The Patent Troll by the name of Dynamic Hosting Company is suing Apple for allegedly infringing patents 6,216,156 and 5,826,026 which are both titled "Internet Message Communicator with Direct Output to a Hard Copy Device." The patents were originally owned and filed by Connect-One back in 1995.

The Troll that now legally owns these patents is asking the court to find Apple guilty of patent infringement (so that they can skim off a nice never-ending royalty for doing little else but sue). The troll is also taking a shot by asking the court to triple the damages for Apple's "willful infringement."

The complaint filed before the court basically covers the following which was abstracted from the document:

Apple made, had made, used, imported, provided, supplied, distributed, sold, and/or offered for sale mobile phones with a visual voicemail app that connects over cellular networks (including, based on information on its or other websites, at least the following models: iPhone (1st generation), iPhone 3G, iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4, iPhone 4S, iPhone 5, iPhone 5C, iPhone 5S, iPhone 6, iPhone 6 Plus) that directly infringed one or more claims of the 026 patent.

In addition, customers of Apple used mobile phones with a visual voicemail app that connects over cellular networks (including, based on information on its or other websites, at least the following models: iPhone (1st generation), iPhone 3G, iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4, iPhone 4S, iPhone 5, iPhone 5C, iPhone 5S, iPhone 6, iPhone 6 Plus), thus directly infringing one or more claims of the 026 patent.

These components in these mobile phones with a visual voicemail app that connects over cellular networks constitute a material part of the invention of one or more asserted claims of the 026 patent and are not staple articles of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use. These distinct and separate components are used only to carry out the visual voicemail functionality in an infringing way and not any other mobile phone functionality.

The patent infringement case presented in today's report was filed in the Texas Eastern District Court. The Presiding Judge in this case is noted as being Judge Rodney Gilstrap.

A Note about Patent Trolls and Action Being Taken

A 2011 study showed that Patent Trolls cost tech companies $29 Billion and a 2012 study made the case that patent trolling was out of control. In the first half 2013, Apple remained the #1 Target of Patent Trolls. In the second half of 2013 Apple remained in the top three.

On December 5, 2013, The US House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed the "Innovation Act" bill on Thursday aimed at discouraging frivolous lawsuits by patent holders. The move was backed by companies like Apple, IBM, Cisco and Google. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R., Va.) sponsored the bill, which won strong bipartisan support in passing by a 325-91 vote. Goodlatte said his bill "takes meaningful steps to address the abusive practices that have damaged our patent system and resulted in significant economic harm to our nation."

In Addition to the new act, the FTC is currently examining the practices of patent trolls or Patent Assertion Entities (PAEs) which are firms with a business model based primarily on purchasing patents and then attempting to generate revenue by asserting the intellectual property against persons who are already practicing the patented technologies. The FTC is conducting the study in order to further one of the agency's key missions—to examine cutting-edge competition and consumer protection topics that may have a significant effect on the U.S. economy.

Patently Apple presents only a brief summary of certain legal cases/ lawsuits which are part of the public record for journalistic news purposes. Readers are cautioned that Patently Apple does not offer an opinion on the merit of the case. A lawyer should be consulted for any further details or analysis. About Comments: Patently Apple reserves the right to post, dismiss or edit comments. On most legal cases, comments will be closed. See our Legal Archives for other patent infringement cases.