You were arguing against my assertion, which was that Nokia isn't dependent upon webkit, nor mobile-safari, in order to have a usable browser. The issue of "who had the first usable browser" is your attempt to shift the goals of the argument. I was sticking to the original contention -- whether or not Nokia phones would have a usable browser without webkit.
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.
Nokia Files iPhone-Related Suit Against Apple Regarding Wireless Patents
- Thread starter ChazUK
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You were arguing against my assertion, which was that Nokia isn't dependent upon webkit, nor mobile-safari, in order to have a usable browser. The issue of "who had the first usable browser" is your attempt to shift the goals of the argument. I was sticking to the original contention -- whether or not Nokia phones would have a usable browser without webkit.
Come on guys, a bit of common sense here. Apple and Nokia have probably been discussing this issue for 2 years and were unable to come to any agreement. Apple obviously feels they are on the right side and forced Nokia to file suit.
Nokia patents
It seems to me (same number of 10, only a few days ago granted in the US) that the Nokia patents could be these:
http://www.latestpatents.com/nokia-patents-granted-on-13-october-2009/
Said that, I think we all cannot properly discuss the matter, until we know more details about Nokia's claims AND what Apple has to say.
Apple is not simply a mobile phone maker, but has a multi-decade hedgy intellectual / technological background on hardware and software, covering data trasmission / exchange, communication and interoperability between devices, over wired and wireless networks.
As for the "keyboard for handset" covered by the tenth Nokia's patent (see the link above), the Apple Newton Message Pad (first introduced 1993) had a on-screen pop-up QWERTY virtual keyboard.
Until we have details about Apple's reaction, we can't discuss the matter with proper knownledge.
It seems to me (same number of 10, only a few days ago granted in the US) that the Nokia patents could be these:
http://www.latestpatents.com/nokia-patents-granted-on-13-october-2009/
Said that, I think we all cannot properly discuss the matter, until we know more details about Nokia's claims AND what Apple has to say.
Apple is not simply a mobile phone maker, but has a multi-decade hedgy intellectual / technological background on hardware and software, covering data trasmission / exchange, communication and interoperability between devices, over wired and wireless networks.
As for the "keyboard for handset" covered by the tenth Nokia's patent (see the link above), the Apple Newton Message Pad (first introduced 1993) had a on-screen pop-up QWERTY virtual keyboard.
Until we have details about Apple's reaction, we can't discuss the matter with proper knownledge.
assume?
Look at the time of each post - identical - before you post such a comment.
It's also ridiculous that people cannot make a comment without being labeled 'fanboy' by the PC crowd.
Instead of all the wild speculation, why don't you wait for Apple and/or Nokia to make a public statement.
Look at the time of each post - identical - before you post such a comment.
It's also ridiculous that people cannot make a comment without being labeled 'fanboy' by the PC crowd.
Instead of all the wild speculation, why don't you wait for Apple and/or Nokia to make a public statement.
This is going to be a very technical case and we don't know the details. But I can only assume Apple thinks the patents are bogus.
For example what If I patented a "device where the perimeter is equidistant from a revolving axle." Then I asked everyone who make roller skates to cars to pay a license for by "invention". Maybe if I only charge $100 they'd pay rather then spend the thousands it would take to overturn by patent on the wheel. Just because they all pay me the $100 it still does not make my patent valid.
It could be that Apple simply refused to pay to use something that is so obvious and figured they'd spend the bucks in court to get it overturned. I'm sure someone at Apple did the math and figured court was cheaper in the long run.
Apple is on both ends of this. Look at the Pystar case. Apple claims Pystar is violating some EULA while Pystar claims the EULA is bogus. No matter what you think about this you have to agree that it is not so clear who is right. If it were clear the judge in the case would have not let it go this far. Pystar is simply gambling. They have a lot to gain and little to loose so it makes sense for them
Apple may have decided "gambling" is their best option too. If you look at the long term costs, out 10 years or more Apple is smart to take the gamble. If they win they eliminate a cost forever and if they loose, at worst they pay triple. With the odds of "forever to triple" I'd take the bet even if my odds of winning the case is only 1 in 2.
Court cases are like betting. Just work out the odds and go for it if they are good.
because sometimes, paying the lawers + court + sue is still less than paying at the beginning for license.
It's a guess but often works
Don't mind them, even the Nokia CEO recognized what the iPhone has done to the industry but we have a bunch of random dudes on the net who know better.
How is this a sure sign? Are you a lawyer for either party? Have you read in detail the filed suit? Are you an expert on the patents in question? Or are you just blindly supporting a company you really like?
Really? because my guess is that this isn't about the money at all.
My guess is that it's about cross-licensing. How much do you want to bet that Nokia wants access to Apple patents that Apple doesn't want to have to share, that THAT was what Nokia wanted in compensation for Apple using their patents, and that THAT was what derailed the negotiations?
Apple has money. Nokia, while having a bad year (like almost everyone else), is still doing quite well. Neither of them is actually desperate for cash right now. If it was just about money, I doubt it would have taken this long to come to terms, nor that it would have come to a court case.
