Apple's Continued Patent Offensive Poses Risks for Shareholders

[Small White Car]

You are completely false about my use of features. In fact the exact opposite is true. Rather than patenting a specific example of doing something, companies like Apple want to patent the feature itself.

What does this story mean, then?

https://www.macrumors.com/2011/12/20/htc-already-finished-with-workaround-for-patent-issue/

android phones had multitasking, real notifications, etc. before the iPhone did. When Apple came along and copied those features Google didn't cry foul.

Which phone was that? I'm curious, I really don't know. Which manufacturer and what model Android phone had multitouch before the iPhone came out?

 

[koach]

Yup, because this is the same

http://www.engadget.com/2007/11/12/a-visual-tour-of-androids-ui/

as this

Its not like Google/Android shifted course when Apple unveiled the the iPhone in 2007

Now back on topic,



I've never commented on any of these paten lawsuit post, but I like this part of the article.

You do understand there were touchscreen phones before the iPhone, right? you're also aware that Android has numerous different types of phones - full touchscreen, qwerty, portrait slider, landscape slider, etc. That picture is one model of an early prototype.

Those early days aside, in more recent times Android was first to market with multitasking, but nobody cried foul when Apple implemented it. Apple blatantly stole the notification system for ios5 directly from Android. is Google suing? Nope.

 

[samcraig]

Yup, because this is the same

Its not like Google/Android shifted course when Apple unveiled the the iPhone in 2007

Now back on topic,



I've never commented on any of these paten lawsuit post, but I like this part of the article.[/QUOTE]

I can't seem to understand why people like yourself keep forgetting that there's a difference between Android (an OS) and Hardware.

But yet people, like yourself, keep trotting out meaningless pictures which don't do any service to prove your (non-existent) point.

 

[realitycheck69]

Apple sabotaging themselves per par for the course

 

[SuperCachetes]

Those early days aside, in more recent times Android was first to market with multitasking, but nobody cried foul when Apple implemented it. Apple blatantly stole the notification system for ios5 directly from Android. is Google suing? Nope.

Did Google patent either of the examples you mention?

 

[koach]

What does this story mean, then?

https://www.macrumors.com/2011/12/20/htc-already-finished-with-workaround-for-patent-issue/

Well we don't know what HTC's workaround is so we can't know yet. Even if they have a workaround Apple may sue them again like they did Samsung when they redesigned the Galaxy tab 10.1.

Which phone was that? I'm curious, I really don't know. Which manufacturer and what model Android phone had multitouch before the iPhone came out?

I said multitasking but you said multitouch. Every android phone in existence had multitasking before the iPhone.

As for touchscreen, here is one example of a touchscreen phone that predate the iPhone: http://www.gsmarena.com/motorola_a1000-653.php

And multitouch technology was not invented by Apple. It has existed for many years before the iPhone was created.

 

[starnyc]

Apple can uniquely afford to protect their intellectual property. They need not be the R&D lab for the entire electronics industry.

If a company like Apple does not stand up for intellectual property, it sets a precedent that everything can be copied.

I don't see how enforcing patents which insure apple's profitability are bad for shareholders.

 

[koach]

Did Google patent either of the examples you mention?

I have no idea, I don't know of every phone patent in existence. Regardless if they did, there is prior art in Android, and that's my point. Apple has no problem blatantly ripping off other companies, but then they want to sue every company in existence that uses rounded rectangles or makes a device with an all black front.

 

[kdarling]

Not enforcing your intellectual property poses larger risks.

Depends on the IP.

Trademarks and trade dress must be aggressively protected and/or promoted. (E.g. the fact that Apple took over four years to sue Samsung over trade dress is why a California judge threw out their request for an injunction.)

Patents have no such requirement. In fact, sometimes it's considered smarter to wait until there is enough usage to make it worthwhile to sue for damages.

Have you seen the last "core" and "key" multi touch patent awarded to Apple?

Yep. That one doesn't look so bad.

The recent brouhaha on the web about "Apple wins patent for multitasking during a call" was silly, though. It was just for an iOS-specific return-to-call button.

Rather than patenting a specific example of doing something, companies like Apple want to patent the feature itself.

Exactly, and as you said, granting such non-specific ideas is what's wrong with the current software patent system.

 

[AZREOSpecialist]

Apple by cross licensing patents will allow competitors to commoditize the technology at faster pace therefore deflating Apple's profit margins. Apple does not have monopoly on innovation. More innovation by competitors is only good for consumers.

