[Any Ihnatko (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Ihnatko) is a writer of computer articles, programming manuals, and the like. His wry wit sometimes cuts quickly to the heart of the matter in question. He is credited with the original concept of the MacQuarium (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macquarium) as a potential use for outdated Mac 128K and 512K machines and published the first instructions on how to build one.]
...from:
http://www.macworld.com/article/160687/2011/06/ihnatko_icloud_god.html#lsrc…
The theology of iCloud
by Andy Ihnatko, Macworld.com Jun 26, 2011 8:00 am
We’re now in the calm, cozy eye of the iCloud storm. The anticipation and speculation period was followed by the day of the announcement and the Getting of the Facts, which was followed by the analysis of the announcement and the grinding but not-at-all necessary process of converting one’s initial enthusiasm into an endless list of reasons to be deeply concerned about the future of our great Republic.
Each of these things is stressful. The next step after this is the most stressful yet: it’s the bit when iOS 5 actually ships and we get our first chance to see how iCloud might destroy our day-to-day lives for real, instead of just hypothetically.
But as I say, at the moment the skies are blue and the winds are still. It’s a brief bit of time in which we should stroll the yard, tracing bursts of confused clucking and mooing to animals that have been halfway-embedded in trees, and effect a humanitarian rescue, and think about the larger issues while we await the possible end of the world.
Technology, when done ambitiously, is a form of art and as with painting, it’s always interesting to see how three different artists have approached the same subject. All art is autobiographical in nature, or so I heard in between naps during my Art History classes. It’s hard for me not to look at iCloud and the other new cloud services offered by Google and Amazon and think of them as emblematic of the companies’ views on the world.
What I find most remarkable about iCloud is that (unless there’s a lot more that Apple hasn’t shown us yet) it’s not a destination: it’s a highway system. Yes, technically my iCloud contains loads of information and files, but that fact chiefly articulates itself when I pick up my iPad, launch Pages, and resume work on an article right from the point I left it on my MacBook earlier in the day. We understood iDisk (and even Dropbox) as a directory on a remote server that we could attach to our local file system and use for storage. Despite Apple’s positioning of iCloud as a Huge Thing, we’re not meant to even think of iDisk at all. We’re meant to just have our data where we need it, when we need it. iCloud is the reason why when I got back to my hotel room I found that my bed had been turned down and there was a bottle of Coke already on ice. It’s not the phone call I make to a hotel service to make those things happen.
Some clouds have chrome linings
Google’s attitude is 180 degrees away from Apple’s. The same week that Apple announced iCloud, the first wave of ChromeBooks started to ship. These are the machines that exist solely as host organisms for the Chrome browser. They can do very little except connect to Google and run apps on their servers, usually with data that’s hosted by Google somewhere. They’ve also introduced Google Music, which will let me sync my music library between my Android devices… provided that I upload all 13,000 tracks to Google’s servers first.
Apple tipped its hat early by releasing iPhone and iPod Touch-compatible editions of its iOS iWork apps. Even without iCloud, it was a clear statement that Apple and Google are opposing forces destined to die with their hands wrapped around each other’s throats, like Popeye and Bluto or Lou Reed and Jimmy Buffett. Apple was clearly stating a belief that productivity apps belong on devices, with a network connecting these apps seamlessly. That’s diametrically opposed to Google’s app philosophy. Yes, using Google Docs’ web-based user interface is about as much fun as spending your last minutes of life in a disabled submarine that’s slowly sinking closer and closer to its crush depth…
(I’m being kind; I count three independent menu bars.)
…But when you host everything on the server, including apps, the user is left solely with the responsibility of launching the browser. And with a ChromeBook, it’s not even as complicated as that.
The third cloud company in this pageant is Amazon. Amazon is the friendly neighbor who will always lend you his electric weed trimmer. You would never consider that your using his weed trimmer is coincidentally compatible with his own goals (that’s Apple) or that he’s actually manipulating you into using this weed trimmer as a ploy to broaden his opportunities to exploit you later on (yes, that’s Google; well-spotted).
Amazon isn’t as simple-minded as that. It realizes that Amazon Cloud Player makes its MP3 store more valuable. But largely, Amazon’s server storage is like the power tool that it owns and often goes unused. If its customers are buying things from the store, why not give them a free Cloud Drive to put them in? Though it’s perfectly fine with them if you never ask to use it.