I see the fanatics are out in force in this thread....
If Apple can "beat 'em" and therefore presumably doesn't need to sue people then why are they suing Psystar? Oh, that's right...when Apple sues the living crap out of people it's not only OK, it's the right thing to do! Bad Psystar! Evil Psystar! How DARE they infringe on Apple's intellectual property!?!? I hope Psystar goes out of business immediately, the cut-throat leeches!!! Hey wait...what's this? Nokia is suing Apple for phone related patent violations? Those scum suckers! They can't beat the iPhone so they're trying to steal some of Apple billions! (you know the billions they make from not having to compete with anyone else's hardware directly for "Mac" sales since anyone wanting a "Mac" must buy only Apple hardware even though it's identical to all Intel clone hardware and so an "intellectual license" is their shield against competition and against the Clayton Anti-Trust tying provision for that matter, but who cares about that because Apple gets what Apple wants!) What? The very suggestion that Apple should COMPETE with Psystar's hardware instead of just trying to erase them off the planet? Pshaw! That's absurd! You don't "compete" in a monarchy! King Steve doesn't compete with anyone! He sues his enemies into oblivion and he will do the same with Nokia for stealing his patents on wireless phone technology just as soon as he figures a way to get his "Time Machine" to go back and change history! Then Nokia will rue the day they messed with the Almighty Steve!
Great post, but be careful, making fun of the Fanbois here is not allowed at MacRumors. They gang up and report you for being a troll or forum spammer, so I wouldn't criticize LTD again if I were you.
I was warned multiple times by MacRumors for criticizing Apple regarding PowerPC/Snow Leopard support & Leopard problems as well as comments I made in the Psystar threads.
Making comparisons to other threads and Apple-related topics is considered by MacRumors moderators and Fanbois as SPAMMING, so your Psystar comparison clearly violates this policy.
So be forewarned, resistance against the Apple Fanbois is futile. They will attack.
Now, my take on this lawsuit is that it's a shot across the bow and nothing more.
I'm sure Nokia and Apple have long been in negotiations and a deal will be struck.
Nokia is probably frustrated with the negotiations and their current financial situation certainly does make the situation more desperate to bring this to a close sooner rather than later. That's my opinion, of course, your mileage may vary.
And finally, just because Apple hasn't sued Palm over the Pre does NOT mean Palm is not currently in negotiations to license Apple technology. It's not really in Apple's best interest to sue immediately, nor was it Nokias, that's why these things drag out.
Now that the iPhone is an even bigger success, Nokia stands to make even more money on patent licensing if Apple has infringed on any. If they'd have sued 2 years ago, it would have been a stupid waste of legal costs for little gain. They clearly waited until now because the iPhone is an enormous success. I do agree with a previous post though, Apple should have just bought Palm out of business for chump change, but Steve Jobs can be stubborn on some things. It's possible Apple is waiting 2-3 years to ultimately sue Palm out of business, or maybe they don't even have a case, or possibly they think Palm will go under on its own. In any case like this, its a cost/reward analysis. Apple might not even think Palm is hurting iPhone sales, therefor not even worth suing!
In the end, no one really knows, its all conjecture at this point.
I didn't realize there were so many lawyers on macrumors! Yep! that's how we do it! We see something that a company may have done wrong and immediately sue them the same day! Nothing like doing research and preparing a case! Nope! Just straight to suing!
These are new patents. However Nokia sued because of the violation of old patents. Most likely GSM-EFR is included:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enhanced_Full_Rate
This post is the first time that you have made that assertion. The original claim by Morky was that "Nokia wouldn't even have a usable browser on their phones if not for Webkit." You called that "100% pure BS."
A reasonable person can argue that Mobile Safari and the other Webkit browsers that followed were the only usable browsers. In addition, any improvements in the usability of other browsers can be reasonably attributed to the concepts that Apple introduced in Mobile Safari and the pressure that it put on the market by producing such an obviously superior experience.
And I stick by my assertion that Mobile Safari and Webkit are the primary drivers behind the improvement in usability in the mobile web. Of course, Nokia or its partners can develop a usable browser without using Webkit. But they didn't, and they probably would not have by now without the introduction of Mobile Safari.
remember that Apple had to pay $100 million to settle a Patent Lawsuit with Creative. i love Apple as much as the next guy, but they seem to be following this pattern of not getting the license to pay for these patents.
Unfortunately, we have nothing but a few vague articles and press releases to go on now. I wish I had a pink to a PDF of the actual complaint or something equally useful, but until then the forum seems to be divided between those arguing Apple wouldn't let this go to court unless they thought they had a case and those arguing Nokia wouldn't bother pursuing it unless they thought they had a case.
I'm only giving Nokia the benefit of the doubt because they happen to be more firmly rooted in the industry, while Apple is a relative new comer. I don't think the other handset vendors would have blindly paid Nokia license fees if they thought they could avoid it. Maybe Apple is onto something, but what little we know about the news coupled with past precedence makes me side with Nokia.
