14 DAY TRIAL // Single Touch Systems Inc., a provider of media solutions for mobile devices, today announced that on September 8th, 2011, the company issued a “Letter of Notification” to Apple Inc. regarding Single Touch’s issued patents directed to streaming and routing media.
Single Touch Systems touts itself as an innovative mobile solutions provider serving retailers, advertisers and brands.
Their multi-channel messaging gateway aids marketers in reaching consumers on all types of connected devices, according to the company's profile.
It does so through “patented technologies and a modular, adaptable platform,” says Single Touch.
No specifics are given in the company’s press release (such as what that letter actually says), other than the patent numbers supposedly being infringed upon by the Cupertino, California technology giant.
U.S. Patent numbers include 7,054,949; 7,191,244; 7,689,706 and 8,015,307, for those who are willing to search them in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office database.
According to Single Touch, the letter was sent by their attorneys, Polsinelli Shughart, P.C.
The company acknowledges that Apple is a leader in the digital music market, in the mobile phone industry, as well as in the tablet market with its iPad 2, described as “a leading influence in mobile media.”
It then goes to note that “On July 7, 2011 Apple Inc. […] announced that over 15 billion apps [had] been downloaded from its revolutionary App Store by more than 200 million iPhone, iPad and iPod touch users worldwide.”
The reason, you ask? Because Single Touch Systems seems to be the owner of no less than 15 patents related to mobile search, commerce, advertising and streaming media, which is precisely what iTunes, Apple’s iOS devices and the App Store are all about.
That doesn’t necessarily mean Apple is infringing on any patents, though.
Commenting on their initiative, Anthony Macaluso, Single Touch’s Chairman and Chief Innovation Officer, said: “After years of establishing ourselves as a pioneer in mobility, and cementing our IP position, it has become increasingly important for us to take the steps necessary to protect what we have already established with firms such as Polsinelli Shughart and McKool Smith.”