Yes, it’s a clumsy analogy, but I’ll go ahead and say that Amazon is Ned Flanders… only without the mustache and all the God stuff.
The three faces of cloud
In a sense, these three companies’ cloud services do represent three different concepts of God. Google is an Old Testament, theist-style cloud all the way: He through whom all blessings and punishments come, who must be praised and supplicated; without the Cloud, you are nothing and have nothing. iCloud represents more of a Deist ideal. The Cloud exists, but its presence is more to be felt than seen; if it does its job right, iCloud will instill great doubt that it even exists, or that it takes any notice of us at all.
Amazon is a form of agnosticism. You don’t know if you really believe in it or not, but you do know that on the third weekend of every month this pointy building near the center of town throws a really great bake sale.
The more I think about it, the more I’m convinced I’m on to something with these ideas about God and iCloud. Some atheists derisively describe God as “Your magic friend who lives in the clouds,” after all. I’m perfectly fine with that concept, if this new magical friend makes sure I’ll never again find myself 3000 miles from home with a hard drive that’s making crunchy noises instead of retrieving the Keynote files I’ll need for the four hours of talks I traveled there to deliver.
I mean, at the time I prayed to my previous, analog God for deliverance… and a fat lot of good that did me.
...from:
http://www.ifixit.com/blog/blog/2011/06/29/what-makes-the-thunderbolt-cable…
What Makes the Thunderbolt Cable Lightning Fast
June 29, 2011 Filed under: Hardware,Site News — miro @ 4:05 pm
It’s the chips.
And we’re not talking about the Lay’s variety. Wereceived good word from one of our friends, Ars Technica’s own Chris Foresman, that the $50Thunderbolt cable may be an active cable. He postulated that the cable may actually have chips containing firmware in it, making it more expensive to produce than your garden-variety HDMI cable — thus justifying the hefty price tag.
There was only one way to find out for sure; we hopped on over to the local Apple Store and donated $50 to the build-Apple-a-new-campusfund. A short while later, the cable was in our hands and ready to go under the knife.
And we knew exactly where to look. The cable contained a sturdy plastic sleeve on each end that looked quite suspicious. Heating up an Exacto knife worked well against the hard plastic, and we managed to remove the casing from the connector after some careful cutting/melting.
Once the casing was gone, we had to perform a significant amount of desoldering and cutting in order remove the metal surrounding the connector. Peeling back the metal (which appears to be plated brass) revealed the hardware underneath.
We found two Gennum GN2033 chips in the connector, one on each side. They were flanked by other, much smaller chips that surely added to the cable’s cost: two chips labeled S6A 1JG on one side, and chips labeled 1102F SS8370 and 131 3S on the other. Of course, there were tons of little resistors (providing impedance as needed) all around the larger chips.
We assumed that the other connector side would be identical, and we were correct. All in all, Apple’s $50 cable contained a total of 12 larger, inscribed chips, and tons of smaller electronic components.
One note: Gennum’s site mentions that their transceiver technology enables “reliable data transfer at cutting-edge speeds over low cost, thin-gauge copper cables.” Perhaps they were thinking of some other low cost cables, as we don’t think Apple’s $50 creation can be considered cheap. But, now you can at least sleep better at night knowing that there’s little chips inside your cable making it go fast. Your move, Monster Cable.
...from:
http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/20/icard-ecg-brings-heart-monitoring-to-the…
iCard ECG brings heart monitoring to the iOS device of your choice (video)
By Terrence O'Brien posted Jun 20th 2011 1:55PM
AliveCor's iPhoneECG case was pretty sweet but, being a case, could only be strapped to an iPhone 4. Doctors content with their 3GS or patients who prefer to hug an iPad to their chest will be elated to hear the company is working on a more hardware-agnostic option for your iOS heart monitoring needs. The business card-sized iCard ECG mounts to the back of your iDevice using velcro and wirelessly feeds data from its electrodes to the AliveECG app. The app automatically records 30 seconds of your heart's rhythmic pulse before uploading it to AliveCor's servers for sharing with your doctors. The bad news? They're still awaiting FDA approval, so you can't run out and pick one up just yet. But, when it does hit shelves, it looks like you'll have a choice of red or black -- so you can make sure your medical accessories match your scrubs. Check out the video after the break.
