Google Plays a Bigger Role in Latest Apple vs. Samsung Lawsuit

[MacRumors]

Google engineers, including former Android Chief Andy Rubin, may testify during the second patent lawsuit trial between Apple and Samsung, reports The Wall Street Journal.

Samsung will reportedly use the testimonials to prove that it licensed four out of the five software features it is accused of infringing upon, as it contends that Google had already been working on the technologies before Apple filed for patents.

To help defend Samsung, Google engineers are expected to take the stand to refute Apple's arguments that it forged new ground with the iPhone. Andy Rubin, the former head of Google's mobile business who oversaw the development of Android, is listed as a potential witness. Mr. Rubin worked for Apple from 1989 to 1992.

"Google will be a lot more front and center than in previous cases," said Michael Carrier, a patent expert and law professor at Rutgers University in New Jersey. "Google vs. Apple makes it more of a clash of the titans on the same turf."

Apple's list of asserted patents include those for hyperlinking, background syncing of data, Siri's universal search capabilities, auto-complete, and slide-to-unlock. Samsung states that all of these features found on its Galaxy devices are Android features, except for slide-to-unlock functionality. The second trial covers more recent devices such as the Galaxy S III, Galaxy Note II, Galaxy Tab 10.1, the iPhone 4/4s/5, the iPad 2/3/4, the iPad mini, and fourth and fifth generation iPod touch.

Following the conclusion of the original patent lawsuit that covered older devices, and the subsequent damages retrial to redetermine a segment of the reward, Samsung was ordered to pay Apple $890 million.

A report last week also noted that Samsung plans to call Google's VP of engineering Hiroshi Lockheimer, and Todd Pendleton, Samsung's marketing chief for its U.S. telecoms division to the stand. Meanwhile, Apple expects to call marketing chief Phil Schiller and possibly former SVP of iOS Software Scott Forstall among many others.

Article Link: Google Plays a Bigger Role in Latest Apple vs. Samsung Lawsuit

 

[Cyborg21]

I don't know why but a feeling tells me Apple will win again.

 

[brendu]

By the time this is all settled these devices will have been discontinued. What a huge waste of money.

 

[Swift]

Here comes the main show

It's been building up to this. They started with the smaller manufacturers, now they've worked their way up the ladder.

 

[kdarling]

By the time this is all settled these devices will have been discontinued. What a huge waste of money.

Yep. IIRC, it involves the Galaxy S3 and the iPhone 5.

I don't know why but a feeling tells me Apple will win again.

I hope neither one wins. This is like the poster child of why software patents (and their trials) are just plain dumb.

For example, the "universal search" is something that people have been doing for years. Whether or not Samsung infringed, all hinges on what a missing comma means, and which year dictionary is used. You might as well flip a coin.

Ditto for the "hot links" for recognizing things like phone numbers in text, and for keyboard "word completion", or for Samsung's patent on compressing video.

None of these are novel inventions, so it comes down to whether or not one company's developers implemented something in the same way that the other filed a patent on... a situation which is NOT about copying, but about developers doing the same thing a world apart.

.

 

[Dj64Mk7]

Could someone please explain the whole Apple vs. Samsung thing to me? Who is suing who, and for what exactly?

 

[dermeister]

Could someone please explain the whole Apple vs. Samsung thing to me? Who is suing who, and for what exactly?

Sure. Apple is suing Samsung for basically wholesale copying of the iPhone, both in terms of software and trade-dress, meaning the Samsung devices look so similar that users can't even tell the difference. Apple produced a document with something like a 130+ bullet point review by a Samsung employee of Apple's device and how to copy it.

Samsung is counter-suing on the basis of standard-essential patents, meaning technical patents that are so basic that one cannot hold-out - by law, it must be licensed to anyone for a "reasonable fee". Apple contends that Samsung is asking for more than the value of the standard patents, effectively desiring to steal value from Apple in excess of the value of the patents.

The nihilists who want to claim both sides are equally at wrong proclaim that both are suing for patents, and both claims are thus equivalent and absurd or cancel out, or proof that there should be no such thing as patents.

The Samsung brigade claims Samsung suing is proof that Apple copies too. Furthermore, it downplays the fact that Samsung devices were blatant copies by the absurd reduction of the iPhone to "a black rectangle", and, as Samsung's lawyers said "who can have the right to black rectangles". The insult to everyone's intelligence not withstanding, the Samsung brigade has taken up the lawyer's slogan.

The Apple brigade claims that Samsung is a shameless copy-master with copying so ingrained in it's corporate culture that the poor kleptocrats don't even understand right from wrong anymore.

Helpful?

 

[sixrom]

I don't know why but a feeling tells me Apple will win again.

It's obvious.

American company

American court

Well respected American company.

There's no justice, simply victory for the ones in favour.

Sadly the longer Apple drags on with legal assaults, less time and money go towards doing innovating things.

