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 Suspends iCloud/MobileMe Push Email in Germany Due to Lawsuit
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
People have the right to protect their intellectual property, but no technology in 2012 is an island. Every OEM has built a product based on someone's prior art. This is my biggest problem with Apple's approach.
Nokia successfully sued Apple and settled and licensed the technology. That was after Apple was informed and refused to take a license. The same story with Motorola and their "FRAND" patent. All the Apple loyalists are screaming FRAND abuse, but what is being overlooked is Apple was offered a license years ago from Motorola and wanted special treatment. All the while continuing to use the technology. That is not right.
The reason why Apple comes across as the bad guys is also the approach being taken. Ban and Block are becoming synonamous with Apple litigation. Apple is not totally clean when it comes to copying innovation. Camera from unlock is a 2010 Microsoft patent. And it will blow my mind if their Notification Center is not a patent infringement on Google's patent pending version if/when it is approved.
If you do not want to share your patents with someone else that is okay. But then do not be surprised if others do not want to share theirs with you. It is going to be a sad, fragmented world we will live in when the dust settles.
Nokia successfully sued Apple and settled and licensed the technology. That was after Apple was informed and refused to take a license. The same story with Motorola and their "FRAND" patent. All the Apple loyalists are screaming FRAND abuse, but what is being overlooked is Apple was offered a license years ago from Motorola and wanted special treatment. All the while continuing to use the technology. That is not right.
The reason why Apple comes across as the bad guys is also the approach being taken. Ban and Block are becoming synonamous with Apple litigation. Apple is not totally clean when it comes to copying innovation. Camera from unlock is a 2010 Microsoft patent. And it will blow my mind if their Notification Center is not a patent infringement on Google's patent pending version if/when it is approved.
If you do not want to share your patents with someone else that is okay. But then do not be surprised if others do not want to share theirs with you. It is going to be a sad, fragmented world we will live in when the dust settles.
1. You are mispresenting the Nokia case. Nokia sued Apple, Apple countersued, eventually they came to an agreement. Apple refused to accept Nokia's original license terms, but Nokia and Apple agreed on license terms in the end. The license isn't cheap, but nobody expected that.
2. Motorola offered license terms that Apple didn't find acceptable under FRAND terms. Now what is Apple supposed to do? If your argument was right, that Apple shouldn't be allowed to use the patent until there is agreement, then every owner of an FRAND patent could stop anybody from ever using the patent by just demanding completely unreasonable license terms and delaying things in the courts for as long as possible.
If you made a commitment to offer those patents under FRAND terms you do not have that option. You have to share.
Now, in practice, quite what "fair and reasonable" is will sometimes end up in dispute, meaning that it will likely be decided by a judge. But while that case is making its way through the court system the holder of FRAND-encumbered IP ought not to seek an Injunction (ie. a court order banning the sale of a product base only on preliminary evidence.) If you get an Injunction you are defeating the spirit, and letter, of FRAND principles. All you need to do is set your royalty rate at terms the would-be licensee cannot accept, then run off to Mannheim.
Nokia never sought an injunction against Apple.
You also need to understand that this isn't just the opinion of Apple and its supporters. The EU Competition Agency and the US both issued very strongly worded statements warning Google and Motorola that they need to clean up their act regarding their FRAND-encumbered IP. Samsung is already being investigated in Europe for doing it.
Lastly, this issue goes far beyond Apple. Motorola is also playing the same games with Microsoft over the Standards Essential IP that allows your PC to access WiFi or display video. I'd refer you to this posting from Microsoft's General Counsel:
Worried about patent trolls "stifling competition" and raising prices for all consumers? You need to see who the real bad actors are. This isn't just about Motorola "picking the pocket of Apple's iPhone profits. Its about the very real possibility that you Windows laptop will cost an extra $20 or $40; that your wi-fi enabled TV will cost an extra $15; or your Linksys router costing an extra $5.
Last edited:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9B5141a Safari/7534.48.3)
Anyone else in Germany suddenly getting Push emails again? I just had two through (one from iTunes and then a test mail from me). This was 23:00 CET
Anyone else in Germany suddenly getting Push emails again? I just had two through (one from iTunes and then a test mail from me). This was 23:00 CET
Sounds right. Have you seen how many people in China religiously worship Motorola and Nokia? I am Chinese so I know this. It's almost unbelievable how ignorant they are.
You are overlooking what happened in the Nokia case. Nokia informed Apple that they were infringing on their IP and Apple refused to take a license. That is Apple's M.O. Happened time and time over. Are they the only ones that do that? Of course not, but it does not excuse that behaviour.
Also, according to FOSS patents and court documents, Apple was offered FRAND terms. Read here. FRAND means fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory. If Apple was offered a different rate, then Motorola would have absolutely NO leg to stand on since that is indeed discriminatory. That case would have been dismissed from day one because that defeats the whole point of FRAND. They are at the point they are now because Motorola wants to withhold the 3G patent from Apple to force them into cross-licensing and/or drop all these lawsuits. Apple made an offer to Motorola which Moto rejected. Moto wants insane damages and 2.25% of Apple's sales. Ridiculous request but what do you expect from businesses? Triple damages, backpay, and frand terms, yes.
Apple's tremendous riches are coming from the iPhone and iPad. They are looking to protect it at all costs, which means stamp out the competition. You don't see this happening in the iPod or Mac world do you?
