Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Wins Injunction Barring U.S. Sales of Samsung Galaxy Nexus Phone
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The list of patents are proprietary to the OEM's yes AAPL, M$ etc.. that Android is infringing on according to the article.
Oh Apple, how you've changed.
I read the brief and it seems that Samsung's lawyers focused in on one claim in particular and hinged the other claims (prior art/invalid) on their interpretation - one the judge didn't agree with. Their loss there.
I think the whole patent portfolio bit is a sign of the change of the times at Apple. The early 2000s were a great time for Apple, not so much patent armageddon as innovation and evolution (the Mini to the nano was shocking - and it worked. They killed off a successful product and made something better before their competitors could even copy & tweak it.
Apple of the present seems to be more focused on frustrating competitors than continuously innovating. Don't get me wrong - they've introduced new products with new and neat features, but the whole patent war has been protracted, and about stopping competitors from doing the same improvement of existing ideas Apple had become so expert at. It's now ending in a patent war between tech giants that's becoming counter productive, and ultimately the consumer loses.
Without analysis of the prior art or obviousness [both by legal definition] f the patents in question (I lack the legal background to do so), I think Apple is compelling Google to step forward more aggressively on Android, since these patents affect vanilla Android and thus have a huge ability to be used against all the major OEMs, not just Samsung (the #1 Android OEM) Whether or not this will end well for Apple, I am not sure. Only time will tell.
I read the brief and it seems that Samsung's lawyers focused in on one claim in particular and hinged the other claims (prior art/invalid) on their interpretation - one the judge didn't agree with. Their loss there.
I think the whole patent portfolio bit is a sign of the change of the times at Apple. The early 2000s were a great time for Apple, not so much patent armageddon as innovation and evolution (the Mini to the nano was shocking - and it worked. They killed off a successful product and made something better before their competitors could even copy & tweak it.
Apple of the present seems to be more focused on frustrating competitors than continuously innovating. Don't get me wrong - they've introduced new products with new and neat features, but the whole patent war has been protracted, and about stopping competitors from doing the same improvement of existing ideas Apple had become so expert at. It's now ending in a patent war between tech giants that's becoming counter productive, and ultimately the consumer loses.
Without analysis of the prior art or obviousness [both by legal definition] f the patents in question (I lack the legal background to do so), I think Apple is compelling Google to step forward more aggressively on Android, since these patents affect vanilla Android and thus have a huge ability to be used against all the major OEMs, not just Samsung (the #1 Android OEM) Whether or not this will end well for Apple, I am not sure. Only time will tell.
According to the article, yes, but not according to reality. Florian Mueller is lying and twisting the facts, a lot of them are not infringed by Android, the infringers are OEM's that have developed their OWN features.
And not accounting for the trials that have not ended
You mean when Apple records sued becaus Apple Computer inc was going to market and sell music?
Hmmm.
True, difficould to make a connection there........
Btw, Apple is not having a design patent on a rectangle. Look into it and you see.
It is not Florian's opinion it is his list of findings made by courts and the ITC
enough to justify OEM's pursuing litigation;
Apple uses small teams of 3 to produce iPhone features.
1) A designer to make it pretty.
2) A developer to make it functional.
3) And a lawyer to sue Android.
1) A designer to make it pretty.
2) A developer to make it functional.
3) And a lawyer to sue Android.
You are kidding right? Heard of trademarks? Those, you know, have nothing to do with patents...
My God, can you understand that is not Android, that there are OEM's applications and implementations?
Now or do you need an scheme?
Samsung Picture Gallery is not Android, HTC Sense is not Android, Samsung Touchwiz is not Android.
I can't make it clearer, perhaps is only that you can't get it
You are kidding right? Heard of trademarks? Those, you know, have nothing to do with patents...
Ok fine, my bad
But that wasn't the first lawsuit was it? The first was simply over the name and the outcome was a settlement that meant Apple Computer got to use the name Apple as long as they didn't get into Apple Corps' business, i.e. music. But then they did.
But I get it, patents and trademarks are treated differently in this regard but we're still just talking about design patents, right? Cause I can't imagine that an actual patented innovation is free to use just because it's applied to a product in a different category(?)
And? The fracking Samsung Gallery Application is NOT Android so it is not Android the one infringing the fracking patent.
Really, are you trolling?
Then submit your findings to the ITC and overturn the court(s) decision.
I'm sorry I am too old to use juvenile terminology such as *trolling*.
But I understand the effect your are trying to impress. Which IMO is not impressive.
By definition of *Android*
Android is a software stack for mobile devices that includes an operating system, middleware, and key applications.[1] This page seeks to list and compare hardware devices that are shipped with either Google's Android operating system or its OPhone derivative from China Mobile.
Google has announced that in Q3 2011, the total number of Android activations had surpassed 190 million, a significant increase from 135 million in Q2 2011. The increase was boosted by sales of lower Android smartphone prices from Chinese and Indian manufacturers.[2]
Last edited:
You can't be serious.
I give up, if you're incapable of understand a simple concept is not my problem
And the fracking Gallery App is not Android like Aperture is NOT OS X even if it runs on OS X.
Really, are you joking or are you a little slow?
Ah, for your knowledge, troll and trolling are concepts that have more than twenty years, so no, no juvenile slang
I think what Rodimus Prime is trying to say is that Florian is not the credible source many think him to be. He's quoted on many forums and big news sites (BBC, NYT, etc) but he definitely has an anti-Google stance. Even in his article about the Nexus ban he states:
Google haven't lost anything. First, the lawsuit is against Samsung and its only a preliminary injunction so Apple could still lose the lawsuit.
Add to that the fact he was paid by Oracle as a consultant for a period whilst reporting on the Oracle/Google case (which inicidentally he got totally wrong) but never declared this conflict of interest.
I've no doubt he knows more than most people on these forums about IP, but he has no credibility wth me when it comes to his opinions.
Apples or Sour grapes?
I gave Apple its final chance i just sold my ipad and my iphone 4s 64 gig and bought a Galaxy tab 2 10.1 and a unlocked galaxy nexus i dont post alot but i read alot and i see whats going on apple is afraid very afraid of whats coming and so suing is the only way instead of saying Jobs is gone lets push out a 7 tablet and compete lets come up with great products but to keep suing to stop copetition is wrong apple did not invent pull down notification should they be suied for it apple did not invent the cell phone.
I gave Apple its final chance i just sold my ipad and my iphone 4s 64 gig and bought a Galaxy tab 2 10.1 and a unlocked galaxy nexus i dont post alot but i read alot and i see whats going on apple is afraid very afraid of whats coming and so suing is the only way instead of saying Jobs is gone lets push out a 7 tablet and compete lets come up with great products but to keep suing to stop copetition is wrong apple did not invent pull down notification should they be suied for it apple did not invent the cell phone.
If I were talking about this case specifically, then yeah, it would've been. But no, I was referring to Chilloret's claims that anything resembling iOS is a copy, regardless of how different it is in implementation. He seems to believe that since Apple released a touchscreen exclusive device, anything else that comes out afterwards is nothing more than a cheap ripoff.
You and I both know this isn't true.
Please tell me why apple would be sacred when the only reason you have the other options is because of Apple?
Another obvious misunderstating here is the difference between patents and trademarks.
Hint
Category doesn't seem to matter to Apple when it comes to anything with a picture of an apple.
They've threatened poor little coffee shops, Walgreens, and even the Big Apple (NYC) itself over a recycling logo.
