Apple Pulls All 3G Devices Except iPhone 4S from German Online Store Following Motorola Patent Win [Updated]

[Renzatic]

Lol. This man is a fan of Google's search technology, Samsung's display technology, and Apple's consumer technology. This man is not a fan of Samsung/Motorola/Google's iphone/ipad rip offs, or Apple's half-assed failures like Ping and MobileMe.

But since I actually have a preference in one category, somehow I'm a fanboy. Lol.

Yeah, and yet you list Google amongst the copycats and wannabes. Why? Because you happen to have a preference towards the competing platform?

A preference is one thing. An ignorant bias is another.

I prefer iOS over Android, yet I don't call Google a copycat and ripoff. I've used both enough to see that they're only superficially similar. Yeah, Google has ape some iOS features before. But hey, Apple has aped a few Android features as well. Yet, despite this, you don't see me calling anyone a copycat and a ripoff, nor complaining about either/or. If anything, I'd like to see these companies ripping each other off more.

 

[kdarling]

Wrong. Patents do need to be defended or risk becoming public domain outside of the US.

Naturally an inventor needs to apply for patents outside the US, but once he has them, they do not become public domain until they expire.

Huh? I listed Steve Jobs contribution as a matter of interest and nothing more. Using the small percentage of Apple patents that Jobs was included in to somehow prove that Apple's tens of thousands of other patents are not worthy of being considered inventions is an absurd and flawed argument.

The two topics are not related, except for the fact that a lot of Apple US patents are ornamental, not utility.

Nevertheless, as you said, Apple has invented along the way.

As for that 25,000 number, it sounds like it came from Bloomberg, who must've counted multiple copies of the same patents around the world.

Interestingly, if we look at just mobile communications related patents in the US and EU between 1993 and 2011, one analysis has Apple down in about 30th place with ~1,000. Samsung is number one with ~12,000. Which makes sense; Apple is relatively new to mobile comms.

 

[menithings]

Yeah, and yet you list Google amongst the copycats and wannabes. Why? Because you happen to have a preference towards the competing platform?

A preference is one thing. An ignorant bias is another.

I prefer iOS over Android, yet I don't call Google a copycat and ripoff. I've used both enough to see that they're only superficially similar. Yeah, Google has ape some iOS features before. But hey, Apple has aped a few Android features as well. Yet, despite this, you don't see me calling anyone a copycat and a ripoff, nor complaining about either/or. If anything, I'd like to see these companies ripping each other off more.

Android is fundamentally an iPhone rip-off IMO based on personal use of both platforms, and not 'ignorant bias'. Google originally bought Android and developed it as a Blackberry clone until the iPhone was announced. Then Google systematically and comprehensively copied Apple's iPhone IP while adding flourishes taken from the jailbreak community to give it a semblance of differentiation.

No amount of "Apple also copied Andriod's xxx" after-the-fact arguments can convince me from knowing that Android is at its very core, an iPhone clone.

Again, I love Google's search tech and Samsung's display tech. But not Android. I used it. I hated it. It's an unstable, unresponsive, fragmented, malware infested copycat. And it deserves to be sued into oblivion for being the tacky copycat it truly is.

If Apple stole Google's AI algorithms in an attempt to make their own copycat search engine, I'd just as vigorously support Apple being sued by Google.

Alright I'm out. Have a lovely weekend

 

[AppleScruff1]

The scenario is simple. Apple used patents that Motorola owns without paying for them. Apple will now be held liable until reasonable licensing fees are settled. And until that (or until an appeal) - Apple can't engage in certain commerce in Germany.

Is it a win for Motorola. Yes. Is it devastating to Apple? I don't think so. Although Apple did try and get Motorola to be on the hook for over 2 billion and the courts deemed it worth over 1 million for a bond.

If the situation was reversed, the usual suspects would be claiming victory and how Apple innovates and everyone else who "steals" from them should be brought down.

So some of the responses in this thread are not surprising in the slightest.

Quite true. I'm sure that they would all feel the same way about Samsung too.

It's amazing that some people don't remember what they write in this short thread. If you're asserting that Motorola REFUSED to license the patent under reasonable terms - then you're falling short of the truth.

