Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Details Five Patents Violated by Samsung Galaxy S4 and Google Now

Thank you. I was beginning to wonder if everyone on this forum had turn to idiots. Patent titles are purposefully vague so they are harder to search for. You could title your patent "A method to drink coffee." It's doesn't mean you're patenting drinking coffee. Its the method described INSIDE the patent that is being patented. And no one better steal my idea for making an anti-gravity bubble so that my coffee can float into my mouth while I continue to type away at work... (Patent Pending)

nagromme said:
Let me guess... people will now pretend the following three obvious falsehoods:

1. That the title of the patent is the entire patent... that the patent contains no specifics beyond that one phrase.

2. That nobody sues Apple. Apple only sues others.

3. That Apple truly has the option not to play the patent game that its competitors are playing.
Click to expand...
 
moo083 said:
Okay. Please Apple. I am so tired of hearing about this ****. As much as I am an iPhone user and all, can we just make nice and be done with all this dumb legal action?
Click to expand...

Change the channel. It isn't Apple broadcasting these things, it is web sites like MacRumors. So if you are tired of hearing about this stuff, don't blame the subject of the news - blame the news provider or change the channel.

moo083 said:
As Larry Page said recently, "We should be building great things that don't exist." Not focusing on the platform wars or sniping with other companies. And iOS 6 was really boring.
Click to expand...

Of course Larry Page would say that - his company ripped off a bunch of Apple patents and technology. But we don't want to discuss, that, right? We just want to move on. Uh-huh. Also, sorry that you found iOS 6 boring - personally I don't look to my mobile operating system to add interest to my life.

moo083 said:
It starts seeming like Apple is spending more effort on lawsuits than new products and features. I am keeping my fingers crossed on iOS 7 and Jon Ive, but at the moment Google is pushing the envelope more than Apple and Apple is suing Samsung for Google Now?
Click to expand...

How is Google pushing the envelope, with their ridiculous "google glass" piece of crapware? Or do you mean the self-driving car that is just a pipe dream for the foreseeable future? Or their streaming music service which is just a rehash of what others are already providing, bringing nothing new to the table? Is that what you mean?
 
I just like how apple takes things from android, and no one sues them. but somebody makes a rectangular touch screen phone and apple goes ape *****.
why isn't apple suing the guys who actually replicate the iPhone 5? like the GooPhone or the non smartphone knock offs?
 
rydewnd2 said:
I don't think the two are mutually exclusive in fact quite the opposite. What's the point of innovating if you sit idly by as your competitors steal your ideas?
Click to expand...

Well because if you are ahead of the game people will want your new stuff not the old ideas that someone just copied years later. So how many of you would like a Samsung Razr flip phone now? Its super thin and the battery will last a few days! nah Motorola would sue over it since they are such a hot item now.
 
As with some others on this article, I say to Apple to quit with the lawsuits and get back to focusing on R&D. The lawsuits in the past have not been very benficial for Apple as courts, even though they may have favoured Apple, have overturned those earlier rulings as well as Apple is awarded such a paltry sum compared to their legal costs.
 
moo083 said:
Okay. Please Apple. I am so tired of hearing about this ****.
Click to expand...

Then tell MR to stop posting the lawsuit news. Don't shout at Apple because you're tired of hearing about lawsuits. These lawsuits are really nobody's business but the companies involved. You have no idea if it's stifling Apple's product innovation. Relax.
 
AppleVsAndroid said:
Define what is "good engineers"? Steve Jobs was neither engineer nor he was good in engineering lol
Click to expand...

What does Steve Jobs have to do with anything?

You use a software engineer to get something to work. While I'm a firm believer in the old "too many cooks spoil the soup" yarn, hiring a select few good ones can do wonders if you're wise about it.

Also tell me why you think Apple does not have plenty of engineers?
Click to expand...

Don't remember ever saying they didn't.
 
dBeats said:
Thank you. I was beginning to wonder if everyone on this forum had turn to idiots. Patent titles are purposefully vague so they are harder to search for. You could title your patent "A method to drink coffee." It's doesn't mean you're patenting drinking coffee. Its the method described INSIDE the patent that is being patented. And no one better steal my idea for making an anti-gravity bubble so that my coffee can float into my mouth while I continue to type away at work... (Patent Pending)
Click to expand...

The patent is just as vague as the title. You type in the letter A and all the words that you have used with that start with that letter pop up. It describes every single autocomplete on the market. Maybe Apple should broaden their lawsuit to include other tech companies as well.

A data input technique for a computer that provides the user with a historical list of potential choices for the data input is described. A historical list is displayed to the user so that the user can input data by selecting an item from the historical list being displayed. The historical list contains the most recently and/or frequently used data values for the data field that the user is inputting data. Preferably, the historical list is displayed over a form also being displayed that requires the data input into its one or more of its fields. By using the historical lists a user is able to enter data with a greater ease of use than previously obtainable. The historical can also be shared between different applications that execute on the computer system concurrently or at different times. By sharing the data between applications, the historical list becomes more useful and valuable to the user and thereby further improves the ease of use of the computer system. The data input technique can be implemented numerous ways, including as a system, an apparatus, a graphical user interface, or a method, or as a computer readable medium.
Click to expand...
 