Killed off by the intentional generation of negative energy is not in anyone's best interest. Yet it seems to validate Apples need to fight.

 

[MikhailT]

To help defend Samsung, Google engineers are expected to take the stand to refute Apple's arguments that it forged new ground with the iPhone. Andy Rubin, the former head of Google's mobile business who oversaw the development of Android, is listed as a potential witness. Mr. Rubin worked for Apple from 1989 to 1992.

Not sure that's a good witness, considering he was an Apple employee first.

In addition, it doesn't matter if Google worked on some features first, as long as they didn't show it in public nor patent it first, it is pointless.

It will be interesting to see but honestly, I just want Apple and Samsung to just agree on a cross-patent agreement with an anti-cloning clause and move on already.

I really hope SCOTUS will also rule software patents are ineligible for protections but I doubt they'll do such a sweeping outlawing of it.

 

[SILen(e]

Ditto for the "hot links" for recognizing things like phone numbers in text


None of these are novel inventions

Yeah, BUT...

That patent isn't new.

In some other forum, I had someone claiming that his Nokia phone did recognize telephone numbers in 2002 or 2003, so that there would be no way for Apple to invent this for the iPhone.

And he was both right and also very wrong - Apple didn't "invent" this for the iPhone, that patent is from 1995 or 1996, predates the iPhone by a decade... And was for the Apple Newton!

Some people just love to forget that Apple existed before the iPhone was released and that they played a major part in the development (and refinement) of the GUI, doesn't matter if it's running on a desktop computer, a PDA or a phone and if the pointing device is a mouse, trackball or finger.

Some people even claimed that Apple stole the idea of a copy&paste function (for iPhone OS, iOS' name at that time, iirc) from Android, ignoring that people have been using the concept of C&P on an iMac a decade before Android (and much earlier on other Macs (was it available on the Apple I or II?)) and that the implementation of C&P on the iPhone was very different (and much better) than C&P on Android.
Google then took the way it was done by Apple and replaced the old and clunky implementation with the new one.
Kinda like MP3 players pre- and post-iPod and smartphones and tablets pre- and post-iPhone and iPad.

 

[kdarling]

Sure. Apple is suing Samsung for basically wholesale copying of the iPhone, both in terms of software and trade-dress,

This trial has nothing to do with trade dress.

Samsung is counter-suing on the basis of standard-essential patents,

This trial has nothing to do with SEPs.

This trial, like most software patent trials, is about asking a jury of people off the street to decide technical issues that often confuse people with decades of specific experience.

And of course, it's about infringement, not copying, since it's extremely unlikely that either side stole any code or even looked at the other's methods.

Then there's the royalty payments that Apple wants. They're so outrageous, that even Florian Mueller, who is well known as being pro-Apple and anti-Samsung, wrote:

"I face the first situation in which I don't merely disagree with Apple but am rather wondering whether it has lost its mind."

"Apple's damages theory for the trial (...) is an objective insanity"

At upcoming trial, Apple wants Samsung to pay $40 per device for only five software patents

Not to mention that this could backfire on Apple, when they later have to pay Samsung and others. A jury could decide that what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

 

[69Mustang]

Sure. Apple is suing Samsung for basically wholesale copying of the iPhone, both in terms of software and trade-dress, meaning the Samsung devices look so similar that users can't even tell the difference. Apple produced a document with something like a 130+ bullet point review by a Samsung employee of Apple's device and how to copy it.

Samsung is counter-suing on the basis of standard-essential patents, meaning technical patents that are so basic that one cannot hold-out - by law, it must be licensed to anyone for a "reasonable fee". Apple contends that Samsung is asking for more than the value of the standard patents, effectively desiring to steal value from Apple in excess of the value of the patents.

The nihilists who want to claim both sides are equally at wrong proclaim that both are suing for patents, and both claims are thus equivalent and absurd or cancel out, or proof that there should be no such thing as patents.

The Samsung brigade claims Samsung suing is proof that Apple copies too. Furthermore, it downplays the fact that Samsung devices were blatant copies by the absurd reduction of the iPhone to "a black rectangle", and, as Samsung's lawyers said "who can have the right to black rectangles". The insult to everyone's intelligence not withstanding, the Samsung brigade has taken up the lawyer's slogan.

The Apple brigade claims that Samsung is a shameless copy-master with copying so ingrained in it's corporate culture that the poor kleptocrats don't even understand right from wrong anymore.

Helpful?

Not helpful at all. This is how misinformation gets spread. The thinly veiled knocks on Samsung are not convincing in an honest summary. You would have been better served by just saying "Samsung copied the s#%t out of Apple's ideas". I personally think they both need to stop this crap but that's just my opinion. No matter which company wins, it doesn't benefit us at all.

