"Boy have we patented it". Steve Jobs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8JZBLjxPBUU
LOL he wasn't kidding at all. He had a serious face even after saying it and the crowd was laughing.
Google, Samsung, et al apparently thought he was joking too.
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.
Ban on Sale of Samsung Galaxy Smartphones in EU Set for October 13th
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Google, Samsung, et al apparently thought he was joking too.
Good one. Apple didn't lose anything. They received the preliminary injunction that they requested. Just because some claims were rejected as grounds for a preliminary injunction, doesn't mean they are rejected as part of the actual lawsuit.
Similarly, Apple is "stealing" MSFTs camera features such as swiping left to get to the reel + hard-button for faster access. As we work out how to make sense of touch, we are way better off exploring together than creating unnecessary forks.
This is a consequence of the current patent system and is not Apples fault. Appleare required to defend their patents even in the most tenuous cases otherwise the failure to defend will be used against them in future cases.
This does not fit the definition of anti-competitive behaviour
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-competitive
re original article
a good thing - though aapl didnt get all it was asking for
also good judge ruled earlier than expected
"cant always get what you want..." - rolling stones
a good thing - though aapl didnt get all it was asking for
also good judge ruled earlier than expected
"cant always get what you want..." - rolling stones
Because if you allow obvious patents it will be very difficult to invent anything new. Your new invention probably violates a number of obvious patents which you will have to license which may severely hamper your potential profit margin.
This means that obvious broad patents are actually much more valuable than real inventions because the more obvious it is, the more $$$ you'll collect in license fees. Your financial incentive for inventing stuff would be pretty much gone, whereas patenting something obvious would be much more lucrative.
Also, if software patents were great why do software developers hate them?
I'm not familiar with European Patent laws but I would have thought that a single optional (on android) application does not constitute the banning of a whole device, simply the app.
While it's not a direct comparison, windows versions in the EU have several application differences than the US and (where I live) Australia. Seeing as this is the case I'm surprised that the ruling is "These devices may not be used" rather than "These devices must be released with an alternate application"
As an owner of a GS2 I can say that there are some things which appear to come from iOS, and some features that iOS didn't have and I'm enjoying a lot.
I should also like to point out that all of the claims regarding "Look and Feel" seem to have been rejected, meaning that (in the eyes of the EU) these galaxy devices do not copy the iPhone (A bit of a stretch regarding the GS2, although I do think the GS1 does look like a big iPhone 3GS)
While it's not a direct comparison, windows versions in the EU have several application differences than the US and (where I live) Australia. Seeing as this is the case I'm surprised that the ruling is "These devices may not be used" rather than "These devices must be released with an alternate application"
As an owner of a GS2 I can say that there are some things which appear to come from iOS, and some features that iOS didn't have and I'm enjoying a lot.
I should also like to point out that all of the claims regarding "Look and Feel" seem to have been rejected, meaning that (in the eyes of the EU) these galaxy devices do not copy the iPhone (A bit of a stretch regarding the GS2, although I do think the GS1 does look like a big iPhone 3GS)
Samsung swiped the swipe?
1 vote here for the "Surely that's too obvious to patent, that's just a design decision not an innovation" side.
you say this now, but if it is so why did previous devices, even touch screen devices use prev/next buttons for so long?
According to Engadget, they did have a patent invalidated. Still, it seems worth it so far given the news!
Others know how to make things.
Apple on the other hand knows how to make or use things and generate a lot of money from them.
Yes, is more specific and the infringement only applies to Android 2.3 and not to Android 3.x
No, it doesn't have to pass through Google
Thus the injunction, and EU-wide no less. I wonder what Samsung will be nabbed for next.
Yes, you will be banned from wiping your ass in the EU if Apple has anything to say about it
That's why they have bidets...
In my opinion Apple is playing ball in a game that was already playing long before they started to become significant in the marketplace. I remember seeing a graph anew weeks ago with the amount of patents Apple has compared to some competitors and I was surprised to see that they actually (comparatively) don't have that many.
It is not important whether these cases are fair, mean or whatever. The point is that in order to become and remain successful an electronics manufacturer needs to patent the hell out of it's devices or else other companies will do it for them.
If Apple doesn't challenge any infringement of their patents, then they won't stand a chance in court when other companies infringe on the same patents. As long as the USPTO and EPO don't change their policy, this is a game that all need to play, whether they like it or not. The shareholders of Samsung, Apple, Microsoft et al. demand it.
It is not important whether these cases are fair, mean or whatever. The point is that in order to become and remain successful an electronics manufacturer needs to patent the hell out of it's devices or else other companies will do it for them.
If Apple doesn't challenge any infringement of their patents, then they won't stand a chance in court when other companies infringe on the same patents. As long as the USPTO and EPO don't change their policy, this is a game that all need to play, whether they like it or not. The shareholders of Samsung, Apple, Microsoft et al. demand it.
Stop buying their products. That is the only message that they will understand.
It's ok when Apple copies.
Lets hope so. I mean, given that the swipe-animation was established before touch itself one would argue that its a fairly obvious course for someone building a touch-based image gallery (not to mention that we use the exact same operation every other time we want to move around between screens).
You still have to wipe it dry. Apple has us Europeans cornered. We're all running around in diapers scared of having to pay them royalties for bum wiping.
I think mostly management, executives and lawyers love them. :-D
Most developers couldn't care less for the most part, as long as they can be happy coding and getting paid.
I do think that they are a necessary evil, because we can't all be virgin nerds living in mom's basement working on GPL stuff. Maybe the application of the patents is wrong, but we do need some IP protection. Some of us have families and houses and as such need a revenue stream.