Innovation /= copying

 

[Zarmanka]

You do understand there were touchscreen phones before the iPhone, right? you're also aware that Android has numerous different types of phones - full touchscreen, qwerty, portrait slider, landscape slider, etc. That picture is one model of an early prototype.

Those early days aside, in more recent times Android was first to market with multitasking, but nobody cried foul when Apple implemented it. Apple blatantly stole the notification system for ios5 directly from Android. is Google suing? Nope.

Multi tasking, Parallel processing, multi processing, was invented and implemented commercially back in 1960's. Google didn't invent anything.

 

[Small White Car]

I said multitasking but you said multitouch. Every android phone in existence had multitasking before the iPhone.

As for touchscreen, here is one example of a touchscreen phone that predate the iPhone: http://www.gsmarena.com/motorola_a1000-653.php

And multitouch technology was not invented by Apple. It has existed for many years before the iPhone was created.

I'm really not arguing with you, I have no idea who owns what patents on touch-screen stuff.

But as far as products go, one of the commentators on that Motorola phone claims it doesn't have multitouch:

http://www.gsmarena.com/motorola_a1000-reviews-653.php

I'm still not saying Apple had it first, but I don't think your example wins the title either. (Unless that poster is lying.)

 

[samcraig]

I don't see how enforcing patents which insure apple's profitability are bad for shareholders.

Because there "could" be consequences. IE - other companies creating better/alternative solutions which make Apple's patents relatively "useless."

I agree Apple SHOULD enforce their patents. But that doesn't mean they shouldn't also consider policing and then licensing their patents. That would actually do more to stifle innovation from competitors who would otherwise be too lazy to come up with their own solutions (unless Apple's fees were too high).

No one can say for certain what will happen in the future. But there are plenty of scenarios where enforcing (and not licensing) these patents could wind up biting Apple (and other companies who act the same) in the butt and consequently be bad for their stockholders

 

[Oletros]

The first pre-release Android phones were shown in 2006. The iPhone was announced in 2007. You are 100% factually incorrect.

And false another time, the first pre-release phones where showed in November 2.007

 

[koach]

Multi tasking, Parallel processing, multi processing, was invented and implemented commercially back in 1960's. Google didn't invent anything.

I never said they did. I was pointing out examples of technologies Google implemented before Apple. This is to address the fanboys who think that Apple invented all phone technology and that Android should pay licensing fees to Apple.

 

[AZREOSpecialist]

Those early days aside, in more recent times Android was first to market with multitasking, but nobody cried foul when Apple implemented it. Apple blatantly stole the notification system for ios5 directly from Android. is Google suing? Nope.

I don't believe Apple or Google own a patent on multitasking, so that's a moot point. We are discussing patent infringement, and as such multitasking has no role to play in this discussion. As far as the notification system is concerned, maybe Google has no patent to pursue in this regard. Just because you see it doesn't mean there is a patent behind it. Apple's revamped notification system includes widgets and actionable lock screen notifications - features Android lacks.

Go away Fandroid.

----------

And multitouch technology was not invented by Apple. It has existed for many years before the iPhone was created.

Yet Apple is the one who was awarded a patent on its multi-touch technology and gestures. Funny how that works.

 

[Oletros]

Apple's revamped notification system includes widgets and actionable lock screen notifications - features core Android lacks but third party lock screen had long time ago.

Corrected

 

[koach]

I'm really not arguing with you, I have no idea who owns what patents on touch-screen stuff.

But as far as products go, one of the commentators on that Motorola phone claims it doesn't have multitouch:

http://www.gsmarena.com/motorola_a1000-reviews-653.php

I'm still not saying Apple had it first, but I don't think your example wins the title either. (Unless that poster is lying.)

Sorry I wasn't clear, I didn't mean to imply it had multitouch, just that it had a touchscreen. The multitouch tech itself (out side of phones) was developed long before Apple created the iPhone. for a brief history of the technology: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-touch#History

So I was using two different examples to show prior art - one for touchscreen phones and another one for multitouch technology.

 

[TMay]

Well we don't know what HTC's workaround is so we can't know yet. Even if they have a workaround Apple may sue them again like they did Samsung when they redesigned the Galaxy tab 10.1.




I said multitasking but you said multitouch. Every android phone in existence had multitasking before the iPhone.

As for touchscreen, here is one example of a touchscreen phone that predate the iPhone: http://www.gsmarena.com/motorola_a1000-653.php

And multitouch technology was not invented by Apple. It has existed for many years before the iPhone was created.

