Apple Claims Key Android Framework 'Inspired' by Andy Rubin's Work at Apple

[Reed Rothchild]

I think there's a bit of confusion here over who invented what and when. People are forgetting Apple's patented time traveling device created way back in 2084. Once they were able to correct certain historical anomalies and have everything that could possibly be conceived protected under the "Apple Unifying Patent" these discussions were expected to die out.

Anyway, back to the future....

 

[mojohojo]

hello sheldon cooper

 

[lilo777]

By the same token...

We can clearly assume now that the whole iOS idea was "inspired" by Steve Jobs' work at Hewlett-Packard.

Do they have no shame at Apple? I understand that the lawyers might come up with very weird ideas but they have to be supervised by Apple management. Acting like spoiled brats Apple create tons of really bad precedents in hi-tech industry which is really sad.

 

[EiriasEmrys]

I find it interesting that Google is being pursued legally in one way or another by a number of parties (MS, Oracle, etc) - in some cases successfully, yet they haven't really pursued anyone else in turn or made any assertions against other entities.

They are a new company, they don't have the war chest of patents the others do. Also, your logic says, "Everyone must have patents that are being infringed upon, therefore Google, since Google is not suing, they are being nice and letting people infringe on their patents."

I can't respect that even if it was true. That's bad business. Intellectual property must and should be reinforced. For many of us in the creative industries, it would be devastating to see such opinions come into play over the protections of patents. "There's only so many ways you can write a story. There is only so many ways you can paint a painting. There is only so many ways you can build a machine." That line of thinking would destroy craftsman and artists alike.

I think that the average Joe cannot understand the subtleties of these patents, or appreciate their intellectual value.

 

[adamtore]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)



And is Android's notification system patented? No. Find another example.

What you are saying here is that its okay to steal other peoples work as long as its not patented? If a bicycle is not locked then its okay to steal it aswell huh?

Dumb.

 

[adamtore]

To the people in this thread that are still denying that Android vendors have to pay licensing fee to MSTF: There are 18 handset vendors, so far have 6 of them licensed with MSFT to fork over 5-15 dollar per device.

This is licensing money to get "protection".

Ballmer is a business genius.
Apple invent Iphone. Googlge clones it. MSFT gets billions in licensing money each year.

Google doesn't manufacture phones. Only HTC pays to M$.

How can you be so wrong?!

 

[SeattleMoose]

This Sort of Thing Almost Impossible To Protect Against

With all the cross pollination in the form of inter company moves it is almost impossible to prevent this. Happens in every industry.....

Good luck trying to prevent/enforce anything to prevent it....

 

[Ijustfarted]

I hope Apple takes them all for what they're worth...

Google, HTC, Samsung ... Knock off scum.

all the way!

I don't know if you're being serious. I'll just pretend you aren't, you sound like such a loser I feel bad for you .

 

[gkpm]

This is completely false. Apple was the first to coin the initials PDA - but by no means did they invent the PDA.

But feel free to re-invent history...

They didn't just coin the initials, they coined the term Personal Digital Assistant, previous devices such as the Psion 3 were just called organisers.

If you look at the Apple Newton - which coined the term - it's the one that most closely resembles the current day devices. Previous ones looked more like glorified calculators.

 

[divinox]

They didn't just coin the initials, they coined the term Personal Digital Assistant, previous devices such as the Psion 3 were just called organisers.

If you look at the Apple Newton - which coined the term - it's the one that most closely resembles the current day devices. Previous ones looked more like glorified calculators.

and?

 

[nascimento]

Wow

I think apple should sue the people of planet earth for breathing as it has invented oxigen. Like that the only ones living would be the workers and shareholders of Apple Inc

Ups that wont work...nobody left to buy the computers

Should these idiotic judges that accept this be substituted or just put on a firing line...these things are being taken to the extreme and nothing good will come out of it

 

[Shaneuk]

This really annoys me. People feed of each others ideas, it's how the world becomes better, someone invents the wheel and someone else think's to add an engine.

 

[meechy]

I think if this is true and Android copied Apple, then Apple should prosecute every single Android user in the US to the full extent of the law.

Oh just shut up!

 

[gorgeousninja]

Even if Google had patented it, they wouldn't sue Apple because they like to play nice. Not that Apple shouldn't sue Google, but I wish more companies were like Google in the legal world.

No, the point is theyre not suing anyone because they can't. Google and nice do not go together. I'm surprised anyone actually still believes that.

 

[vrDrew]

Why can't Apple see that the more they push and push against these products, the worse they will look as a company to many of the public..

