So you condone theft?
Ban on Galaxy Nexus U.S. Sales Upheld, Software Patch to Circumvent Forthcoming
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
So you condone theft?
Wow. While i agree with the case...
That analogy is unnecessarily and quite unnaturally brutal.
blackcrayon
macrumors 68020
No, I'm sure there are at least 5 or 6 other people that will react this way as well. I noticed you sold your iPhone 4S and didn't smash it... So Apple gets another iPhone 4S user regardless
viewfly
macrumors 65816
You mean USPTO 12/363,325 (filed January 2009, 2 and a half years before iOS 5 ?) :
It's coming.
Maybe this is the whole strategy. Samsung/Google needs Apple's Search patent and Apple finds/knows that they need Google Notifications patent.
So they will trade/cross license each. This may just be a chess game to show Google/Samsung that Apple's patent has some meat to it, so don't even think about suing over the Notifications patent.
idk
Patents don't allow a company to mgfr anything. They only exist to prevent others from mgfr and making money using your patent. Otherwise they are only plaques on the wall.
Companies are mostly gracious about patents. If they want to make a product but need another company's patent they ask for a license. If they decide not to, or believe they don't need to, then the courts are the only recourse.
The decision to sue is done carefully. Courts generally favor small companies over large companies. And if the money being made by the infringing company is small...it is generally decided not worth suing. But if real money is being made, i.e. like Samsung, that is something different.
Reason077
macrumors 601
I can't think of anyone that had a universal search interface before Spotlight came out in OS X. i.e.: a single search box that searches not just files, but contacts, emails, etc - all without having to specify what type of thing your looking for (this last part is important! It's a key part of the patent).
viewfly
macrumors 65816
+1 Yes this is the key.
baryon
macrumors 68040
I don't really like these patent wars, and although I don't like companies copying each other, what I dislike even more is when one company wants to limit the use of their ideas just so they can make money.
Humans should help each other to advance their world, and not be greedy and keep their ideas to them.
This can't always work, sure, but I think that in a future world patent disputes like this will no longer exist.
Humans should help each other to advance their world, and not be greedy and keep their ideas to them.
This can't always work, sure, but I think that in a future world patent disputes like this will no longer exist.
I just know that Apple better not pull this crap with my Nexus 7 before they ship it. Just makes me sick that have we have to see lawsuit after lawsuit because Apple can no longer innovate and produce product to make us forget about everyone else. What is Apple going to do a year from now? Sue Microsoft "if" windows phone 8 and their tablets take off?
Knowing Apple the next iPad will look exactly the same because of the Retina display. You can add faster processors and better camera's but it will still use the same old iOS 6 and will feel no different. And increasing the size of a iPhone to 4 inches is no magical feat. Android first started using 4 inches over 2 years ago.
Instead of suing your competitors how about releasing the next big thing to make us forget about the competition.
Knowing Apple the next iPad will look exactly the same because of the Retina display. You can add faster processors and better camera's but it will still use the same old iOS 6 and will feel no different. And increasing the size of a iPhone to 4 inches is no magical feat. Android first started using 4 inches over 2 years ago.
Instead of suing your competitors how about releasing the next big thing to make us forget about the competition.
You are aware that there is a cross licensing agreement in place between Apple and Microsoft for their patent portfolios, right?
jonnysods
macrumors G3
I totally love Notification Center, it has changed the way I use my phone. But it certainly wasn't invented by Apple. I'm curious to see what would happen if this got challenged.
kdarling
macrumors P6
Good grief. And we always thought that car analogies were bad
If you're going to try to simplify, it would be more like:
- You need to find always-on-the-move Uncle Harry's latest address. So you look everywhere. In your address book. In your desk drawer for old letters from him. You search the web. You call your sister and ask. Each time you filtered out the info you were most interested in.
Unduly impressed with your own smartness, you patent your search methods using fancy and incredibly general words like "heuristics", instead of actually detailing what search method each heuristic entails.
- Later, you're at someone else's house and they lose their keys. You watch amazed as they search the bowl near the door, their pockets, their dresser, and even ask their wife and kids.
"Stop!", you cry out. Only *I* can search multiple places at once!
----------------
Infringement in this case hinged on claims construction interpretation. For one example, a major patent claim in question included a requirement for:
"... a plurality of heuristic modules configured to search for information that corresponds to the received information descriptor, wherein: each heuristic module corresponds to a respective area of search and employs a different, predetermined heuristic algorithm corresponding to said respective area..."
Samsung's lawyers argued that patent infringement clearly required different algorithms for each search area. Apple's lawyers claimed that "each" didn't apply to the following phrase "heuristic module", but to the initial "plurality of heuristic modules".
Apple's construction arguments won over the judge. Otherwise there would have been no preliminary injunction.
Of course, the actual trial jury could later come out with a totally different interpretation.
Last edited:
So if apple holds the patent, they should just let everyone use it and come up with something better? Why have the patent then? Apple gets sued when they violate a patent. You infringe, you get sued. And the engineers working on the next big thing probably are not the ones in court, I doubt R&D is suffering because of it.
Labeno
macrumors 6502
There are a few unknowns here...