Radio said:
Shut it apple !

Less litigate; go innovate !
Click to expand...

Why? If everyone's gonna steal my ideas, I'm just gonna sit back and watch the idea train derail. Look at the GS4. Nothing new but useless gimmicks and 1% wider and 2% sharper. There was nothing to copy! They can only go forward by copying.

Fortunately Apple doesn't agree. They ARE innovating, your attention span has just been getting shorter and shorter. While Samsung and Google throw snot at the wall to see what sticks (Google glass will be like bell bottoms...what were we thinking!?!) Apple internally tests and tests and tests. They make more products that they don't sell then most tech companies make that they DO sell.
 
Elvergun said:
Samsung fans are also keeping their fingers crossed...hoping some of those new iOS 7 features make it to the S5. :apple:
Click to expand...

Samsung phones have enough features, infact the major complain about GS4 is that it has so many features that users are 'overwhelmed' by them. If I start listing them, you might easily get frustrated by lack of features on your iPhone.

Here's a quick example:

 
AZREOSpecialist said:
How is Google pushing the envelope, with their ridiculous "google glass" piece of crapware? Or do you mean the self-driving car that is just a pipe dream for the foreseeable future? Or their streaming music service which is just a rehash of what others are already providing, bringing nothing new to the table? Is that what you mean?
Click to expand...

You know what - if it weren't for these types of innovations or whatever you want to call them - the industry would never grow or improve. What might be crap today could easily morph or adapt to a very viable and usable technology.

The iPhone wasn't created in a vacuum. If it weren't for years and years of technological advances - the iPhone woudn't exist.

A self driving car is a pipe dream? Ok.

And google music's service does bring something new to the table. Unless you can tell me what other music service allows me to stream MY entire library wherever I am + also have access to millions of songs.
 
hot spare said:
Samsung phones have enough features, infact the major complain about GS4 is that it has so many features that users are 'overwhelmed' by them. If I start listing them, you might easily get frustrated by lack of features on your iPhone.

Here's a quick example:

YouTube: video
Click to expand...

Syncing wise, exactly as iTunes handles iOS syncing.

The sidesync ability is a great feature. The enormous S4 screen is practically a desktop display so that makes sense :p

I do admit to loving the ability to access it right on the desktop, especially when demonstrating how a route can be drawn and sent via email or text.
 
AppleVsAndroid said:
You can say - Apple needs to find and buyout those great innovative creative minds out there in the world and throw the work onto engineers who work like a dogs(yes dogs because they work for salary- they are not entrepreneurs) to make that product!
Click to expand...

You don't buy out a person. You walk up to them, say "hey, you wanna work for us", then you negotiate a salary. If an agreement isn't made, then everyone goes their own happy way, doing what they did before.
 
charlituna said:
Eliminate IP protection and no one has a reason to create anything. Because they would put it out in the world only to have to ripped off left and right.

What we need is a better patent system. Clearer rules on what can receive protection, new system for public review of pending patents before they can be signed off, new rules for when you can file a complaint of violation and what kind of damages you can get.

So for example
patents on mere ideas are out the door. There has to be a specific and detailed tech described even if it is just theoretical at this time. And a violation requires at least 80% of those details to match exactly and a lack of proof of concurrent development.

When a patent is submitted as part of the final review it is publicly revealed so other companies can object in the grounds they have prior art that would invalidate this new patent. A board reviews it and rejects the patent application if they agree or rejects the prior art claim. If anyone releases anything that violate the announced patent during this period and it is approved then it is still a violation. If someone falls to submit an objection during the public review they can't use it in a suit later unless they can prove there was no way for them to see clearly it was an issue until they saw the final product.

And in regards to claims against companies for violations, a limit of say 3 years is put on filing a suit for violation from the time the tech in question was released to the public. Otherwise no statutory damages will be awarded, just actual. A blanket no injunctions on SEP related issues and statutory damages are only applicable if the owning company can prove that they did attempt to negotiate FRAND rates and the offender refused. Or the offending company attempted to offer FRAND rates and was refused. In the case of offense yes it might be possible for the court to decide a FRAND rate for the license and require payment AND at the same time find against the patent owner for failure to properly license depending on circumstances

Same if there is clear evidence of patent exhaustion and the owners attempted to double dip with knowledge of the PE. And if any company, party or not, claims to have an applicable patent exhaustion, such as Apple and Lodsys, all cases are frozen (and no new ones can be filed) while the claim is reviewed. If it is shown that the owners falsely filed claims they have to pay all legal fees for those they filed against and a reasonable nuisance fine.
Click to expand...

That would be true if they were good patents. not this very lose things apple is trying to protect. For example slide to unlock or multitouch or a black slab.

This one more than likely falls under the things above. It should never of been granted.

To me the thing that shows Apple knows it does not have much is it refuses to go after Google directly. If Apple has such a case why not targe google now directly. Google owns that one. It is not open source.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back