But since when has that stopped some posters and bloggers from insisting that they've been posting the truth all along.

Some are in denial. They can't see the forest because of the trees.

I'm able to comprehend the *actual* level of impact. Which is next to nothing.

I'm sorry if the Facts have a pro-Apple bias. Not much I can do about that.

Source? You're stating something as fact without providing proof.

 

[thenerdal]

ROTFL

I proved that your "Apple doesn't invent" statement is patently false (pun intended) and instead of admitting you are wrong, you just change the subject.

BTW the Samsung patent warchest you introduced in lue of admitting you don't know what your talking about is an entirely different discussion, and in no way validates your delusional statement that "Apple doesn't invent" lol.

Apple invents, yes. But They don't invent the things people think they invented. Such as Multi-Touch.

What I meant to say is that Apple didn't invent huge things.
Like what Motorola did.
They invented the first handheld Mobile Phone used in a non vehicle setting. Basically. The first Cell Phone.

 

[shadowhawk2020]

Android is fundamentally an iPhone rip-off IMO based on personal use of both platforms, and not 'ignorant bias'. Google originally bought Android and developed it as a Blackberry clone until the iPhone was announced. Then Google systematically and comprehensively copied Apple's iPhone IP while adding flourishes taken from the jailbreak community to give it a semblance of differentiation.

No amount of "Apple also copied Andriod's xxx" after-the-fact arguments can convince me from knowing that Android is at its very core, an iPhone clone.

Again, I love Google's search tech and Samsung's display tech. But not Android. I used it. I hated it. It's an unstable, unresponsive, fragmented, malware infested copycat. And it deserves to be sued into oblivion for being the tacky copycat it truly is.

If Apple stole Google's AI algorithms in an attempt to make their own copycat search engine, I'd just as vigorously support Apple being sued by Google.

Alright I'm out. Have a lovely weekend

Google hasn't been sued by Apple because what you say is just wrong... They are going after the little patents (bounce back on a page change, rounded edges.) because it is all they have.

You don't think the pulldown notification isn't at least a little like Android?

 

[krzyglue]

It's responses like these that further convince me that Apple's doing the right thing defending its game changing innovation against cheesy copycats and wannabe's like Motorola, Google and Samsung.

And it's idiotic language like that that makes me seriously consider covering the Apple logo on my MBP with a sticker or something while out in public.

 

[MacinDoc]

Google hasn't been sued by Apple because what you say is just wrong... They are going after the little patents (bounce back on a page change, rounded edges.) because it is all they have.

You don't think the pulldown notification isn't at least a little like Android?

Actually, Apple has used similar notifications as far back as the Newton.

----------

Interestingly, if we look at just mobile communications related patents in the US and EU between 1993 and 2011, one analysis has Apple down in about 30th place with ~1,000. Samsung is number one with ~12,000. Which makes sense; Apple is relatively new to mobile comms.

Not to mention the fact that Apple makes computers and handheld gadgets, while Samsung also makes computer components, printers, scanners, TVs, DVDs, Blu-ray players, HTIBs, digital cameras, camcorders, and kitchen appliances (heck, it probably makes half the components Apple uses). Its range of products could easily outnumber Apple's 100 to 1.

Edit: did I mention embedded chips, construction materials and heavy construction vehicles?

 

[shompa]

This is strange since GPRS have nothing to do with 3G.

GPRS is a 2G technology that allows for more data bandwidth. We are talking 64Kb to 128Kb depending on the base stations. GPRS is (almost) never used since Apple support EDGE at 384Kb.

Using the internet with 64-128Kb is almost impossible.

The bandwidth for GPRS is insanely more expensive for the telephone companies then EDGE/3G since GPRS takes up more bandwidth on the base station since its 2G.

1) Apple could do a software patch to remove GPRS and no one would notice.
2) Apple won't loose an appeal. Isn't this the case where Apple didn't defend itself since they wanted the case in a higher instance? (Someone with German law insight can this better then me)

In many Euro countries the court system works like this: lowest instance 2 person with law degree and 3 people appointed by the "people". Second instance have 3 persons with law degree and 2 persons appointed by the "people". That is why many don't have a defense in the first instance since the majority making the deception are people without law degree. Second instance have majority law degree.

