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

[Zombie Acorn]

Most of those posting here should be ashamed of their postings. You should understand what is being contested before speaking.



Quote:
1. A means of detecting and marking up data like a phone number or an e-mail address, and then initiating a phone call or an e-mail when the linked data is clicked
2. A means of searching multiple databases and sources for data.
3. A slide to unlock feature.
4. An autocorrect-type function that completes the word as a user types and allows the user to accept or reject the word.

None of these should be granted patents. Parsing data and having it be clickable to initiate a function goes back to the hyperlink.

Searching multiple databases for data? Im 100% sure apple did not come up with this.

Slide to unlock? Really? Thats like patenting type to unlock. And autocorrect? Whoever has the spellcheck patent should be angry.

Apple forgot how to innovate so they sue and make more pixels. So impressed.

 

[lifeinhd]

What I find most disturbing, is all of us who buy iPhones are funding Apple's ability to eliminate the competition.

 

[leroypants]

“I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple’s $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong.”

“I’m going to destroy Android, because it’s a stolen product. I’m willing to go thermonuclear war on this.”

He was right about the dying part, although android is still alive and kIcking unlike the messiah.

 

[Oletros]

Meanwhile the judge was spotted going out the back into his car with a huge Louis Vuitton holdall stuffed with $100 bills.

Are you accusing Judge Koh of being bribed by Apple?

Amusing, when she didn't granted the injunction again the Galaxy Tab 10.1 she was accused of being bribed by Samsung.

People accuse she of what they would do?

 

[Bezetos]

It's not fair competition if you've implemented someone else's ideas without permission or compensation. That should probably be "cancelled out."

That's what you Apple fans like to believe. But please name me one thing that Android "stole" from iOS.

I've always found the talk about Android stealing Apple's ideas ridiculous. Both systems were implemented roughly at the same time and they just share basic features.

And the look-and-feel argument?

Here's a picture of some icons from my PC desktop in a black rectangle:

Looks a bit like an iPhone, doesn't it?

 

[Mackan]

That is what judges do. Not everybody thinks the same. Haven't figured that one out yet have we?

Get lost dude.

 

[Moccasin]

None of these should be granted patents. Parsing data and having it be clickable to initiate a function goes back to the hyperlink.

Searching multiple databases for data? Im 100% sure apple did not come up with this.

Slide to unlock? Really? Thats like patenting type to unlock. And autocorrect? Whoever has the spellcheck patent should be angry.

as others have shown, Apple had the original patent on this in the mid 90s.

Again as had been said by others, Apple has patented methods of carrying out ideas.

Presumably there is an expectation that Apple - or indeed Sony, Nokia et al - should find new and better ways of doing things, spending millions of dollars on R&D, and then have other companies come along and use their work without any payment or other recognition

 

[Relativistic]

Some of the replies make my head hurt. Here, I can play this game too:

Apple STOLE the following from Android:
1) Sliding notifications
2) Access to camera in lock screen
3) OTA updates
4) Find My Friends (Google Latitude)
5) iMessage (GTalk)
6) Copy paste
7) Tabbed browsing
and many more

Here's a quote by your Dear Leader: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CW0DUg63lqU

In all seriousness though, did GM steal from Ford when they made a vehicle with 4 wheels?

YOU CANNOT STEAL IDEAS. Get that through your thick skulls.

 

[coldmack]

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.

I am pretty sure I had an option like this on my old Nokia S60 phones.

 

[Moccasin]

I am pretty sure I had an option like this on my old Nokia S60 phones.

A previous post showed that Apple patented this in the 90s for desktops etc.

 

[Poisednoise]

I forgot you Americans consider 1,000 millions in a billion, I'm still thinking in old school UK system where 100 millions in a billion.

In "old school UK" it's a million million which is a billion, not 100 million. However that has not been the case for many years now: the use of "long scale" as it is properly known was officially abandoned in the UK in 1974, and while for much of the 80s the BBC continued to use the term "thousand million" and simply shied away entirely from the term "billion" in any context, in order to avoid confusion, it has now been a very long time since billion meant anything other than a thousand million. Feel free to google it if you like. Having been taught in the UK in the 80s at an "old school", where a million definitely meant a thousand million, and now being a teacher at an "old school" myself (founded in the mid-16th century), albeit not as a Mathematics teacher, I think I can speak with some authority on this matter.

 

[Zombie Acorn]

as others have shown, Apple had the original patent on this in the mid 90s.

Again as had been said by others, Apple has patented methods of carrying out ideas.

Presumably there is an expectation that Apple - or indeed Sony, Nokia et al - should find new and better ways of doing things, spending millions of dollars on R&D, and then have other companies come along and use their work without any payment or other recognition

A few of these ideas were in use before the mid 90s.

 

[Moccasin]

Some of the replies make my head hurt. Here, I can play this game too:

Apple STOLE the following from Android:
1) Sliding notifications
2) Access to camera in lock screen
3) OTA updates
4) Find My Friends (Google Latitude)
5) iMessage (GTalk)
6) Copy paste
7) Tabbed browsing
and many more

Here's a quote by your Dear Leader: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CW0DUg63lqU

In all seriousness though, did GM steal from Ford when they made a vehicle with 4 wheels?

YOU CANNOT STEAL IDEAS. Get that through your thick skulls.