Multitasking isn't patentable. A particular implementation may be. Apple didn't "take" Android's implementation which is noted for being much less power efficient than Apple's.

 

[tundrabuggy]

Not True

I love the thought process of Apple fanatics. Android was announced before the iPhone, Android phones contained numerous features before iPhones had them, and Apple has been blatantly stealing features from Android recently, but these "experts" believe that android manufacturers should be paying Apple licensing fees? Apple should be the ones paying the fees.

There is a couple of pieces missing from your logic. Eric Schmidt (CEO of Google at the time) was sitting on Apple's board when they were discussing the ideas of the iPhone...he started implementing Apple's ideas before Apple did...This is a HUGE fiduciary "No No"......did you notice that when all of this came out, Eric Schmidt was demoted....Google did not want the CEO of Google to be indicted; however, Apple took a different legal path by going after HTC instead of Google directly...The Apple Google battle would go on for years!, So, Apple went after the little guys using Android to try and slow the momentum. In addition, they would be accumulating wins and injunctions that will strengthen their eventual case against Google (Smartest approach to the problem). Lets also add this, Rubin (Androids chief architect at Google) used to WORK for Apple!

Don't feel bad, many people have the same misconception you do. I just wanted you to have all the facts. Now do you see why Android is a blatant rip-off and Jobs was infuriated?

 

[koach]

And false another time, the first pre-release phones where showed in November 2.007

Wrong again. That was the time frame of the first public release to media outlets. There were pictured of prototypes, like the one shown earlier in this thread, back in 2006.

 

[Small White Car]

Sorry I wasn't clear, I didn't mean to imply it had multitouch, just that it had a touchscreen. The multitouch tech itself (out side of phones) was developed long before Apple created the iPhone. for a brief history of the technology: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-touch#History

So I was using two different examples to show prior art - one for touchscreen phones and another one for multitouch technology.

You keep trying to argue that Apple shouldn't have these patents. But they do. A lot of them.

I have no opinion on whether or not Apple should have them. You obviously think they shouldn't, but there's really no point in all the arguments against it. It happened and now that's done.

The question is, what should they do with them now? Anything having to do with when Android came out or who invented this stuff first is really beside the point. It's just a lot of 'what if' games that don't really mean anything in the end.

The subjects in the article think Apple is mis-using them. I'd agree with them if I thought we knew Apple's final goal in all this. IF that's their goal then yeah...it's probably the wrong way to go about it. But since I don't know what Apple's ultimate plan is, I really can't judge it one way or the other.

Like most things, we'll just have to wait and see what happens before we can know what they're really thinking.

 

[Oletros]

Multitasking isn't patentable. A particular implementation may be. Apple didn't "take" Android's implementation which is noted for being much less power efficient than Apple's.

Apple didn't "take" one of Android's implementations which is noted for being much less power efficient than Apple's, they used one of Android's implementations, freeze programs in background to not take CPU cycles

----------

Wrong again. That was the time frame of the first public release to media outlets. There were pictured of prototypes, like the one shown earlier in this thread, back in 2006.

Have you looked the date of that picture?

Yeeeesss, November 2.007.

Can you post ANY picture of an Android prototype prior to November 2.007?

There is a couple of pieces missing from your logic. Eric Schmidt (CEO of Google at the time) was sitting on Apple's board when they were discussing the ideas of the iPhone...he started implementing Apple's ideas before Apple did...

Another false claim. Why people doesn't stop of saying those silly things?

 

[Compile 'em all]

I don't think they understand.

Apple is not looking for money in those patent suits.

Exactly. A typical analysts/businessmen way of thinking.

Apple isn't suing companies because they want to make money. They want others to make their own ****. It is really that simple.

 

[koach]

I don't believe Apple or Google own a patent on multitasking, so that's a moot point. We are discussing patent infringement, and as such multitasking has no role to play in this discussion. As far as the notification system is concerned, maybe Google has no patent to pursue in this regard. Just because you see it doesn't mean there is a patent behind it. Apple's revamped notification system includes widgets and actionable lock screen notifications - features Android lacks.

Go away Fandroid.

----------

Apple doesn't even have widgets, and many variations of Android do have lock screen notifications, and have had them for years.

Yet Apple is the one who was awarded a patent on its multi-touch technology and gestures. Funny how that works.

Yes the USPTO is severely broken. It is sad and horrifying, not funny as you stated it. Prior art and obviousness are completely ignored by the USPTO, and that's a problem.