What planet do you live on? Do you think 99.995% of the people in the world read Foss Patents (or MacRumors, or AndroidDweebWeekly, for that matter?)

People simply don't care. Nobody cares if one multi-billion corporation sues another. It has no impact on their lives, nor is it likely to ever do so.

Do you know about the only people who get upset about stories like this? The sort of self-loathing Android Drones who spend their (apparently copious) free time trolling an internet discussion forum dedicated to Apple products.

And why are these people so upset? Because this sort of story confirms the deep dark secret they live with every day: Android IS a copy. Its a rip-off.

Never mind the actual FACTS being discussed here: (ie. Apple's lawyers point out a significant omission in a filing by HTC appealing a Judge's ruling that Android infringed on the '263 Patent. Read that again: A Judge already ruled that Android infringed. HTC is just trying to weasel their way out of the consequences of that.)

No, never mind the Facts. Lets change the subject. Pretend its all about Steve Job's part time work at HP in 1975. Pretend that its all about what a "bully" Apple is. (I know, just the other day Jonny Ive and Tim Cook drove by my house a few times in a rusty black Dodge Challenger...)

Yeah, Apple's been "bullying" people into loving their products for more than thirty years now. And the $70 billion or so they've got in the bank just proves how badly they are failing.

 

[Oletros]

Android does not allow for app badges at all, last time I checked.
Android had drop down and status bar user notifications UI since launch. (did not have push)
Android started provided push notifications for developers in 2.2.

1. It doesn't have badges but they're not necessary with widgets
2. You're confussing push notifications like Apple has with push notifications via connection to a server, Android apps had it since the beginning because they can run services in background and connect to the server.
3. Cloud to Phone is not like push notifications

----------

And why are these people so upset? Because this sort of story confirms the deep dark secret they live with every day: Android IS a copy. Its a rip-off.

Ah, so, seeing the developing of one single patent means that the whole OS is a copy?

You're joking, don't you?

Never mind the actual FACTS being discussed here: (ie. Apple's lawyers point out a significant omission in a filing by HTC appealing a Judge's ruling that Android infringed on the '263 Patent. Read that again: A Judge already ruled that Android infringed. HTC is just trying to weasel their way out of the consequences of that.)

Can you show me any court decission where the judge says HTC is infringing anything? Thanks

 

[vrDrew]

Can you show me any court decission where the judge says HTC is infringing anything? Thanks

Here

 

[Oletros]

Here

Thanks

 

[lukarak]

Personally, i couldn't care less on what is patented or what's not. I can, with my own two eyes, clearly see what is copied, and what is not, regardless of the legal status of that copy. I can also see who is riding on whose wave. Apple had the courage to go out with both a completely touch phone (no, they didn't do it because of the Prada), and to go out with a tablet. Everybody else, they are just copycats, unwilling to take risks and invest in them. Sure, sometimes they have the occasional good idea, but overall, they are just pathetic. And it's not only in the mobile space, the same works for laptops as well. The amount of manufacturers copying the MBP design is just insane, without adding on top of it the MBA segment, which, again, now everybody is interested in. And it doesn't matter if there was an occasional thin laptop before it, they didn't make it popular, Apple did.
Of course, that can be good for the consumer. It still doesn't mean things shouldn't be called by their right name.

 

[divinox]

Personally, i couldn't care less on what is patented or what's not. I can, with my own two eyes, clearly see what is copied, and what is not, regardless of the legal status of that copy. I can also see who is riding on whose wave. Apple had the courage to go out with both a completely touch phone (no, they didn't do it because of the Prada), and to go out with a tablet. Everybody else, they are just copycats, unwilling to take risks and invest in them. Sure, sometimes they have the occasional good idea, but overall, they are just pathetic. And it's not only in the mobile space, the same works for laptops as well. The amount of manufacturers copying the MBP design is just insane, without adding on top of it the MBA segment, which, again, now everybody is interested in. And it doesn't matter if there was an occasional thin laptop before it, they didn't make it popular, Apple did.
Of course, that can be good for the consumer. It still doesn't mean things shouldn't be called by their right name.

First, there has been no shortage of silver laptops with black keys and black bezeled screens in the history of portable computing. And no, just like the case with MBA Apple wasn't first there either.

Second, what the f. are you expecting, really? If there is a demand for a given product (e.g. ultraportables) of course there will be a supply. Further, you need to revise your casual assumptions. I'd say that most successes, in general, comes down to timing rather than anything else.

Granted, Apple has had good timing at times, but please. Its quite tiresome after all... If Apple is first-to-market and fails, they are the inventors and everyone copies. If someone else is first-to-market and fails, and Apple then "gets it right" everyone is still copying Apple - even if they were doing exactly the same thing as they did before.