...video at:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZ3r-OoCj_8&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.engadget.c…
OR
http://preview.tinyurl.com/6c9ce2a
....and
...from: http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/20/withings-blood-pressure-monitor-for-ios-…
Withings Blood Pressure Monitor for iOS hands-on (video)
By Zach Honig posted Jun 20th 2011 9:00AM
Hands-On
Withings users not satisfied with only being able to share their weight with the world can now add blood pressure and heart rate to the mix. This iPhone-connected blood pressure monitor made its first appearance at CES, but you'll finally be able to order one of your own today. Compatible with iPhone, iPad, and iPod touch, the $129 accessory costs three to four times as much as off-the-shelf blood pressure monitors, but integrates well if you're looking to pair it with your Withings scale for a complete vitals management solution. Results can be sent to health sites like Google Health and Microsoft HealthVault, or directly to your doctor. Care to see how it works? Join us past the break for a hands-on look at the monitor, including a video comparison with the in-store vitals machine at our neighborhood Kmart.
Update: Withings wrote in to let us know that the blood pressure readings in the video below were likely inflated because we were talking, though we do appreciate the concern you've already expressed in the comments.
Withings Smart Blood Pressure Monitor for iPhone Hands-On
Even iOS newbies shouldn't have any issue getting started -- connecting the monitor to your device's dock connector launches the Withings app (or prompts you to install it, if you haven't already done so). An on-screen start button inflates the AAA-battery powered cuff, and presents your results about 30 seconds later. Colored circles indicate a possible health issue, and an FAQ screen helps to explain your results. During our Kmart test, the Withings monitor presented results of 147/93 with a heart rate of 94, compared to 133/95 with a heart rate of 96 on the in-store machine -- perhaps the c-list discounter was trying to imply that we can afford to load up on some junk food? Considering results tended to vary by a similar amount during multiple tests on the same machine, it's safe to conclude that both are accurate. The Withings Blood Pressure Monitor ships today, so early adopters could be tweeting a complete snapshot of their physical health before the week is out.
...video at: http://www.viddler.com/explore/engadget/videos/2887/
The beginning of July this year has seen major new changes announced for Microsoft Windows 8 (shipping, perhaps, in 2012) and OS X Lion (shipping in July, 2011). iOS5 will see many improvements including things like "split keyboard" when running on larger displays.
Here's an overview of iOS5, Lion, and Windows 8 in about 15 minutes.... well, OK, I guess it's more like 28 minutes if you watch all of them all the way through ::-) :
- iOS5: http://www.youtube.com/user/Apple?blend=1&ob=5#p/u/1/LLJIef-e-7g
- OS X Lion: http://www.youtube.com/user/Apple?blend=1&ob=5#p/u/2/tq2enQYTrbU
- Microsoft Windows 8: http://allthingsd.com/20110601/microsofts-windows-8-demo-from-d9-video/
Wayne Billing
Classroom Technology Support
Audio Visual and Classroom Technology Support
130 Machray Hall Building
474-6649
474-7625 (fax)
Wayne_Billing(a)umanitoba.ca
....from:
http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2011/06/microsoft-joins-pre-emptive-p…
Microsoft joins pre-emptive patent protection program
By Peter Bright | Published 3 days ago
In an effort to avoid costly patent litigation, Microsoft has become the first company to sign up to a crowdsourcing service that seeks to find prior art and eliminate patents that should not have been awarded.
The new Litigation Avoidance Program comes from Article One Partners, a startup that pays cash rewards to discoverers of prior art. Article One pays out rewards of between $5,000 and $50,000 to members of its claimed million-strong community of patent researchers, and says it has paid out more than $1.3 million so far.
So far, Article One has operated a scheme enabling those on the receiving end of patent litigation to crowdsource the search for relevant prior art; with that prior art the defendents can then seek to have the patents being wielded against them invalidated. The Litigation Avoidance Program goes a step further, proactively seeking out patents purchased by non-practising entities, and then hunting down prior art relevant to those patents. Non-practicing entities—better known as patent trolls—are those companies who perform no research and make no products, but instead buy patents and then use them in lawsuits.
The Litigation Avoidance Program should enable companies to more easily identify poor-quality patents that ought not have been issued, and use the prior art to overturn those patents and avoid costly damages awards.
