Company That Sued Apple for iPhone 6 Patent Infringement 'Barely Exists'

[69Mustang]

Perhaps it's finally time to slap a certain nation with some tariffs.

Tee hee. That ain't gonna happen. China's been doing the same thing for years and we've just accepted it. Why? The companies doing business with China make money. They put up with the occasional inconvenience because they make money. Look at Apple as a classic example of a company making money in China. Does Apple make a stink? Hell no, they double down with a billion dollar investment in Didi, build more stores in China, and make sure their updates include Chinese centric features.

We get pissy and hyperbolic in these forums but the companies we're defending just keep on keepin' on with business as usual.

 

[B4U]

Anyone remember the same crap from China a few years back in regards to the iPad trademark?

 

[JoelTheSuperior]

I realise China is a huge market but if the Chinese courts don't respect western companies and their IP then why don't the likes of Apple threaten to start producing their products elsewhere?
If I was Apple I would be doing feasibility studies on opening factories elsewhere (I know Pegatron/Foxcon etc build the devices), perhaps with greater automation they could be built in the West again?

I imagine because Apple decided that, on balance, the risk was worth it. Even with the problems that trading with China may bring, the fact is it's much cheaper to produce their products there, and it's a huge market so they most certainly do want to sell them there too.

 

[bryanescuela]

Who would have thought anyone could do such a thing!!?

 

[carrrrrlos]

Digigone.

 

[12vElectronics]

Everyone is looking for a free payday and apple just happens to be the hot entity to take it from.

 

[bdkennedy1]

Last ditch effort to grab some money before going under.

 

[kas23]

Golddiggers.

This has very little to do with "gold digging". How would a company that doesn't exist benefit from blocking iPhone sales in China? This is just a veiled attempt by the Chinese govt to discourage Apple products being sold in China or being used as a bargaining chip.

 

[Gasu E.]

I find it funny that the term "marketing ploy", as stated by the one former employee, is the Chinese translation of "Shakedown." Cultural differences or not, I find it sad that a Chinese court, assuming they saw the financial state of affairs of the company that brought this lawsuit, let this pass. Even under an attitude of "China first" that is just sad.

Edit: Even the Chinese should have limits....it's one thing to culturally accept bribes as a way of doing business....but this is just flat out embarrassing on the world stage that their court system allowed this to get this far.

My observation is that the central Chinese government is highly embarrassed by the kind of petty corruption that occurs at the lower levels. They are well aware it is terrible for business and the overall economy, but lack the know how or means to tweak the system to reduce it. Occasionally you will see a corrupt official or crooked businessman subject to the most extreme punishment, but of course that only occurs for the most egregious cases.
[doublepost=1466609097][/doublepost]

This has very little to do with "gold digging". How would a company that doesn't exist benefit from blocking iPhone sales in China? This is just a veiled attempt by the Chinese govt to discourage Apple products being sold in China or being used as a bargaining chip.

It does exist. It is just on the verge of bankruptcy. You are reading the headline too literally.

 

[Karma*Police]

As ridiculous as this is its karma for Apple. Apple sued for petty things like swipe to unlock.

Karma has nothing to do with Apple being the biggest target of lawsuits. Their bank account is.

Also, I find it interesting that you would call slide to unlock petty. At the time, all of their competitors were saying that was the most obvious way to unlock a smartphone... entire articles were written about it.

With iOS 10, Apple removed that functionality and proved that those competitors truly were lacking imagination and lazily copying Apple's hard work.

 

[DotCom2]

Opportunists

 

[winston1236]

Well, Apple knew the risk of going into a market protectionist country like China, that said, I think this is nothing more than the chinese company trying to force Apple to buy them.

 

[RowellE]

Golddiggers.

Rose Gold diggers.

 

[Pbrutto]

I wish apple could recover their legal fees if these company's are found to be nothing but trolls....

 

[2457282]

100% on point with Apple's need to diversify it's manufacturing. Just not Brazil. Just not right now. Brazil is currently a ****-show politically and economically. They can't even pay for the Olympics and the infrastructure there is pretty crappy. Right now, China is the tail wagging the dog. Unfortunately, I think as long as the ledger sheet says profitable, Apple will continue to get wagged just like every other company doing business with China.

On topic: Although I think this Chinese company is simply reaching for dollars, they don't exactly fit the definition of a patent troll as we've come to define them. They actually had a product on the market when the suit was initiated in 2014. The slow stroll through the court system notwithstanding, they sort of fall in a different category from the standard NPE. I'm not debating the merits of their case; just stating that calling them a patent troll is not exactly factual.

You are probably right about Brazil, but I mentioned them because as I understand it, Foxconn is looking to open plants in Brazil and India. And since Apple does pretty much all its manufacturing through Foxconn....

As for the Troll topic. I am not even sure that applies in a country like china. We have problem with them honoring patents or copyrights at any level. To me the government and their judicial system needs to rethink how they engage with outside organizations. If we stop pandering to them, they will change. Obviously too big a gamble now (as you say tail wagging dog). But as they diversify, and become less reliant on China, things could change. For Apple as a company and for all its investors, the single source of China is a risk and the risk is increasing. Tim better have a plan up his sleeve or things will become more problematic for him and the company.

 

[JustSoldOut]

Digione 'barely exists' because those lazy cheap American copycats keep stealing all their hard work!
Poor Digione...

 

[kdarling]

I still fail to see how they are even remotely similar.

As much as I hated the whole Apple vs Samsung crap, the Samsung Galaxy looked very much like the iPhone 3G at the time.

