result, certainly as part of an opening gambit.

[Philip_M]

Why does everyone assume that Lodsys is incorrect? If you sell someone a patent they can't arbitrarily declare everyone else owns that patent too. If apple wanted developers to be allowed to use lodsys patents they should have made it clear when they bought the rights to this bullshit patent that they could arbitrarily allow anyone they wanted rights to the patent..

[Turing_Machine]

Isn't that exactly what Apple is claiming? "Under its license, Apple is entitled to offer these licensed products and services to its customers and business partners, who, in turn, have the right to use them."