Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Sues Motorola Over Multi-Touch
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
are you suggesting that you'd still be using the first one you had if it still worked?
i managed to keep my viewty for 2 1/2 years until it went too glitchy, all the while just wishing i had the fiscal abandon to get an iphone. finally, i gave in.
And returning to the topic, do these patent lawsuits ever get resolved? im sure its a lawyers wet dream and they run for years, but are we actually likely to see a phone made by motorola for example having to stop using multi-touch because Apple is found to own the patent?
Don't give that much blame to reverse engineering. Some stuff are obvious and discovered by many different companies at the same time.
Thanks, that had the information I couldn't find elsewhere: alienating competing handset makers (Apple and Sony, for example) would cost Samsung on the order of 8 billion dollars a year. Seems like a steep price to pay just for spite...
I wouldn't have tried to infringe the patent, seeing how defensive Jobs was about it.
At the iPhone's 2007 launch, one of the 'features' of Multi Touch was "And boy, have we patented it!"
At the iPhone's 2007 launch, one of the 'features' of Multi Touch was "And boy, have we patented it!"
Illiterate? Write for help!
And without citing a single one of the claims of the patent--or how one (a Motorola engineer, for example) must lay out the substrates, charge coupling surfaces, capacitance sensing media, the indium tin oxide, and glass members--you advise us that they are all lame, ridiculous, stupid and useless, because "Apple has not invented multipoint touchscreens."
If Motorola devises a screen technology under its own R&D, congratulations. They deserve whatever credit and profit they can derive from it. They have done it often. But if they use a very particular method worked out by someone else, they do not have an intrinsic right to profit from it without compensation to the inventor, just because you do not care to read.
And without citing a single one of the claims of the patent--or how one (a Motorola engineer, for example) must lay out the substrates, charge coupling surfaces, capacitance sensing media, the indium tin oxide, and glass members--you advise us that they are all lame, ridiculous, stupid and useless, because "Apple has not invented multipoint touchscreens."
If Motorola devises a screen technology under its own R&D, congratulations. They deserve whatever credit and profit they can derive from it. They have done it often. But if they use a very particular method worked out by someone else, they do not have an intrinsic right to profit from it without compensation to the inventor, just because you do not care to read.
Did Apple not famously use the quote "Good artists copy, great artists steal" ?
Should that not read: "Good artists copy, great artists sue" ?
Should that not read: "Good artists copy, great artists sue" ?
LOL! How right you are!!!!!
I think it's funny how some people on the forum just refuse to accept that Apple set the standard for the current day smart phone. The iPhone 1.0 was game changing. Does not matter who did what before then... in fact, looking at the info people posted about "multi-touch" Microsoft should be kicking themselves for not doing something like the iPhone before Apple. They had the experience... they had the ingredients... but didn't have the vision to know what to do with them. That's the difference with Apple... they are always looking at the ingredients in their cupboard and others for that matter, and doing something different with them.
It's one thing to say you can use two fingers to move an object on a screen... it's another thing to make it useful and cool. Apple knows how to make things useful and cool.
Oh... and for those of you that just say Apple is just greedy... well, making money is what business is about. Sorry to burst your idealistic bubble, but no one wants to work for free and companies are there to make money. Thank goodness Apple not only knows how to make money, but give us all cool and innovative products we want.
or they reached a licensing agreement when Apple signed the contract for them to provide flash memory and LCD panels to them... Just because each company out there uses the technology, it doesn't mean they haven't talked to apple about it.
There seems to be but one reasonable point of action. Everybody stop! Scratch all your current products and start over with something new. Really new. So new that no one has ever seen anything like it before! So new it doesn't even resemble a phone. That way you can't be violating any patents.
Not a monopoly. Anyone that want's to can use the patent's technology. They just have to agree to pay reasonable licensing fees to the patent holder.
Not correct. This assumes that the holder of a patent will grant rights under a reasonable offer. Nothing compels them to do so.
I saw that same TED video. Granted I didn't see it till after the iPhone was out, I'm not sure exactly the year of it.
It'd end up on Engadget, BGR, and various other tech blogs. It'd be especially interesting if it were running Android 3.0 or some other not yet released version.
Part of the reason the iPhone 4 stirred up so much interest is the fact that Apple is very secretive. It's not uncommon to see leaked images of other phone models before they are announced, but there are lots of people who are interested.