Microsoft is no stranger to patent trolls; most famously, the company was ordered to pay $521 million to Eolas after Eolas sued Microsoft claiming that Internet Explorer's use of plugins infringed on an Eolas patent. Microsoft appealed and eventually entered into a settlement agreement with the patent troll, the terms of which are not public. Bart Eppenauer, Chief Patent Counsel at Microsoft, warned that "NPEs continue to actively target large technology companies and often with portfolios of questionable quality", and that the Litgation Avoidance Program would "reduce risk and potential litigation cost."
Of course, the Litigation Avoidance Program wouldn't have helped in the Eolas case—that patent withstood prior art challenges.
...from:
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news/2011/06/droiddream-light-a-malware-nigh…
DroidDream Light a malware nightmare, booted from Android Market
By Ryan Paul | Published 2 days ago
A number of malware-encumbered applications were found in the Android Market back in March, but the infestation was brought to a swift end when Google deployed its kill switch. A new variant of the same malware recently resurfaced and was identified by security researchers over the weekend. Google has responded by booting the new round of infected applications out of the Android Market.
The malware was discovered by Lookout, a mobile security company. They found just under 30 infected applications across six separate developer accounts. Several of the infected applications were existing third-party programs that the attacker copied and then repackaged with the malware.
The malware-bearing programs spanned a diverse range of functions, including a scientific calculator, a solitaire game, and a photo enhancement tool. Malicious developer Magic Photo Studio had the most colorful assortment of infected apps, including a soundboard called Sex Sound and a photo gallery program called Beauty Breasts.
The infected applications appear to have been widely downloaded prior to being shut down by Google. Lookout estimates that between 30,000 and 120,000 users have been affected by the attack. We used Google Cache to examine the Android Market pages for several of the malicious apps. The Beauty Breasts program had a 3.5 star rating and been installed between 1,000 and 5,000 times.
The new malware is based on the same code that was used back in March, but it is simpler and has some limitations that make it less potentially dangerous. The original March flavor would attempt to root the victim's phone so that it could install additional software without requiring intervention by the user. The new variant still has the capability to download and install additional software, but it doesn't take root access and consequently has to prompt the user before it can install anything.
Lookout is calling the variant DroidDream Light. Like the previous version, Droid Dream Light will send information back to a command-and-control server. The malware can apparently do its dirty work even if the user never actually runs the application. It hooks into the platform's event system APIs and will launch itself as a background process when the device's call state changes—like when a call is received.
It's worth noting that hooking into the phone's state requires a special permission that is listed when the user installs the application from the Android Market. A savvy user who is paying attention to the permissions would likely realize that phone state monitoring isn't needed for looking at images of breasts and would hopefully think twice before installing the program.
This latest round of Android malware makes it seem like the problem isn't going to go away. Although Google responded to the threat very quickly after it was detected, the number of users who downloaded the applications is still troubling. Armed with a remote kill switch and full control over the Android Market, Google can address threats as they arise, but can't really provide a proactive safety net.
...from:
http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/03/adobe-ceo-has-no-beef-with-apple-no-answ…
Adobe CEO has no beef with Apple, no answer for poor Flash performance on Android (video)
By Amar Toor posted Jun 3rd 2011 6:06AM
The Adobe-Apple Flash war used to be one of the juiciest catfights around, but, much like two aging boxers, both sides now appear willing to act like adults put it all behind them. Speaking at yesterday's D9 conference in Palos Verdes, California, Adobe head Shantanu Narayen confirmed that he and Steve Jobs have reached an unofficial armistice, bringing an end to their prolonged war of words. According to the CEO, Apple's Flash issues stemmed from the company's "business model," rather than any legitimate concerns over quality. "It's control over the app store that's at issue here," Narayen said, implying that Flash's wide-ranging platform compatibility may not have jibed with the Cupertino ethos. He went on to remind moderator Walt Mossberg that developers can still use Adobe's AIR software to get their products to the App Store, adding that his company is looking forward to the rise of HTML5 and "actively contributing" to its development.
Mossberg, meanwhile, seemed to blindside Narayen when he brought up Flash's poor performance on Android devices. "I have yet to test a single one where Flash tests really well," the columnist claimed. "I'm sorry, but it's true." Narayen sputtered a bit, before pointing to the BlackBerry PlayBook as an example of the progress that Flash has made. When Mossberg reminded him that the PlayBook doesn't run on Android, the CEO not-so-subtly sidestepped the question by emptily declaring that Adobe's mission is simply to provide people with the best tools to create content. Apparently satisfied with this non-answer, Mossberg changed the subject back to Apple, allowing Narayen to wax poetic about their new Pax Romana -- and, perhaps, to breathe a sigh of relief. See the full interview after the break.
http://video.allthingsd.com/video/d9-video-adobe-ceo----flash-war-is-over/7…
Yesterday, Apple automatically pushed an update to their "File Quarantine" (aka Xprotect) anti-malware daemon, in response to the new variant of the Trojan / Ransomware "OSX.MacDefender".