- Did Google patent or copyright the pull down notification?
- If so, is Apple already paying a license fee to use it? Can't assume Apple is stealing it, just like we found out last year that Apple is licensing the use of an in-app purchase.
Anyone know the answers?
Good grief. And we always thought that car analogies were bad
If you're going to try to simplify, it would be more like:
- You need to find always-on-the-move Uncle Harry's latest address. So you look everywhere. In your address book. In your desk drawer for old letters from him. You search the web. You call your sister and ask. Each time you filtered out the info you were most interested in.
Unduly impressed with your own smartness, you patent your search methods using fancy and incredibly general words like "heuristics", instead of actually detailing what each method entails.
- Later, you're at someone else's house and they lose their keys. You watch amazed as they search the bowel near the door, their pockets, their dresser, and even ask their wife and kids.
"Stop!", you cry out. Only *I* can search multiple places at once!
----------------
Infringement wasn't extremely clear in this case. It hinged on claims construction terminology. For one example, a major patent claim in question included a requirement for:
"... a plurality of heuristic modules configured to search for information that corresponds to the received information descriptor, wherein: each heuristic module corresponds to a respective area of search and employs a different, predetermined heuristic algorithm corresponding to said respective area..."
Samsung's lawyers argued that patent infringement clearly required different algorithms for each search type. Apple's lawyers claimed that "each" didn't apply to the following phrase "heuristic module", but to the initial "plurality of heuristic modules".
Apple's construction argument won. Otherwise there would have been no injunction.
Bowel ... ouch!
Just kidding.
Oletros
macrumors 603
Google has applied for a patent and Apple doesn't have licensed nothing
Oletros
macrumors 603
No, you think someone is infringing your IP, you sue
Navdakilla
macrumors 65816
Moral of the story: Don't mess with Apple
why can't these people engineer their own stuff. Shameless idiots. I guess the typical work cycle at samsung or google is:
1) Order new iPhone or iPad or Mac
2)Deliver it to all Sr. Design engineers or Architects
3)spend some days to reverse engineer it
4)rip-off as it as with Windows OS or Android OS
5)sell it the market
I doubt what is their morals to work in a company that is after every model of Apple's product and copy-cat and release it. I use to respect Samsung but it is playing below the belt.
1) Order new iPhone or iPad or Mac
2)Deliver it to all Sr. Design engineers or Architects
3)spend some days to reverse engineer it
4)rip-off as it as with Windows OS or Android OS
5)sell it the market
I doubt what is their morals to work in a company that is after every model of Apple's product and copy-cat and release it. I use to respect Samsung but it is playing below the belt.
Oletros
macrumors 603
Why should read the post if I can write nonsense?
doesn't that actually mean they licensed everything?
kdarling
macrumors P6
Bowel ... ouch!
*laughing* Yeah, I noticed that later on and changed it to the correct "bowl".
Good thing it wasn't a "loose" one.
blackcrayon
macrumors 68020
So the next iPad will "feel no different"? Then I guess Apple has another winner on their hands. And no one said increasing the size of the iPhone was an innovation in and of itself. Nor is it for phones running Android. Presenting that weird straw-man argument is just... Weird. Apple has sold devices with different sized screens for decades, I'm pretty sure they're well aware of the concept
Oletros
macrumors 603
Mmmm, no?
<not attacking you>
How did you get google music to sync to each nexus device you and your family has, without giving each device access to you your personal gmail account? Meaning I don't want my wife and friend to be reading my mail?
again just asking questions not making a direct statement!
<now back on topic>
I have zero issue with Apple protecting and upholding what they invented! If this model wasn't in place why would any company want to make a better product?
Each user on the same computer must log in to Google Music Manager to make their music sync. Once sync is completed, they can log out and verify their music is now on Google Play when the log in to their Google account. This works especially well when I buy my kids music from my iTunes account. Music Manager is in the Other category of System Preferences on the Mac.
Remember, Google Music Manager is an application which runs on the Mac. Google Play is separate and runs as a web application on your Mac. It runs as a native app on your Android device. Yes, each person who has an Android device must have their own Google account.
Last edited:
Not directly related but a UK court has just handed a win to HTC against Apple - including slide to unlock.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/07/04/uk_htc_no_infringement/
------------------
HTC was first to file in the UK, trying to invalidate patents that were already at issue in the firms' cases in Germany, but Apple quickly counter-sued over patents dealing with multi-touch, photo management, slide-to-unlock and changing alphabets on keyboards.
Judge Christopher Floyd said that the photo management patent was valid, but HTC wasn't infringing on it. The judge ruled that the three other patents were invalid either because they were obvious, in the common knowledge or had been done before.
--------------------
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/07/04/uk_htc_no_infringement/
------------------
HTC was first to file in the UK, trying to invalidate patents that were already at issue in the firms' cases in Germany, but Apple quickly counter-sued over patents dealing with multi-touch, photo management, slide-to-unlock and changing alphabets on keyboards.
Judge Christopher Floyd said that the photo management patent was valid, but HTC wasn't infringing on it. The judge ruled that the three other patents were invalid either because they were obvious, in the common knowledge or had been done before.
--------------------