Tiresome indeed.

Addendum: Oh, and yeah. While it is true that Apple surely did not use touch cause of prada, the same could be said about many others. The tech. was always interesting, and it was clearly coming into the price range where it were commercially viable to offer such products. Especially so with regards to capacitive screens.

 

[macsmurf]

They are a new company, they don't have the war chest of patents the others do. Also, your logic says, "Everyone must have patents that are being infringed upon, therefore Google, since Google is not suing, they are being nice and letting people infringe on their patents."

I can't respect that even if it was true. That's bad business. Intellectual property must and should be reinforced. For many of us in the creative industries, it would be devastating to see such opinions come into play over the protections of patents. "There's only so many ways you can write a story. There is only so many ways you can paint a painting. There is only so many ways you can build a machine." That line of thinking would destroy craftsman and artists alike.

I think that the average Joe cannot understand the subtleties of these patents, or appreciate their intellectual value.

Actually, there are only so many (sensible) ways you can build a computer, which is why all computers in the last 50 years have a Von Neumann architecture to some degree.

 

[divinox]

Actually, there are only so many (sensible) ways you can build a computer, which is why all computers in the last 50 years have a Von Neumann architecture to some degree.

Von Neumann? Surely you mean Von Jobs!

 

[KnightWRX]

We can clearly assume now that the whole iOS idea was "inspired" by Steve Jobs' work at Hewlett-Packard.

He never worked at Hewlett-Packard. That was Steve Wozniak.

To the people in this thread that are still denying that Android vendors have to pay licensing fee to MSTF: There are 18 handset vendors, so far have 6 of them licensed with MSFT to fork over 5-15 dollar per device.

There's more than 18 handset vendors. There's 21 official listed on the OHA page alone :

http://www.openhandsetalliance.com/oha_members.html

Now, no one is denying that some Android vendors are paying MSFT for Patent licenses that could be related to Android (or not, never been officially tested in court and proven to be infringing), what we're correcting is this statement you made which you just proved false yourself :

Every single Android device: 5-15 dollar licensing fee to MSFT. Billions to MSFT in pure profit each year.

I think you're the only one in denial here. And obviously, you have a very weak grasp of reality, what with comments like these :

1) The only reason why Linux exist is because software patents didn't exist in 1960. Linux is a Unix clone.

Linux is not a Unix clone at all. It is its own operating system that happens to implement a POSIX layer. If anything, it is based on Andrew Tannenbaum's work on Minix, even though the kernels are very much different from one another.

Linux is a kernel. Some distribution vendors (not all), implement a user space using other technologies that are also used by Unix vendors such as MIT's X11 display server and the FSF's GNU userspace (which itself is not a part of Unix, the GNU userspace tools goes beyond the SUS in implementing the common tools. If you've ever used HP's or Sun's userspace tools, you'd miss the nice GNU extensions).

And even if software patents at existed in the 1960, by the time Linux came into existance in 1991, they would have all been expired. Good try though. You should read up on the history of Linux a bit, you grasp of it is tenuous at best.

2) Apple did the right thing and used BSD UNIX, not Linux. There is a licensing difference.

Apple used whatever NeXT was using at the time. OS X is very much a continuation of NeXTSTEP. This has nothing to do with licensing but with whatever they bought. If they had acquired Be Inc. instead of NeXTSTEP, Mac OS X would be based on the very superior BeOS.

 

[KnightWRX]

merge double failed...

 

[LeakedDave]

My God, but can you read the link you put.

Push notifications for Mail was for iPhone, NOT for Android. Android had push notifications from the start.

You know something called IMAP IDLE, don't you?

And Android has had push notifications on all apps since the beginning. And you know why? Because it has had multitasking from the beginning and thay didn't need something like the "push notification service" made by Apple to circunvect the lack of multitasking.

Please, for the last time. READ and UNDERSTAND better before writing such nonsense

And no, Cloud to Phone is not like push notifications

Wow. Android didn't get push notifications until Froyo. Of course, that's using the actual technical definition of push.

----------

For you, yes. As shown a gazillion times before there are still Android-based phones that look like that. Android is software, not form-factor. There are dishwashers, TV:s and microwaves running Android. Did they copy Apple too?

...And when Apple starts making say, a TV, are they then to be considered as "copiers of Android"? Awkward indeed.

----------



1) Somehow pretty much no one is infringing on those patents. Guess why?

----------



he said modern. if you're gonna pull stuff like that why not pull stuff from before Apple wasn't even a thought in Jobs mind.

?? Apple TV ring a bell, dude?