Apple Wins Access to Information on Android Development History and Motorola Acquisition Talks

[dethmaShine]

Sort of. The source code may be available, but that doesn't mean that any hardware manufacturer can sell an Android product without permission from Google.

Well. Sure they can. But Google does exert a LOT of control on these manufacturers.

It's ironical actually. Google exerts so much control that they could throw Skyhook out of the Android domain. Moreover, asked Samsung and Motorola to stop their shipments. But have no control over Android OS updates. It's funny really.

----------

I liked this part :

"It's certainly remarkable that those two emails show a consistent attitude: the Android team basically says "let's just infringe" whenever an intellectual property issue comes up. If they did this to Oracle, what about the intellectual property of other companies like Apple, Microsoft, eBay and Skyhook?"

I sincerely have lost faith in Google. I've contributed to the ML team at Google for their no-man AI cars but enough. The working atmosphere is great, contrary to what some people say. But that's just me.

I've no faith in the company's policies, disciplines or ideals(if any).

 

[AndyM]

Sort of. The source code may be available, but that doesn't mean that any hardware manufacturer can sell an Android product without permission from Google.

Umm... It does.

They need a licence to use the Market Place, however that isn't the Google OS.

That is why you see a lot of tablets coming from china without the Market Place.

As someone said earlier, Companies pay google for help in implementing the source code onto their hardware, not for the OS itself.

 

[Mattstkc]

Anyway, who cares anymore. Apple has always been the sue-happiest company in the industry. And now, since there haven't been any real innovations since the introduction of the first iPhone, apparently litigation is all that's left for them to do.

no innovation? There are no words to address that level of ignorance so I'll just say that and let it be.

Apple has to litigate when companies infringe on their patents. Software patents on their face are debatable because the logos can be TM'd, the code can be Copyrighted and then the interface can be patented. But it's not like their paranoid- they have tens of billions in the bank so they're doing something right. Companies are copying Apple's designs, both physical and digital, left and right. Their only legal recourse is the courts.

 

[fat phil]

Apple has had what, 5 phones in the past 5 years. Android powered phones probably topple 100 different models in the past 4 or so years. Of course, when you sell an Android phone for next to nothing or give them away for free, of course people will buy.

According to:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Android_devices
Samsung alone has 25 models...heh.

 

[Consultant]

But regarding those eMails... Will we also get access to the eMails from Steve Jobs in which he orders his employees to rip off the LG Prada?

Why do you continue to spread false information? Surely every phone is copying the LG Prada. Perhaps the facts too difficult to understand for some people.

iPhone vs. LG Prada nonsense
http://gizmodo.com/261172/settling-this-iphone-vs-lg-prada-nonsense

In addition,
December 12, 2006: LG Prada announced (by then, many companies knew that Apple will introduce a new phone, and many tried to "announce" their product ahead of Apple's)
January 9, 2007: iPhone unveiled
January 18, 2007: official press release showing image of LG Prada

iPhone: 8GB internal storage
LG Prada: 8MB (not GB) internal storage
there are other major differences of course

 

[dethmaShine]

Why do you continue to spread false information? Surely every phone is copying the LG Prada. Are the facts too difficult to understand:

iPhone vs. LG Prada
http://gizmodo.com/261172/settling-this-iphone-vs-lg-prada-nonsense

In addition,
December 12, 2006: LG Prada announced (by then, many companies knew that Apple will introduce a new phone, and many tried to "announce" their product ahead of Apple's)
January 9, 2007: iPhone unveiled
January 18, 2007: official press release showing image of LG Prada

iPhone: 8GB internal storage
LG Prada: 8MB (not GB) internal storage
there are other major differences of course

LOL. In no way the original iPhone looked like LG Prada. It's so weird that people find core similarities b/w the two but can't see the obvious infringement in Samsung Galaxy Ace or SGS1/2 phones.

 

[Bubba Satori]

The problem is when Apple innovates, they get ripped off. If Apple sits back and doesn't protect their innovations, then they are basically saying "we'll show everyone how things should be done, feel free to come steal our stuff".

What was it Steve said about copying great ideas?
We'll wait.

 

[KanosWRX]

In the end patent disputes only hurt consumers and that's a fact. If apple wins against android they don't have to develop ios as much because they killed of the competition and the innovation created from them in order to compete. Do you think we would have had that notification system taken from Google if Google didn't make it? No Apple saw the competition and had to keep up. I can only imagine how little change would be in ios if they didn't have to compete with Android. I am glad their are competitors out there as it spurs on competition which we need as consumers. I hope Apple gets a smack down from the government soon for their bullying. I love my apple products but I want them to get better, therefor I want competition.

 

[Peace]

According to:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Android_devices
Samsung alone has 25 models...heh.

You do realize you just showed how Apple innovates and the other companies follow. right ?

 

[fertilized-egg]

Why do you continue to spread false information? Surely every phone is copying the LG Prada. Perhaps the facts too difficult to understand for some people.
...
there are other major differences of course

More importantly, has anyone who claims Apple copied LG actually used the LG Prada? The touch UI on that thing was nothing like the iPhone or any other current modern multitouch smartphones. I'm always flabbergasted by the number of people who think LG Prada had any impact on the modern smartphones.

 

[dejo]

They should just stop the pissing contest and try to get back in the lead by innovation instead of litigation. But it seems that without Jobs they can no longer do that.

Yeah, because they never sued anybody while Jobs was alive...

 

[fourthtunz]

Lol, delusional post Name ONE company that's 'out innovating' Apple. Just watch 2012 unfold with new products and you'll eat those words over and over. By the end of the year you'll look up 'innovation' in the dictionary and see this

I'll be more impressed that ever if Apple continue's to act on Steve's wishes and takes down Android the stolen, yet poor copy of Apples incredible work on iOS and the iPhone.

Go Apple Go!

I can't understand why people are having such a hard time with this.
Wasn't it ex-apple employees that developed the android?
I don't think the android is nearly as good as the iPhone but it is a lot more like the iPhone than the others, is this just a coincidence?

 

[crazy4apple]

Fanboys War

For anyone to say that Google was not influenced in any way what-so-ever by the iPhone is either blind or just really stupid. Android was being demo'ed in 2006 and 2007, both of those times it was clearly an answer to the Blackberry. After the iPhone, Google obviously went back to the drawing board. If they didn't, why did it take almost two more years after the original unveiling of the iPhone before the first Android device was brought to market? iPhone Jan. '07 ... T-Mobile G1 October '08. Especially since Android was started towards the beginning of the decade. Furthermore, Google's answer to the iPad followed the EXACT SAME path, iPad Jan. '10, Honeycomb March '11. I mean honestly, where exactly is Google leading? They didn't even have the foresight to see the tablet market, they were trying to push ChromeOS onto netbooks. They were going after what was already out there, not trying to think of any new possibilities.

Sorry, but Apple changed the mobile UI paradigm. True Android doesn't look exactly like iOS, or Windows Phone Metro isn't even close, but the fact is, Apple came in and changed how people thought about user interfaces on mobile devices. Before the iPhone, yes there were grids of apps on home screens, but EVERY UI was point-and-click, and menu driven just as it had been on full desktop OS's decades prior.

for life

 

[KnightWRX]

You can't use the latest Android version, Ice Cream Sandwich, without a licensing agreement from Google. While Google says that Android is 'free software', this is technically only true for older versions, not the most recent versions.

http://source.android.com/index.html says you lie.

 

[fourthtunz]

In the end patent disputes only hurt consumers and that's a fact. If apple wins against android they don't have to develop ios as much because they killed of the competition and the innovation created from them in order to compete. Do you think we would have had that notification system taken from Google if Google didn't make it? No Apple saw the competition and had to keep up. I can only imagine how little change would be in ios if they didn't have to compete with Android. I am glad their are competitors out there as it spurs on competition which we need as consumers. I hope Apple gets a smack down from the government soon for their bullying. I love my apple products but I want them to get better, therefor I want competition.

Sure we all benefit from real competition but ideas stolen from apple and then incorporated into a competitors product is theft.

 

[KnightWRX]

The results were Google was found to have used the java engine when they had no legal right to do so and then they changed it. Which they had no right to do.

Citation needed ? When did this happen ? Oracle's case against Google for use of Java in Android is crumbling.

----------

Sort of. The source code may be available, but that doesn't mean that any hardware manufacturer can sell an Android product without permission from Google.

Yes it does, they just can't use the trademark or the Google apps.

 

[fat phil]

You do realize you just showed how Apple innovates and the other companies follow. right ?

I certainly hope so, since that's been my position for the past decade. See my post on Page 2.

 

[rmwebs]

If Android gets sued into obliviion, what will poor Tmobile sell I wonder?

It's shocking that people genuinely think Apple wil wipe Android off the face of the planet. It's comparable to Microsoft taking Apple out...or vice versa.

Not going to happen. The only people this crap benefits is lawyers. Drop the stupid bickering lawsuits and innovate instead.

 

[KnightWRX]

I can't understand why people are having such a hard time with this.
Wasn't it ex-apple employees that developed the android?
I don't think the android is nearly as good as the iPhone but it is a lot more like the iPhone than the others, is this just a coincidence?

Andy Rubin worked at Apple in 1992 or 1993. He started Android in 2003. Meanwhile though, he made a whole other mobile OS named Hip-Top in his earlier startup of Danger Inc from 1998. It sold on a device known as the T-mobile sidekick, like 5 years prior to Apple ever announcing a phone.

The more you know...

 

[fourthtunz]

Time to boycot. Tired of this crap. iPhone hasnt changed in 5 years besides minor things. Look at pictures from the first iPhone OS, until now.. It has a different dock and wallpaper.

Android is taking them to the cleaners at this point.

I had the first one and now have the new one, you could not be more wrong.
Mind sharing what it is that you are smoking?

 

[JHankwitz]

Give me back the "old" Apple, the one that was run by visionaries and engineers; not by accountants, lawyers, and hipster designers.

It looks like you haven't been around very long. You must have missed the battles between Apple and Microsoft in the late 80s and early 90s. What's going on now is nothing compared to those.

 

[firewood]

The choice is Innovate vs Litigate...

No. It's innovate and litigate. The only reason to innovate is because you can also litigate. Otherwise I could just wait for you to invent something, then rush my copy to market, which I could do at a lower price since I didn't have to pay for any R&D, and bankrupt you.

That's fascinating. How exactly can you "willfully exploit" something that by its very definition is FREE SOFTWARE. Java has been put under the GNU General Public License by SUN before Oracle acquired the company. I find playing the patent game on a technology that was made available as free software rather absurd.

You've been fooled by the lie that GPL licensed stuff is "free". It's not. It's a license to end up in litigation. Many companies have been sued for using GPL software. Versions of the GPL did not grant proper patent rights, which allows even more reasons for suing people for using GPL stuff, after tricking then into trying to freely use this allegedly "free" material. It's a very expensive license. A sheep in wolves clothing. Don't believe the lies.

 

[macsmurf]

It looks like you haven't been around very long. You must have missed the battles between Apple and Microsoft in the late 80s and early 90s. What's going on now is nothing compared to those.

The only court case I know of is the one where Apple sued Microsoft for stealing their GUI and Xerox sued Apple for the same thing. Both Apple and Xerox lost.

 

[fourthtunz]

Andy Rubin worked at Apple in 1992 or 1993. He started Android in 2003. Meanwhile though, he made a whole other mobile OS named Hip-Top in his earlier startup of Danger Inc from 1998. It sold on a device known as the T-mobile sidekick, like 5 years prior to Apple ever announcing a phone.

The more you know...

Not sure if He's the one I was thinking of...
We'll find out if it's all a coincidence.

 

[KnightWRX]

You've been fooled by the lie that GPL licensed stuff is "free". It's not. It's a license to end up in litigation. Many companies have been sued for using GPL software. Versions of the GPL did not grant proper patent rights, which allows even more reasons for suing people for using GPL stuff, after tricking then into trying to freely use this allegedly "free" material. It's a very expensive license. A sheep in wolves clothing. Don't believe the lies.

And what do the BSD, MIT or Apache License tell you about patent rights ?

The FUD is so strong...