----------
I am addressing push email in that comment; I agree they have to share standards-essential technology.
No, they did not. they sought damages and royalties. Something that Apple has not extended to other infringing OEMs. I am not saying they have to, but that is why you look like the bad guy.
All in all I just cannot understand the attitude of some commenters on forums.
IP is there for a good reason. Does it get abused sometimes with generic craziness? Yes, but that does not mean the whole system is trash. So if Apple owns slide to unlock and they don't want to share then that is their right. I hope when the tables turn and Google owns notification center that there won't be a reverse cry. But I suspect Apple is banking on Google staying directly out of the patent war for a very good reason...
Last edited:
BTW, Qualcomm only used in 4
There is so many iPhones previously sold without valid licenses and knowingly so. Apple will pay tripple damages when found guilty as charged. Besides, Apple is not the only company making expensive smartphones and others are paying FRAND licensing fees. Apple hand is very weak in this matter...
What next? No more push emails for Apple' products around the world is coming to you soon... This is very serious loss of functionality vs. superstitious shape, pinch, bounce or unlock jokes. What goes, around comes around. Siting on pile of cash emboldens Apple, but it attracts others to get piece of it too.
Last edited:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9B5141a Safari/7534.48.3)
Cool. I didn't for a large chunk of yesterday but it started again yesterday evening for me.
Cool. I didn't for a large chunk of yesterday but it started again yesterday evening for me.
No I haven't but am surprised just how many people I work with have iPhones and Macs, the amount some people spend on gadgets compared to their income makes me feel a lot better about the amount of shiny white or silver products I seem to have in my life.
I try not to call anyone ignorant, having lived in a number of different parts of the world, I accept we are all shaped by our previous experience of life.
I know and accept that to some people I will always be an interloper in their country but for most I hope to be a welcome addition, adding something different.
Good god, I've come over all hippy
Slide to unlock is an even sillier patent than this.
Did Motorola invent push email or something?
A lot of people say this, but if you look at the details it actually is a very useful innovation.
Have you ever tried using a cellphone for the first time? Remember how confusing it can be to try to figure out which button, or combination of buttons, unlocks it?
Apple knew that they needed to do something with the touchscreen of the iPhone that was better than anything else out there.
- It couldn't consist of a just touching or tapping a single button or region on the screen. That could happen by accident in a pocket or bag.
- At the same time, it couldn't consist of pressing two or more buttons simultaneously, because its very difficult to do that with one hand.
- It had to be so simple or intuitive that just about anyone could figure it out without reading or referring to a manual.
Some people like to suggest Apple's patent is invalid, citing "prior art" such as a Neonode touchscreen phone that required a similar "swiping" action to unlock. This simply betrays an ignorance of both the actual patent, and what Apple's innovation actually was.
Apple's Patent actually cites the Neonode in its references. But the critical difference is the Neonode doesn't tell the new or unfamiliar user how to use it.There are no visual or other clues as to what gesture one is supposed to use to unlock the device. The Patent Examiners were aware of the "prior art", but issued Apple's Patent because Apple - by adding the features that made it so anyone could figure out how to use it on the first try really had innovated.
Its easy to say "Swipe to Unlock" was obvious, once you've seen it. But cellphone makers had been coming up with complicated and confusing methods for twenty years that simply didn't work very well.They simply didn't care very much.
Apple's "Slide to Unlock", combined with hundreds of other such small, often little appreciated, features and innovations, is what made the iPhone the runaway success it is. I don't blame Apple for patenting as many of those as they could. Nor of vigorously defending their inventions.
Easy way to work around this is to use push notification's. Send a notification to the device that informs you that you have new emails waiting to be downloaded. Pressing the email icon will then start downloading the email headers followed by their content. There are many variations that can be used that will avoid any delay getting your mail
Last edited:
Its kind of funny how people are claiming google is being a bully....yada yada ya. Every other day there's a story out of Apple suing someone.
Pretty sure Apples lawyers and their cash reserves to pay for them are revered here on a daily basis. Imagine what happens when googles patent for a pull down notification center goes through. Yikes!
Pretty sure Apples lawyers and their cash reserves to pay for them are revered here on a daily basis. Imagine what happens when googles patent for a pull down notification center goes through. Yikes!
It's useful but it is neither innovative nor unobvious. It's a touchscreen version of a physical lock and stuff like that shouldnt be patentable. Its on the same level as patenting a touchscreen keypad to dial phone numbers or a jog wheel to advance music.
Dutch judges may be ignorants because they told Apple not to bring this patent to the full trial because it surely would be invalidated because of prior art.
You certainly sound like an unbiased, reasonable poster. Oh wait, I mean the exact opposite.
If you don't know think Qualcomm would have to pay licensing fees to Motorola to license 3G/GSM patents in a chip that supports 3G/GSM then you should probably contact Qualcomm and tell them to stop sending those licensing fees to Motorola. Imagine all the money they could save! It is well documented that Qualcomm, a chip manufacturer, pays Motorola licensing fees for every chip they sell.
As far as I know, Apple is not paying Qualcomm to "license CDMA technology" -- they are paying Qualcomm for the chips that implement the technology (as well as the GSM technology). If you have a reference that says otherwise please share it. Apple switched to Qualcomm when they moved to chips that support CDMA and GSM -- I can't see this move involving licensing fees in addition to chip purchases.
I understand, from the tone of your post, that you dislike Apple but please try to at least feign objectivity.
