Stereo-headset inventor Koss sued Apple last month on charges of violating five wireless headphone patents. The lawsuit targets both AirPods and Beats wireless headphones.
Apple is now making a comeback with a six-point outfit. Five of the offenses required the court to rule that Apple did not infringe on each of the patents listed in the original lawsuit, while the sixth one stated that Koss had no right to sue anyway …
Apple Patent reported that Koss met Apple several times, these meetings took place under a confidentiality agreement. Under the terms of that agreement, neither party may use anything they have learned in meetings for litigation purposes. Apple says this is exactly what Koss did.
Squeeze? It was Koss, not Apple, insisting on the privacy agreement, so Koss could have undermined his own lawsuit.
In 2017, Koss reached out to Apple in an attempt to participate in licensing discussions. Despite Apple’s request that all discussions be conducted without restriction, Koss asserts that the parties enter into a written Privacy Agreement. The parties eventually signed such an agreement, with the effective date of August 6, 2017 (“Confidential Agreement”). In the Privacy Agreement, Koss and Apple have agreed that neither party will “use or attempt to use any Communication. [between the parties], or its existence, in a lawsuit or any other administrative or court proceeding for any purpose. ”
One possible reason for this outrageous decision is that Koss wants to prevent Apple from going to court to dismiss the infringement allegations before any lawsuits.
Under the terms of the Privacy Agreement, while the agreement is in effect, Apple cannot advise the Koss Court to threaten to file an unfounded infringement claim or to require the Court to declare Apple’s rights and resolve the matter. the legal uncertainty Apple faces. The privacy agreement also restricts how Apple can disclose and use the existence and content of discussions. But the agreement also protects Apple – Koss later is not allowed to use the fact that Apple has agreed to discuss with Koss or the content of the discussion against Apple in litigation.
In other words, having enticed Apple into discussions, disclosing information, and neglected some of its legal options, Koss cannot use Apple’s participation to counter it as a ” method “to make requests in the lawsuit later. However, that’s exactly what Koss did.
While Koss filed his lawsuit in Texas, Apple filed a lawsuit in California and is asking for a jury trial. It looks like the Texas court will be waiting for the outcome of the California case, even though it was filed later, as that could have brought the initial case to life.
I suggested earlier that the inventor of stereo headphones appears to be claiming ownership of the underlying technology used in all wireless headphones and may have decided to start with the company that has the deepest money bag before following other brands. If so, it could be a strategic error, since Apple is not well known as the one who solves such cases, preferring to sue them instead.
FTC: We use affiliate income automatically. Than.
See 9to5Mac on YouTube for more news about Apple: