Stereo headphone inventor Koss sued Apple last month, claiming infringement of five patents on wireless headphones. The lawsuit is aimed at both AirPods and Beats wireless headphones.
Apple now strikes back with a six-point countersuit. Five of the counts are asking a court to rule that Apple did not infringe on the five patents mentioned in the original lawsuit, while a sixth claims that Koss has no right to sue in any case. …
Patently Apple reports that Koss met with Apple several times, these meetings taking place under a confidentiality agreement. Under the terms of that agreement, neither party could use what they learned in the meetings for litigation purposes. Apple says this is exactly what Koss did.
The twist? It was Koss, not Apple, who insisted on the confidentiality agreement, so Koss may have sabotaged his own lawsuit.
In 2017, Koss sued Apple in a proven attempt to participate in licensing discussions. Despite Apple’s request that all conversations be conducted without restrictions, Koss insists that the parties enter into a written Confidentiality Agreement. The parties have finally signed such an agreement, with an effective date of 6 August 2017 (the “Confidentiality Agreement”). In the Confidentiality Agreement, Koss and Apple agreed that neither party would “use or attempt to use” communication [between the parties], if its existence, in a court case other than an administrative as a court going for what purpose. ”
One possible reason for this early decision is that Koss wanted to prevent Apple from going to court to dismiss the infringement claims prior to any lawsuit.
Under the terms of the Confidentiality Agreement, while the agreement was in force, Apple could not advise threats from a Koss Court to file unfounded infringement claims or ask a court to declare Apple’s rights and the legal uncertainty it faced. resolved. The Confidentiality Agreement also limited how Apple could disclose and use the existence and content of the discussions. But the agreement also protected Apple – Koss could not later use the fact that Apple had agreed to a conversation with Koss, as the content of the discussion, against Apple in court.
In other words, after Apple agreed to engage in conversations, disclose information and disclose some of its legal options in advance, Koss could not use Apple’s participation as a “gotcha” to sue in a later lawsuit. . However, that’s exactly what Koss did.
While Koss is filing her lawsuit in Texas, Apple has filed the countersuit in California, requesting a jury trial. It seems likely that the court in Texas would wait for the outcome of the California case, even if it was filed later, because that would have to make the original lawsuit.
I suggested earlier that the inventor of stereo headphones turned out to own the basic technology used in all wireless headphones, and may have decided to start the business with the deepest pockets before going to other markets. If so, that may have been a strategic mistake, as Apple is not known for settling such cases, and would rather litigate instead.
FTC: We use revenue earned by auto-affiliate links. More.
Watch 9to5Mac on YouTube for more Apple news:
