Apple Wins Injunction Barring U.S. Sales of Samsung Galaxy Nexus Phone

[Moccasin]

After reading this whole topic, I'm surprised everyone is talking as if Samsung and the Galaxy Nexus have been found to infringe the patents in question. People, this is a preliminary injunction, there has not been a ruling on whether anyone infringes anything at this point. This is what is frustrating. Go to court, both sides tell their stories, patents are affirmed/invalidated and when the dust settles and the ruling comes down, then issue injunctions for sale on infringing devices.

Placing sales ban on devices that "might or might not infringe" is what is insane here, no matter who is the plaintiff and who is the defendant.

Fair point and I agree there's a way to go yet. That said, there was enough of a case that the judge considered it as a viable course of action. Not saying its open and shut, just that there must be enough evidence to make it a legally- justified action.

----------

I'm genuinely surprised that "A means of displaying a number pad for the purpose of enabling the user to enter, and dial a phone number" isn't in there.

Seriously, these are all common sense features.
1. Just a simplified way of copying/pasting the information into the appropriate app.
2. Google are a SEARCH company. Of course they're going to have advanced searching features. They'd be fools not to.
3. This may be one of the stronger cases but again, it is an obvious and simple way for users to unlock their phone.
4. Auto-correct....really? In this day and age that should be standard on almost any computing device.

I honestly can't see them winning this one. In my opinion they should be losing a few patents along with the court case.

As I have said before, it's the detail. They haven't patented mobile search, just their implementation of it. If it was about general mobile search, then Google would have challenged it long ago.

 

[Vizin]

.

 

[Thex1138]

Dick move Apple, dick move.

See you later then... Apply for and win a patent next time...

 

[Moccasin]

Wait, Apple patented the idea that phone numbers are parsed into clickable links? Web apps (especially forum software) have been doing this for many, many years with URLs and email addresses. They just chose to take this pre-existing idea and use it for phone numbers. That's not novel, it's an obvious, logical way to use an already-existing technology.

The patent system is truly broken if this slipped through.

The keyword is presumably "means". My understanding is that they patented a way of doing it. If others come up with a different way of doing the same thing, there's no challenge.

 

[Vizin]

.

 

[Thex1138]

Wait, Apple patented the idea that phone numbers are parsed into clickable links? Web apps (especially forum software) have been doing this for many, many years with URLs and email addresses. They just chose to take this pre-existing idea and use it for phone numbers. That's not novel, it's an obvious, logical way to use an already-existing technology.

The patent system is truly broken if this slipped through.

Well they actually won the patent for the Mac in the late 90's for this with email, phone numbers and they applied for the patent and won to apply it to iPhone / smart phone... So it's broken when Apple win a patent hmm? Why do yu even bother writing in these forums if anything that Apple wins at patent is broken?

 

[Fruit Cake]

The only Losers here are us consumers, only beneficiaries are apple and it's shareholders. Notice the differing tone in responses ?

 

[Thex1138]

Why should you have to patent something as obvious as parsing text into links...? Apple didn't think of that. AIM did that in the 90's.

Apple applied for and won an implementation of it. Not originated it.

 

[Vizin]

.

 

[Moccasin]

The only Losers here are us consumers, only beneficiaries are apple and it's shareholders. Notice the differing tone in responses ?

No. Consumers are winners if the patent system is protected. Nothing would ever be invented if after spending millions on research, someone else can just come along and steal your idea. Kind of why patents were invented.

 

[Vizin]

.

 

[Moccasin]

A huge percentage of software patents are broken, no matter who owns them. The method for doing something as simple as detecting a phone number and parsing it into a link is obvious to anyone with any knowledge software design. Regular expressions 101.

A huge problem with patents is that the people who approve them aren't experts in the technology and aren't qualified to determine whether an "invention" is actually an invention or just someone trying to patent something obvious.

But maybe Apple did it in a different way to the norm. They innovated a different method and wanted to protect their innovation.

Apple are renowned for taking an existing idea or technology and taking it further. They could just implement it like everyone else but instead they choose to spend time and money taking the idea it to the next level.

 

[billystlyes]

Did Google patent it? If not, there's not an issue. If they did, I imagine that Apple have worked around the patent or licenced it. Would be too risky for Apple not to do so.