 

[blackhand1001]

No offense, but the Razr Maxx is huge ... it's thinner but bigger in every other dimension.

I used it it. Its a good size. Maybe the iPhone is too small.

 

[swagi]

This is strange since GPRS have nothing to do with 3G.

GPRS is a 2G technology that allows for more data bandwidth. We are talking 64Kb to 128Kb depending on the base stations. GPRS is (almost) never used since Apple support EDGE at 384Kb.

Using the internet with 64-128Kb is almost impossible.

The bandwidth for GPRS is insanely more expensive for the telephone companies then EDGE/3G since GPRS takes up more bandwidth on the base station since its 2G.

1) Apple could do a software patch to remove GPRS and no one would notice.
2) Apple won't loose an appeal. Isn't this the case where Apple didn't defend itself since they wanted the case in a higher instance? (Someone with German law insight can this better then me)

In many Euro countries the court system works like this: lowest instance 2 person with law degree and 3 people appointed by the "people". Second instance have 3 persons with law degree and 2 persons appointed by the "people". That is why many don't have a defense in the first instance since the majority making the deception are people without law degree. Second instance have majority law degree.

Errr...you know that every phone falls back to GPRS data usage when 3G is not available, do you? Ever heard of white spots?

 

[zacman]

What hasn't been reported here is that the same court also issued (on Motorola's request) an injunction against Apple's iCloud push email service as it found Apple guilty in violating a Motorola patent about device syncing. Apple has already disabled iCloud email push and tells (German) users to switch to Google or other mail providers for push email.

 

[TheMacBookPro]

You showed a photo of the front of a Samsung photo frame, made in 2006. You neglected however to show the side or the back of that photo frame, as shown here http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2011/08/23/samsungs-digital-picture-frame-was-no-ipad/ . A design patent is for the design as a whole, not for some aspect of a design. Apple's design patent consists of a large number of design properties ("rectangular with rounded corners" being just one of them), and to infringe on the design patent, a product must match all of these design properties. A side view of that photo frame would have showed clearly that as far as design patents go, Samsung 2006 photo frame and iPad are totally unrelated. Front similar or identical, side view completely different, back view completely different, means that they are unrelated.

It also means that if a Samsung tablet in 2012 looked identical to their 2006 photo frame, then Apple wouldn't have a legal leg to stand on. On the other hand, if Samsung tried to sell a tablet that looked identical, including a view from the side and the back, to their 2006 photo frame, people would either laugh or start crying or both.

The picture frame's back is white plastic and is bulbous in appearance. The iPad (1)'s back is silver metal and bulbous in appearance, albeit to a lesser extent.

In addition, the part I was addressing was Apple's 'patent' on "a flat front with a touchscreen and black bezel", which are indeed elements of the picture frame.

I am not new here as you'll see. I've posted here long enough (and lurked here for a long time before I joined up. I will not argue with you over *LTD*. I've read many many of his posts and most of them are not that bad at all, a few were quite the good read. We can just agree to disagree.

And thank you. I will keep enjoying my stay here. While continuing to enjoy *LTD*'s quality posts.

Good idea. So stop with attacks such as,

I would be ashamed of you if I knew you and posters like you could do any better. But I feel they can not. So you live in your dream world.

hm?

Android is fundamentally an iPhone rip-off IMO based on personal use of both platforms, and not 'ignorant bias'. Google originally bought Android and developed it as a Blackberry clone until the iPhone was announced. Then Google systematically and comprehensively copied Apple's iPhone IP while adding flourishes taken from the jailbreak community to give it a semblance of differentiation.

Yes, you are absolutely correct

No amount of "Apple also copied Andriod's xxx" after-the-fact arguments can convince me from knowing that Android is at its very core, an iPhone clone.

Notification Center (Android) and drop-down notifications (WP7). But no, Apple are still 100% completely innovative, right?

