Apple iPhone and iPad patents so broad nearly all major competitors could be targets

Discussion in 'Apple, Inc and Tech Industry' started by *LTD*, Aug 3, 2011.

  1. *LTD*, Aug 3, 2011
    Last edited: Aug 3, 2011

    *LTD* macrumors G4

    *LTD*

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Location:
    Canada
    #1
    http://www.theage.com.au/digital-li...st-the-tip-of-the-iceberg-20110803-1ian5.html

    Apple’s iPhone and iPad patents so broad virtually all major competitors could be targets

    Samsung may have to ditch multi-touch

    “Apple’s tablet and smartphone patents are so broad that virtually all major competitors could be targeted by the company if it is successful in its legal tussle with Samsung,” Asher Moses reports for The Age. “Intellectual property experts say Samsung would have to significantly hobble the Galaxy Tab 10.1 for the Australian market if it hopes to avoid infringing Apple’s patents.”

    “Florian Mueller, an intellectual property expert who has been intimately following the smartphone patent battles around the world via his blog, said the patents cited by Apple in this case would have to be declared invalid by the court or ‘Samsung won’t be able to build a Galaxy Tab 10.1 that consumers want to buy,’” Moses reports. “The patents are so broad that they cover the basics of multi-touch gestures – both the hardware and software implementations – and functions like slide to unlock and list scrolling. Mueller said the fact that Samsung had agreed to hold back its launch of the Tab indicated it believes Apple’s case has merit.”

    Moses reports, “Kimberlee Weatherall, an Australian intellectual property lawyer, blogger and academic, agreed with Mueller. She said while some of the patents in the case related to specific Apple features – such as the way that lists and websites scroll on the iPhone, including the bounce when you get to the bottom – others were far more general and covered most multi-touch gestures used on the screen. ‘If that [patent] claim is valid, that would be quite a restriction on the look and feel of an alternative tablet,’ she said.”

    -------------------------------------------------------------

    The Galaxy Tab is already hobbled. Anything more and there's no point to it.
     
  2. ct2k7 macrumors 603

    ct2k7

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2008
    Location:
    London or Florida
  3. kdarling, Aug 3, 2011
    Last edited: Aug 3, 2011

    kdarling macrumors demi-god

    kdarling

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2007
    Location:
    First university coding class = 46 years ago
    #3
    One of those Australian patents that Apple is using appears to cover enlarging a photo from a thumbnail gallery and then swiping horizontally or tapping its edges to see more photos from the gallery.

    Seriously, Australia?

    (Note that the articles are only talking about ramifications for the Australian market)
     
  4. AppleScruff1 macrumors G3

    AppleScruff1

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2011
    #4
    Too bad Alexander Graham Bell wasn't still alive. He could sue Apple for selling a phone.
     
  5. voonyx macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2011
    #5
    Nah, Apple would have gotten permission first, unlike Google and the Android OEMs.
     
  6. AppleScruff1 macrumors G3

    AppleScruff1

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2011
    #6
    Like they did with Apple Records? :rolleyes:
     
  7. kdarling macrumors demi-god

    kdarling

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2007
    Location:
    First university coding class = 46 years ago
    #7
    Or Visual Voice Mail.

    Or the name "iPhone".
     
  8. KingCrimson macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2011
    #8
    If the Trade commission rules in favor of apple and shuts down Android/WP7 that will be a huge blow to innovation.
     
  9. thejadedmonkey macrumors 604

    thejadedmonkey

    Joined:
    May 28, 2005
    Location:
    Pa
    #9
    If Apple wins, they suddenly become a monopoly in the smartphone market, and become liable for anti-trust problems. At least, that's how it would happen in America. idk about Australia.
     
  10. ChazUK macrumors 603

    ChazUK

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2008
    Location:
    Essex (UK)
    #10
    You don't think companies like Motorola, Samsung, SonyEricsson, LG et;al are responsible for some of the foundations that the iPhone was built upon? They are some of the pioneering companies that designed the technology to get us where we are now.

    The payout to Nokia should show you how much permission Apple had prior to building the iPhone.

    Such a silly statement.
     
  11. voonyx macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2011
    #11
    I guess joking doesn't translate well on the internet either
     
  12. chaosbunny macrumors 68000

    chaosbunny

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2005
    Location:
    down to earth, far away from any clouds
    #12
    What does this want to say? If you don't have a better product than your competition, crush them with patents?
     
  13. ChazUK macrumors 603

    ChazUK

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2008
    Location:
    Essex (UK)
    #13
    Emoticons make a world of difference to a post. ;)
     
  14. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #14
    No, I think apple learned its lesson, back in day apple failed to patent many of its products and were unable to truly protect their IP. Now they like every other organization is patenting every small item just to protect their business and products.
     
  15. fireshot91 macrumors 601

    fireshot91

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2008
    Location:
    Northern VA
    #15
    Apple patents every last thing. If any of you guys read Engadget regularly (Not to start a thread on whether they're professional or not), you can see that they have a patent every week. Even things that they don't even want to put in their product..
     
  16. patrick0brien macrumors 68040

    patrick0brien

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2002
    Location:
    The West Loop
    #16
    A patent is just that, a patent, and I've read the patents in question. Yes, it's a weird hobby, left over from my Intellectual Property days.

    The part of a patent that matters, is the claims section. Everything else is just explanatory and fluffy. It is the claims that need to be narro enough to be valid and enforceable as a patent, but broad enough to protect the invention without somebody circumventing it.
    This is how Microsoft won the case against Apple on the GUI: the patents Apple had were too narrow, and there were some other agreements that fuzzed it further.

    Not this time, having read the patents, it's pretty clear what's going on.

    Forgive me, but Apple patents are actually interesting, I find myself actually able to visualize what they are claiming.
     
  17. KingCrimson macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2011
    #17
    I wonder how many patents the original iPhone violated.
     
  18. LethalWolfe macrumors G3

    LethalWolfe

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2002
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #18
    I wonder when patent law is going to catch up with technology. IP law in general was originally conceived to be a shield to help protect inventors/creators for a finite amount of time and it's too often being turned into a sword to use against competitors. Apple is not the first nor only company to game the system but it's unfortunate that you almost have to do it in order to compete. I feel like it's similar to performance enhancing drugs in sports. If everyone else is taking them you pretty much feel like you have to as well in order to stay competitive.


    Lethal
     

Share This Page