For those who don't know, "File Quarantine" was first released with introduction of Mac OS X 10.6 (Snow Leopard) in August 2009 but has been included is subsequent updates to Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard). If you wish to read further, here are two related Knowledge Base articles.
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3662http://support.apple.com/kb/HT4651
Cheers.
-------------
Doug Hamilton, BA, MA, ASP
Senior Apple Computer Consultant
Computers-on-Campus; Univ. of Manitoba
204-474-6196 (Ph.)
204-474-7556 (Fax)
http://www.umanitoba.ca/bookstore/
....Apple says, "We paid you your money. Go away and leave them [iOS developers] alone." Lodsys moving on to Android developers.
...from:
http://www.macworld.com/article/160030/2011/05/apple_lodsys_license.html?ls…
Apple to Lodsys: 'App makers are protected by [our] license'
Posted on May 23, 2011 2:00 pm by Lex Friedman, Macworld Staff, Macworld.com
A little more than a week after iOS developers were threatened with legal action by a company that holds various patents, Apple’s legal department has struck back.
On May 13, many iOS developers reported receiving FedEx packages containing a threat that they risked patent-infringement lawsuits if they didn’t pay Lodsys to license a patent covering in-app purchasing and other app-related matters.
In a letter sent Monday (read the full text of the letter here) to patent-holder Lodsys and its CEO Mark Small, Apple says its existing license for patents covering in-app purchases applies to all iOS app makers as well.
The crux of Apple’s letter, from senior vice president and general counsel Bruce Sewell, is right in its opening paragraph, which reads in part: “Apple is undisputedly licensed to these patents and the Apple App Makers are protected by that license. There is no basis for Lodsys’ infringement allegations against Apple’s App Makers. In addition to stating that Apple would share the letter with developers—which it has—the company also says that it “is fully prepared to defend Apple’s license rights.”
Though it runs for three pages, Sewell could have ended his letter there. Lodsys has already publicly stated that Apple licenses its patents; the companies agree on that. Apple’s contention, which runs counter to Lodsys’s previously published view, is that Apple’s license covers iOS developers, too.
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.
But that’s not Sewell’s only point; his argument is twofold: Apple’s license to the Lodsys patents covers iOS developers, and the alleged patent infringement isn’t really occurring anyway. By way of example, Sewell cites Lodsys’s claims regarding alleged violations of its U.S. Patent No. 7,222,078, which Apple says “covers two-way interaction with the user and elicits user feedback.” Sewell writes:
Under your reading of the claim as set out in your letters, the allegedly infringing acts require the use of Apple APIs to provide two-way communication, the transmission of an Apple ID and other services to permit access for the user to the App store, and the use of Apple’s hardware, iOS, and servers.
In other words: These developers aren’t infringing Lodsys’s patents, because they’re using Apple software and hardware to provide the functionality that Lodsys alleged needed licensing. Apple’s point is that, since the technology is Apple’s, Apple’s license is sufficient. Sewell makes the same point again regarding another alleged example of infringement:
Claim 1 also claims a memory that stores the results of the user interaction and a communication element to carry those results to a central location. Once again, Apple provides, under the infringement theories set out in your letters, the physical memory in which user feedback is stored and, just as importantly, the APIs that allow transmission of that user feedback to and from the App Store, over an Apple server, using Apple hardware and software. Indeed, in the notice letters to App Makers that we have been privy to, Lodsys itself relies on screenshots of the App Store to purportedly meet this claim element.
Apple’s argument is thus fairly straightforward. The company licensed its use of the Lodsys patents, and the developers that Lodsys alleges infringe those patents in fact leverage Apple’s licensing, since any behaviors covered by the patents are actually driven by Apple’s technology, and not the developers’.
