Apple pays Creative $100 million. Creative starts making iPod accessories.

[Nospam]

Yup, this is yet another example of a patent that should have never been issued. If Apple was to pour enough time and money into it, I think they had a good chance to get it nullified.

However, it would have cost them a heck of a lot more than $100 million, and it would have dragged on for years. Paying the extortion money was the smart thing to do.

Edit:
I think they must've learned from the RIM fiasco...

 

[YamiTenshi]

What is "obvious" is questionable. Remember that Creative filed for this patent even before the first iPod came out. Now several years and dozens of mp3 players later it seems "obvious" that songs are organized in this way.

You can always argue that Apple would have come up with this system by themselves even without Creative, but that's not one of the factors of obtaining a patent. Someone could have come with with this system decades before Creative, but that doesn't matter either. Basic rule of property :First in time, first in right.

 

[plus_c]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ya8282 Probably incorrect as they plan to amoritize it over "many years" (WSJ).

Unless the actual payments don't occur in a lump sum, that statement is actually correct. Cash is, well, cash - you can't apply the principles of accrual accounting to that. I'm actually not seeing the article that you're quoting from, could you link that?

Smart move by Apple - better to pay the $100 million than to risk their back-to-school and holiday selling season. Had Creative won, they could have asked for and gotten an injunction stopping iPod imports into the United States, which would have cost a whole bunch more. (No comments on the validity or "rightness" of this claim, just sayin...)