Maybe you can't steal ideas but you can copy ways of implementing those ideas without permission or recognition. In the 90s, I recall that James Dyson had a huge battle with Hoover etc who copied his bagless vacuum cleaner without permission. He eventually won and Hoover had to design their own implementation of the same idea from scratch.

----------

A few of these ideas were in use before the mid 90s.

but not necessarily their METHOD of implementation.

 

[samcraig]

The big patent in question has to do with "unified search" which is part of Siri. Or at least what Apple claims.

If the patent office allowed a patent to go by granting someone to register a way to search across various systems instead of just one, I find that a ridiculous patent. It's an obvious evolution of a single site search. I'm not sure if that's the detail of the patent. But that's the one, so far, that is "sticking."

The reality is - these have very little to do with Apple protecting their patents because of some noble cause or because they want others to innovate. It's their way of preventing competition. Everyone hear might think that Apple has nothing to be afraid of because of their bank account, fan base, amazing products. But at the end of the day - all of that can turn on a dime. Every company knows it. Apple is no exception.

I don't fault them too much though. The real pariah here in the past few years has been the patent office for approving the patents in the first place.

 

[The Man]

Fun thing is, Microsoft already gets money from their patents used in Google Android. Who's to say the patents aren't the same kind as Apple's? Nobody is questioning this. The only difference is, MS licenses, yet Apple doesn't. Or these companies just don't want to pay to Apple in order to leverage their position as supplier and competitor.

 

[Imhotep397]

It's about freakin time. Hopefully they win this once and for all and the industry goes back to the pre-iPhone Knock-off standards.

 

[r.harris1]

So how the **** is Apple still selling iPhones after:
the Notification Menu (by pulling status bar);
wireless sync in iOS 5;
putting a quick camera access from lock screen;
OTA updates;
tabbed browsing?

Those are only some of Android's features that Apple ripped off.

I mean, do people here really believe that Apple is the only company that doesn't steal ideas from competitors?

Apple lost a huge market share, and it'll continue to loose more and more the more it continues with this ****** practice: being on the side of corrupt judges.

This is a somewhat silly diatribe. One big reason to patent an idea is to then turn around and license it to someone else and make tons of cash, and this could be what happened in the situations you've mentioned, though I personally don't know who holds those particular ones. In other words, big bad Apple may have licensed those particular features, if they dont already hold the patents for their particular implementation. As I am sure you are aware, when you sit back and reflect on what you wrote, everybody sues everybody else - it's the name of the game. It's not just big bad Apple but google, Samsung, htc, Motorola, Microsoft, IBM and others. Statements about corrupt judges aside, taking a look at how big business works might help with your perspective a bit.

 

[tqwcs]

And your expertise in patents comes from where ?

My expertise is in software.

I guess I can't have an opinion on the patent system until I get a JD though. Because its silly for software engineers to have a an opinion on software patents.

 

[Moccasin]

This is a somewhat silly diatribe. One big reason to patent an idea is to then turn around and license it to someone else and make tons of cash, and this could be what happened in the situations you've mentioned, though I personally don't know who holds those particular ones. In other words, big bad Apple may have licensed those particular features, if they dont already hold the patents for their particular implementation. As I am sure you are aware, when you sit back and reflect on what you wrote, everybody sues everybody else - it's the name of the game. It's not just big bad Apple but google, Samsung, htc, Motorola, Microsoft, IBM and others. Statements about corrupt judges aside, taking a look at how big business works might help with your perspective a bit.

This. And understand what intellectual property is.

 

[kiljoy616]

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.

Old rhetorics that don't hold up water in reality. Patents like the ones been used by a lot of these companies are there because the Patent system is broken and not because they though of something new.

 

[Lennholm]

Fun thing is, Microsoft already gets money from their patents used in Google Android. Who's to say the patents aren't the same kind as Apple's? Nobody is questioning this. The only difference is, MS licenses, yet Apple doesn't. Or these companies just don't want to pay to Apple in order to leverage their position as supplier and competitor.

I've come to the conclusion that I think all software patents should be treated in a similar way to FRAND patents. Nobody should be able to use their patent to deny anyone else from using the idea, they only should be able to collect royalties from it.
That's how it works in music, if I write a song I can't prevent anyone else from making a cover version of it, I can only demand my share of the royalties as copyright owner.

 

[thewap]

This. And understand what intellectual property is.

And understand why patents are important.

 

[tqwcs]

as others have shown, Apple had the original patent on this in the mid 90s.

Again as had been said by others, Apple has patented methods of carrying out ideas.

Presumably there is an expectation that Apple - or indeed Sony, Nokia et al - should find new and better ways of doing things, spending millions of dollars on R&D, and then have other companies come along and use their work without any payment or other recognition

Or perhaps we should have a serious software patent reform.

You probably agree with the amazon one click patent too.

 

[Moccasin]

Old rhetorics that don't hold up water in reality. Patents like the ones been used by a lot of these companies are there because the Patent system is broken and not because they though of something new.

Maybe - but until there is a better way of protecting intellectual property then its the system we/you have and is backed by law. Until its changed, then everybody has to abide by it or else lose out when innovation is copied without permission.

 

[ArtOfWarfare]

The four patents in question are software.

Using that logic, couldn't Apple take Google to court over Android and have all devices running any Android version be barred from sale in the US?

And while they're at it, why not bar Windows and PCs from sale in the US, too? I'd say Android resembles iOS as closely as Windows resembles OSX (in each case the former is a shoddy copy of the latter.)