Apple Ordered to Pay $3.3 Million in Japanese Lawsuit Over iPod Click Wheel Patent - MacRumors
Skip to Content

Apple Ordered to Pay $3.3 Million in Japanese Lawsuit Over iPod Click Wheel Patent

Apple has been hit with a judgment for ¥330 million ($3.3 million) in a Japanese court case over infringement of a patent by the company's click wheel system used on a number of past iPod models and the current iPod classic, reports Dow Jones Business News.

The Tokyo District Court on Thursday ordered Apple Inc. ( AAPL ) to pay Y330 million in damages to Japanese inventor Norihiko Saito in a patent infringement case involving the U.S. firm's iPod music player, Kyodo News reported.

The patent that Mr. Saito's company applied for in 1998 covers a technology for the Click Wheel controller that Apple has adopted for the music player in Japan since 2004, Presiding Judge Teruhisa Takano said in the ruling.

ipod_classic_views
Saito had filed an injunction request against Apple back in 2007, and as settlement negotiations failed to result in any agreement, he eventually increased his damages request to ¥10 billion ($101 million). The court ruled, however, that Apple's infringement warranted the much smaller judgment.

Related Forum: iPod touch and iPod

Popular Stories

Apple Event Logo

Apple's Next Era Begins September 1

Thursday May 7, 2026 10:36 am PDT by
Apple recently announced that Tim Cook will be stepping down as CEO later this year, after 15 years of leading the company. Effective September 1, Apple's hardware engineering chief John Ternus will become the company's next CEO, while Cook will become executive chairman of Apple's board of directors. In his new role, Apple said Cook will assist with "certain aspects" of the company,...
Four iPhone 18 Pro Colors Mock Feature

iPhone 18 Pro Launching in September With These 10 New Features

Saturday May 9, 2026 6:03 am PDT by
While the iPhone 18 Pro and iPhone 18 Pro Max are not launching until September, there are already plenty of rumors about the devices. It was initially reported that the iPhone 18 Pro models would have fully under-screen Face ID, with only a front camera visible in the top-left corner of the screen. However, the latest rumors indicate that only one Face ID component will be moved under the...
Apple Watch Series 10 Jet Black Touch ID

Apple Watch Series 12 and watchOS 27: What to Expect Later This Year

Friday May 8, 2026 2:07 pm PDT by
While not too much has been reported about the next Apple Watch models, there are a few rumors about potential design changes and watchOS 27 features. Apple Watch Series 12 and Apple Watch Ultra 4 models are expected to be released in September, and we have outlined some of the key rumored hardware and software changes below. A new Apple Watch SE is not expected this year, as that model was...

Top Rated Comments

165 months ago
I love the comments about how this is pocket change to Apple. While true - it's still a win for the plaintiff. But it seems people are fine with Apple violating patents and how insignificant any judgement is but when it comes to Apple suing others for their patents every other company is evil for violating them.

The hypocrisy is laughable.
Score: 14 Votes (Like | Disagree)
165 months ago
It is not fine to ask $100 million for one small patent on something basic...
something basic? the click-wheel is the only way to use the device. get your head out.......
Score: 8 Votes (Like | Disagree)
165 months ago
It is not fine to ask $100 million for one small patent on something basic. An iPhone uses more than 100 patents on GSM/4G/Blutooth/WiFi alone. Even Apple's pockets aren't that deep - they'd have to raise prices.

If they had asked a more reasonable amount - Apple usually pays and this would not even be news.

No hypocrisy of mine. Where is mine?

And where is evidence that Apple usually pays. Before? Most of the stories are about Apple (and others) having to go through litigation for refusing to pay patent fees.

And who are you (or I) to judge how much or how little a patent is worth. Isn't that why there are courts? If a patent is integral - then isn't it worth more than something that's a "throw away?"

It's clear the judge believed the amount was exorbitant here. Which is great for Apple.

You clearly missed the overarching comment of mine. It's cool.
Score: 5 Votes (Like | Disagree)
needfx Avatar
165 months ago
I love the comments about how this is pocket change to Apple. While true - it's still a win for the plaintiff. But it seems people are fine with Apple violating patents and how insignificant any judgement is but when it comes to Apple suing others for their patents every other company is evil for violating them.

The hypocrisy is laughable.

you traitor :D
Score: 4 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Gasu E. Avatar
165 months ago
something basic? the click-wheel is the only way to use the device. get your head out.......

Read it again. It doesn't say the Japanese company patented the click wheel; it says the compnay patented a technology used in the click wheel. The click wheel might use a hundred different technologies... you can't tell from the article how prominent this specific one was.

----------

I love the comments about how this is pocket change to Apple. While true - it's still a win for the plaintiff. But it seems people are fine with Apple violating patents and how insignificant any judgement is but when it comes to Apple suing others for their patents every other company is evil for violating them.

I'm with you on the "evil" part. But unless you've been involved with development of a complex product, you might not realize that it is almost impossible to develop a complex product without inadvertently violating some existing patent.
Score: 3 Votes (Like | Disagree)
165 months ago
change between the couch cushions
Score: 2 Votes (Like | Disagree)