This looks nothing like the iPhone 6/6s

Actually, the specific design pieces (in red below) that the Beijing administrator looked at between the Apple and Chinese phones, especially for the side view, are more similar...


...than the same curves between the Apple and Samsung phones in the California trial:



So anyone who still actually believes the Samsung phone looked "exactly like" the Apple one, has little choice but to agree with Beijing that the Apple phone infringes the Chinese one. (In both cases, the decisions ignored all the camera / port / button / logo placements and other details that were different and that easily alerted a consumer.)

This has very little to do with "gold digging". How would a company that doesn't exist benefit from blocking iPhone sales in China? This is just a veiled attempt by the Chinese govt to discourage Apple products being sold in China or being used as a bargaining chip.

Maybe. Or it could be just a local official's favor done in an attempt to get some cash from Apple, since it was only done at the Beijing level, not national.

The reason they used it is because Apple thought of something really obvious, but effective. A gesture that couldn't unlock a phone accidentally when in your pocket, but which is easy and intuitive to do when you do want to unlock it.
...
The competitors knew that was patented. They used it anyway, because they couldn't think of anything just as effective. They hadn't thought of it before, even in its most simplistic form.

Wait. First you said it was obvious, then you claim it's not. In any case, you're massively incorrect

First off, Apple didn't invent the concept of swipe to prevent accidental unlocks. A horizontal swipe gesture had already been done in 2002 on a Windows CE phone exactly for that reason. What Apple patented, was using an image slid in a predefined range of motion.

However, that's the same visual action that a virtual on-off button takes, and that's why (along with the 2002 phone), other countries' courts quickly invalidated the Apple patent. Too much prior art.

 

[TylerD554]

You're all missing it. China the KING of rip off literally everything has a PATENT OFFICE!?!? That's right they don't care about American patents

 

[Redpoint]

Is it just me or is it mildly amusing that a Chinese company is suing over patent infringement.

 

[Thunderhawks]

As I have said in all the other threads related to this, Apple needs to be careful. I get that Apple needs to find a way to sell in CHina and Open stores since most of its manufacturing is happening in China. Until it can diversify its operations to India and Brazil, they seem to be stuck playing these games with China. Apple should get aggressive about finding partners in other parts of the world. Otherwise they will continue to be at the mercy of the government that seems to change the rules at will.

They will move production to where the people are.

India, Brazil and Africa is next , until the last elephant or monkey has an iPhone 6Plus.

 

[raivikrant]

Well then why would the competitors use swipe to unlock in their products? There are many other ways to unlock a phone. A button. Swirl your finger around in a circle to unlock. Type in a passcode.

The reason they used it is because Apple thought of something really obvious, but effective. A gesture that couldn't unlock a phone accidentally when in your pocket, but which is easy and intuitive to do when you do want to unlock it.

The competitors knew that was patented. They used it anyway, because they couldn't think of anything just as effective. They hadn't thought of it before, even in its most simplistic form. So yes, I very much agree with Apple suing over that. It's not like there wasn't a different way to do it.

You might see it as something simple and natural. It's easy to say that with hindsight. Even so much as a swipe unlock had a lot of thought and time that goes into it, especially when you consider what the phone industry looked like before 2007.

Thanks for this. I have been saying this for a long time but people don't seem to get it.

 

[69Mustang]

If we stop pandering to them, they will change.

Therein lies the issue. No company seems to be willing to stop. The ROI is too great to ignore. I personally believe nothing will change until the dollars do. It's just the way the business world typically seems to work. None of them seem to be complaining either. The complaints come from people like us. I wonder... will our complaints dry up if companies do as we say they should and we end up paying more for products. I've noticed a lot of conviction tends to have a dollar threshold. <-- That's not a knock, because I am one of those people. I definitely don't want to pay more just so a company can maintain it's Chinese era margins. A bit callously, I look at it like, if the companies don't care, why should I?

 

[smacrumon]

The less pure the iPhone design becomes, the more easier other companies can copy it and then make bogus patent claims. Keep the iPhone design pure, simple and clean, other companies will find it harder to copy and truely make it more difficult to claim infringement.

 

[Kaspersky]

There's no such thing as 'Barely Exists'. It does exists or it does not exist.

 

[Thunderhawks]

100% on point with Apple's need to diversify it's manufacturing. Just not Brazil. Just not right now. Brazil is currently a ****-show politically and economically. They can't even pay for the Olympics and the infrastructure there is pretty crappy. Right now, China is the tail wagging the dog. Unfortunately, I think as long as the ledger sheet says profitable, Apple will continue to get wagged just like every other company doing business with China.

On topic: Although I think this Chinese company is simply reaching for dollars, they don't exactly fit the definition of a patent troll as we've come to define them. They actually had a product on the market when the suit was initiated in 2014. The slow stroll through the court system notwithstanding, they sort of fall in a different category from the standard NPE. I'm not debating the merits of their case; just stating that calling them a patent troll is not exactly factual.

Problem with all that global production is education. It doesn't just take bodies to manufacture.
Asian folks have always put big emphasis on education.

Same issue in Brazil, probably not in India.

Whether that is copying masters or learning math (uurrrgh for most people) and becoming engineers , instead of lawyers.

Brazil may for that reason (education) not work out or Foxconn will have to send their engineers there for control
and experience a lot of pain

I also don't see the trend to assemble 50 millions of phones each year continue.

Upgrade replacements are no longer as enticing as when new developments/features were offered.

All in all a slower cycle, i.e. less production needed.