Citing the Quanta Computer, Inc. v. LG Electronics, Inc. 2008 Supreme Court case, Sewell writes that:
…because [the discussed] 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… Therefore, Apple requests that Lodsys immediately withdraw all notice letters sent to Apple App Makers and cease its false assertions that the App Makers’ use of licensed Apple products and services in any way constitute infringement of any Lodsys patent.
Obviously, Apple’s firm letter to Lodsys doesn’t make the issue go away. Lodsys may force Apple’s hand by going forward with threatened litigation against App Store developers. But Apple’s letter at least offers some reassurance to iOS developers that the company takes the issue seriously, and that the company intends to defend its developers against such patent legal wrangling. Lodsys’s response, of course, remains to be seen.
Developers react
Developer reaction to the news was swift. TLA Systems developer James Thomson, who broke the story when he received a letter from Lodsys, expressed a feeling of great relief.
“I am extremely relieved that Apple has stood up for its developers against these patently unfair claims by Lodsys,” Thomson told Macworld. “I always believed they would, but it’s a huge weight off my shoulders to see it written in black and white. The last ten days have been some of the most stressful of my professional career, and I’d just like to say thanks to Apple and all our customers and friends who have been highly supportive of us during this time.”
Ken Landau, the President of MobileAge and another recipient of Lodsys’s legal threat, told Macworldthat Apple’s letter is “real good for us developers… I’m really very happy. Apple did the right thing.”
“I’ve never seen iOS developers so excited about the walled garden,” Red Sweater Software’s Daniel Jalkut wrote on Twitter.
“I should write to Steve Jobs more often,” tweeted Iconfactory developer Craig Hockenberry. Earlier in the day Hockenberry posted an open letter to Steve Jobs on his blog where he referred to companies like Lodsys as “greedy predators.”
[Updated several times on 5/23 to add developer reaction and more analysis of the letter. Macworld editorial director Jason Snell contributed to this report.]
= - = - = - = - = - = - = - =
...from:
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2386065,00.asp
May 27, 2011 07:21pm EST 23 Comments
Is Lodsys Claiming Android Developers Infringe Its Patents?
By Mark Hachman
Lodsys, which has targeted iOS developers and threatening them with legal action, has apparently taken aim against Android developers as well.
In a post to an Android developer's board, "markusn82" claimed that his organization had received similar letters from Lodsys, claiming that the developer infringed on the Lodsys patents as well.
"We recently implemented in-app purchases for our Android application and several weeks later we received a letter from Lodsys, claiming that we infringed on their patents," the developer wrote.
Lodsys made headlines recently for contacting iOS developers and threatening legal action for patent infringement. The patent in question covers "methods and systems for gathering information from units of a commodity across a network," which translates into in-app purchases, like upgrades from lite to paid versions. Even though Apple has licenses for Lodsys patents, Lodsys argued that those licenses don't extend to app developers.
However, this would be the first reported case of an Android developer being hit with a charge of infringement by Lodsys.
"Have any other Android developers out there been sent a letter? Has Google taken any action on this issue yet?" "markusn82" wrote. "Has Google given direction to any developers that have been hit by this? We are obviously a small shop and are not financially capable of defending ourselves over a litigation."
This week, Apple stepped in and defended its developers, claiming that its own license indemnified those developers who wrote for the Apple platform.
"Apple is undisputedly licensed to these patent and the Apple App Makers are protected by that license," Bruce Sewell, Apple's general counsel, wrote in a letter posted online by MacWorld. "There is no basis for Lodsys' infringement allegations against Apple's App Makers."
Lodsys has a "fundamental misapprehension regarding Apple's license and the way Apple's products work," Sewell wrote. He outlined why Apple is within its rights to offer in-app purchases for its developers and ordered Lodsys to "withdraw your outstanding threats to the App Makers and cease and desist from any further threats to Apple's customers and partners."
"Because Apple is licensed under Lodsys' patents to offer such technology to its App Makers, the App Makers are entitled to use this technology free from any infringement claims by Lodsys," Sewell added.
Lodsys claimed that there was indeed justification, in a series of blog posts. "The economic gains provided by the Lodsys inventions (increase in revenue through additional sales, or decrease in costs to service the customer) are being enjoyed by the business that provides the product or service that interacts with the user," the company wrote. "Since Lodsys patent rights are of value to that overall solution, it is only fair to get paid by the party that is accountable for the entire solution and which captures the value (rather than a technology supplier or a retailer)."
Lodsys representatives didn't respond to requests for comment.