They have, but who knows where is stands. It could mean trouble in reverse though. And that's what I hate about all this crap. It just keeps going and going.

http://www.google.com/patents/US20090249247

 

[Thex1138]

That's even worse then, why would you be able to patent something you didn't come up with?

So you don't know how the patent system works...
There are two basic patents, Novel ideas and methods. Novel is something new, Method is achieving the same result as a Novel but in a different way.
There is a third type of patent but it's hardly used.
The majority of patents are Methods.

 

[Moccasin]

That's even worse then, why would you be able to patent something you didn't come up with?

They patented a different way of doing it. That's why you reference previous relevant patents when you apply for a new one.

It's also why in research papers, you cite your sources rather than passing off their work as your own.

 

[Vizin]

.

 

[Thex1138]

Look at any patent application or awarded patent. The application always sights precedent patents in its preamble. Patent lawyers in court always attempt to sight exclusions or oversights which would then invalidate the patent in their arguments... Just in time for the litigants employer to apply for basically the same idea with the inclusions.

 

[Moccasin]

They have, but who knows where is stands. It could mean trouble in reverse though. And that's what I hate about all this crap. It just keeps going and going.

http://www.google.com/patents/US20090249247

Well if it's passed and Apple haven't taken cognisance of it, then they could be in trouble. They seem pretty hot on patents though and will know that people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones (unless in an innovative way that hasn't been patented) so will be ensuring they are on solid ground.

 

[Serelus]

I'm honestly considering selling my iPad and Macbook out of principle.

Is there a proper response to people who say stuff like this? It's called protecting intellectual property. People on here make it seem like johnny ive and tim cook are at their desks 24/7, figuring out which companies are stealing their ideas...

Get it through your heads, that this is a whole different department within apple, the people who design and make these products are not involved in all of these patent wars, so stop saying: "apple should focus less on sueing and more time developing better products". Wether they do or not, it's not going to make any difference. The people that are sueing within apple, are NOT the same people developing these products.

 

[Thex1138]

Is there a proper response to people who say stuff like this? It's called protecting intellectual property. People on here make it seem like johnny ive and tim cook are at their desks 24/7, figuring out which companies are stealing their ideas...

Get it through your heads, that this is a whole different department within apple, the people who design and make these products are not involved in all of these patent wars, so stop saying: "apple should focus less on sueing and more time developing better products". Wether they do or not, it's not going to make any difference. The people that are sueing within apple, are NOT the same people developing these products.

The best response is see ya dude.... Don't give any air time to them... It's their money

 

[Moccasin]

The problem isn't patents, it's ridiculous patents. Detecting a phone number and making it into a link doesn't require millions of dollars in research, just someone with basic programming skills.

I'm sure many, many components of the iPhone actually are patentable, but nonsense patents like those makes me really question the integrity of the patent system.

You're missing the point though. This is about the way of doing that. Others have done the same idea without incurring the patent lawyers' wrath. Clearly Apple's lawyers and engineers found something in Samsung's implementation that contravened the patent and want a licence or for Samsung to find another way.

Could be the reason why this only applies to one phone. Samsung have changed their method on later phones to avoid this.

 

[Thex1138]

People don't realise that a lot of too-ing and fro-ing goes on way before litigation...
Phone calls, letters, meetings and reverse engineering to find out what a device is doing..
It's not simply as.. See yu in court dude... It's usually a lot deeper..

 

[Vizin]

.

 

[swagi]

Anyone know what the patents are that this supposedly breaks? Apple are a bit late again because the Samsung flagship phone is now the S3

Well, AFAIK it's not released in the US yet. Basically because Samsung decided to saturate more important markets (Southeast Asia and Europe) first.

But in all honesty I'm feeling sorry for the US. You people miss on great products just because of this ridiculous system.

Oh - and the burst photo mode in the Galaxy SIII is gorgeous! Shame Apple will never be able to implement something like that

 

[Moccasin]

People don't realise that a lot of too-ing and fro-ing goes on way before litigation...
Phone calls, letters, meetings and reverse engineering to find out what a device is doing..
It's not simply as.. See yu in court dude... It's usually a lot deeper..

Exactly right. This shows that Samsung and Apple have been battling this and weren't getting anywhere. It may even be that Apple arent that confident about winning but consider it to be worth the risk. $96 million suggests some confidence though!