 

[kdarling]

In some other forum, I had someone claiming that his Nokia phone did recognize telephone numbers in 2002 or 2003, so that there would be no way for Apple to invent this for the iPhone.

And he was both right and also very wrong - Apple didn't "invent" this for the iPhone, that patent is from 1995 or 1996, predates the iPhone by a decade... And was for the Apple Newton!

1) AFAIK, the Newton did not recognize phone numbers in every document. It did try to recognize phone numbers during handwriting or keyboard input.

2) The Newton was hardly the first computer to recognize phone numbers. That was a popular thing to do in DB programs from at least the 80s. Windows CardFile did it in like 1987. Lotus Agenda did it in 1992. Heck, I remember having to write a pattern recognition program to extract them in my PL/1 class back in 1972.

3) Patents don't protect ideas; only their implementations.

Because of (2) and (3), the patent (and the trial) is not about recognizing phone numbers etc. per se. It's specifically for using an "analyzer server" to parse them out concurrently, then informing the UI that it can call an "action processor" to present choices. Those are the vague internal details that Apple's lawyers need to convince the jury that someone else came up with independently and close enough to infringe.

You're right about the age, though: that patent expires in 2016, which is why Apple is trying to wield it now. The same goes for Samsung's patent for a "Remote video transmission system".

 

[newagemac]

It's obvious.

Sadly the longer Apple drags on with legal assaults, less time and money go towards doing innovating things.

Wow, didn't realize the lawyers were doing double duty as designers and engineers as well! And the fact that Apple's massive $150 billion cash hoard was used completely up for this trial must be devastating! Man, Apple must be on hard times that they have to rely on lawyers write all their software code and do their product design innovations.

Hopefully the lawyers can finish this trial quickly so they can make it back to Cupertino in time to finish working on the iWatch.

/sarcasm

 

[Vanilla35]

This actually sounds like one that Apple might have a hard time defending themselves in...

 

[mejsric]

Google has the biggest role when they are the one told Samsung not to copy Apple completely.

 

[koruki]

I find it strange that Google is stepping in, maybe because Samsung is the best selling Android device.

Though Samsung has stopped, you can't doubt how much inspiration they drew from the first few iPhones. Down to changing their earphones to white, charger to a 30 pin shape, white boxes, color scheme packaging. A benefit of the doubt is gone based on their history with other popular handsets pre-iPhone such as blackberry and Nokia.

I'm glad Samsung has somewhat found their way of making phones now but their tactics of copying to get into market before changing is still hard to put up with especially to a giant like Apple.

 

[realeric]

Google, you couldn't even save Motorola.

 

[heyyoudvd]

Could someone please explain the whole Apple vs. Samsung thing to me? Who is suing who, and for what exactly?

Here's a fantastic summary of the lawsuit.

 

[apolloa]

Good, now all the directors can look like a bunch of idiots too, suing each other for ideas to progress business instead of actually innovating.

Although I have a feeling if Google and Samsung wins in a big way, Apple may actually stop this nonsense, and then everyone else will stop the counter nonsense. Hopefully.

And as someone pointed out in the thread about Swiss watch makers, Apple NEVER copies or steals right?

Wrong!.........

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...ay-clock-design-took-permission-iPhone-5.html
https://www.macrumors.com/2012/09/2...s-says-apple-copied-its-iconic-railway-clock/

 

[Constable Odo]

Make Google pay through the nose. Apple's revenue has been looking a bit thin as of late.

 

[MrX8503]

Samsung has been copying for over a decade. Anyone remember the black jack or the blade phones?

Most companies can't stand up to Samsung except Apple. Samsung thought they could do the same to Apple like they've always done to other companies. I don't see this litigation ending any time soon. IMO, it would be best if Google distance themselves from the trial.

 

[BvizioN]

I personally think they both need to stop this crap but that's just my opinion. No matter which company wins, it doesn't benefit us at all.

Quite right! They need to stop this lawsuit madness and instead focus on copying each other! Why do we have to have all tech companies innovating when you can have one or 2 of them and the rest copying? And how would benefit us consumers if all tech companies did focus on innovation instead of ripping off each others ideas?

 

[Jess13]

It's obvious.

American company

American court

Well respected American company.

There's no justice, simply victory for the ones in favour.

Apple has been demolishing Scamsung both in US courts and other nations' courts as well.

----------

I'm honestly tired of dissing Scamsung ⎯ separate from my spelling of the company name ⎯ but for any Scamsung defenders, I have this for you:

September 2013

Apple iPhone 5s: Gold, with Home button fingerprint scanner

Half a year later

Scamsung S5: Gold, with home button fingerprint scanner

Scamsung® We try to copy Apple™

 

[MacMulti]

Only now Google comes into bigger picture, it should have been before it began. Without Android, Samsung would not make it like what it is today. Their software is a shame in every tiny aspects if to go on their own, so is the design. Android to shame sung is akin to a helping hand to copycatting.