Again, I love Google's search tech and Samsung's display tech. But not Android. I used it. I hated it. It's an unstable, unresponsive, fragmented, malware infested copycat. And it deserves to be sued into oblivion for being the tacky copycat it truly is.

I don't suppose you're also the kind of person who believes that Windows needs 35 different antivirus systems otherwise it'll be overrun by twenty-three-trillion viruses in 2 femtoseconds?

 

[Dbrown]

Not to mention the fact that Apple makes computers and handheld gadgets, while Samsung also makes computer components, printers, scanners, TVs, DVDs, Blu-ray players, HTIBs, digital cameras, camcorders, and kitchen appliances (heck, it probably makes half the components Apple uses). Its range of products could easily outnumber Apple's 100 to 1.

Edit: did I mention embedded chips, construction materials and heavy construction vehicles?

Did you even bother what you were quoting. he said mobile communications patents.

 

[JAT]

What hasn't been reported here is that the same court also issued (on Motorola's request) an injunction against Apple's iCloud push email service as it found Apple guilty in violating a Motorola patent about device syncing. Apple has already disabled iCloud email push and tells (German) users to switch to Google or other mail providers for push email.

Does Gmail push?

 

[Rodimus Prime]

Does Gmail push?

yes. It uses Active sync.

 

[JAT]

I must have it set up wrong. I haven't changed the setup since it was on my 1G iPod Touch.

 

[Rodimus Prime]

I must have it set up wrong. I haven't changed the setup since it was on my 1G iPod Touch.

you have to use the exchange settings to do it.

 

[kdarling]

A design patent is for the design as a whole, not for some aspect of a design. Apple's design patent consists of a large number of design properties ("rectangular with rounded corners" being just one of them), and to infringe on the design patent, a product must match all of these design properties.

Just a note that Design Patents don't have to contain a description (e.g. "rounded corners")... they can just have images, such as the iPad US Design Patent below (*).



Moreover, the patent isn't necessarily for the whole design:

1) Any part of the design that's functional is not covered. You can only patent ornamental elements. With the iPad, several judges so far have commented that physical features like rounded edges and flat surfaces are functional and thus are not protectable.

2) The included drawing often has dashed lines to indicate that something is not claimed by the patent. I"m pretty sure I've seen a version of an iPhone design patent with the Home button dashed out, for instance, so they could try to claim anything shaped the same way.

(*)The only descriptive wording on the iPad Design Patent (PDF here) is to describe the drawing: "The large dash broken lines shown on the rear of the figure represent contour lines and not surface ornamentation. The small dash broken lines in the figures show portions of the portable display device that form no part of the claimed design."

 

[mutantteenager]

Not even close. Not Rev A, not that grievous, hardly universal.

Macbook would be pretty high on the list. That logic board was junk.

It was a phone that didn't work as a phone, I'd say that was a pretty bad flaw. If memory serves that was Rev A of the iphone 4...

 

[JAT]

It was a phone that didn't work as a phone, I'd say that was a pretty bad flaw. If memory serves that was Rev A of the iphone 4...

Rev A of the iPhone 4??

So, by that logic, every device or pair of underwear ever made is Rev A.

And it was a phone with an exposed antenna. OMG!!

 

[Reggie1]

Just Buy It !

Apple should just buy Motorola and fold their patents & technology into Apples I.P. folder.

Oh, and offer current motorola phone users an upgrade to iPhone 4S of course!

 

[the8thark]

Good idea. So stop with attacks such as,
hm?

Not my fault if the truth hurts. It's up to you if the truth offends you or not.

 

[TheMacBookPro]

Not my fault if the truth hurts. It's up to you if the truth offends you or not.

At least I'm not the one who has to resort to attacks to make my point clear

"go live in your dream world" is basically an insult towards my intelligence and I don't think the forum rules deems 'truthful insults' as okay. Insult = an insult.

And fwiw, I disagree with your 'truth', but I'm not going to insult you by telling you to live in your dream world because I'm not in grade school

 

[kdarling]

Apple should just buy Motorola and fold their patents & technology into Apples I.P. folder.

Shhh. Don't tell Google that idea. They might buy Motorola for their IP first.