Actually, it would have probably been Mozilla, instead.
Nokia started its interest in Mozilla a few years back and will release a Mozilla based client for one of its other devices - N900(?).
I wouldn't get excited either way. This is just a step in the process of negotiating the licenses. Apple is playing hardball and Nokia is responding in kind. These companies have nothing to gain by some dramatic courtroom battle.
Cue timer for announcement of settlement and cross-license agreement.
Cue timer for announcement of settlement and cross-license agreement.
Actually, I'm not really here to discuss the IP issue.
I'm just here to take the opportunity to once again bash Nokia for being asleep at the wheel for the last two years, with no real change in sight, especially in the wake of their profit and market share nosediving. Someone needs to beat their management over the head with a big wet flounder, the kind you catch off the South Coast, between Pori and Porvoo.
This is not a one quarter phenomenon. Nokia has been losing market share quarter after quarter. This past quarter shows the shrinkage is accelerating. Based on this rate, Nokia could become the next Motorola within a year.
I'm just here to take the opportunity to once again bash Nokia for being asleep at the wheel for the last two years, with no real change in sight, especially in the wake of their profit and market share nosediving. Someone needs to beat their management over the head with a big wet flounder, the kind you catch off the South Coast, between Pori and Porvoo.
This is not a one quarter phenomenon. Nokia has been losing market share quarter after quarter. This past quarter shows the shrinkage is accelerating. Based on this rate, Nokia could become the next Motorola within a year.
Bzzt. Wrong.
Nokia started down this path before the iPhone was even publicly announced (with the Nokia 770 internet tablet). They stated up front that it was a 5 phase path, and they're just now getting to phase 4 (the N900). Their roadmap was already laid out long before the iPhone came along, and they're headed toward a usable touch screen mobile computer in your pocket.
And their browser platform for achieving that is: mozilla, not webkit/mobile-safari.
And, having used both, the ONLY thing I'd rather have on Nokia's mozilla based browser, from mobile safari, is pinch/unpinch. Everything else is better on microb (both in terms of usability and utility). In fact, I'd pretty much say that about the entire Maemo platform -- with a very few exceptions, far better than the iPhone.
Err... let's clear up some misconceptions first shall we?
First of all, Nokia made a loss of Euro 426 Million however this was due to a loss of Euro 1,107 billion - including a write off of close to a billion Euros - made by Nokia Siemens Networks (NSN). NSN have nothing to do with the division that makes handsets (Devices and Services) which made a profit of Euro 785 Million.
Bottom line: Nokia have made some appallingly bad judgment in mergers and acquisitions but the handset division is making money. Lot's of money.
Now sales. Nokia sold 108 million phones last quarter. Yes, that's right. Over a hundred million and an increase of 5% on last quarter although still well down on 2008. Of those phones 16.4 million were smartphones. This is a decrease on last quarter's 16.9 million but an increase on the Y on Y quarter.
To put that in perspective let's strip out the two main markets where the iPhone and Nokia didn't compete against each other - the US for Nokia and China for Apple.
Apple sold 7.4 million iPhones. Given AT&T's figures and Apple's figures on international (i.e. non US) sales that means they sold about 3.8 million iPhones outside the US. Nokia sell about 30% of their smartphones in China so let's say 11.5 million Nokia smartphones were sold in the markets where it competes with Apple. That in turn means they outsell Apple by a factor of 3.
Now Nokia do have issues - they don't have a comparative handset to the iPhone and their smartphone sales are mid tier not top end. However they do dominate the market and will continue to do so for a while.
So, in summary, anyone assuming that Nokia are doing this because their phone business is failing and they jealously want some of Apple's success is flat out wrong.
As for the lawsuit. I have no idea what it's about. If Apple have used Nokia's patents without permission then they'll lose. If they haven't they'll win. It's that simple.
On the subject of browsers - the default is indeed a WebKit based browser. You can, of course, use Opera Mini or Skyfire if you choose though.
First of all, Nokia made a loss of Euro 426 Million however this was due to a loss of Euro 1,107 billion - including a write off of close to a billion Euros - made by Nokia Siemens Networks (NSN). NSN have nothing to do with the division that makes handsets (Devices and Services) which made a profit of Euro 785 Million.
Bottom line: Nokia have made some appallingly bad judgment in mergers and acquisitions but the handset division is making money. Lot's of money.
Now sales. Nokia sold 108 million phones last quarter. Yes, that's right. Over a hundred million and an increase of 5% on last quarter although still well down on 2008. Of those phones 16.4 million were smartphones. This is a decrease on last quarter's 16.9 million but an increase on the Y on Y quarter.
To put that in perspective let's strip out the two main markets where the iPhone and Nokia didn't compete against each other - the US for Nokia and China for Apple.
Apple sold 7.4 million iPhones. Given AT&T's figures and Apple's figures on international (i.e. non US) sales that means they sold about 3.8 million iPhones outside the US. Nokia sell about 30% of their smartphones in China so let's say 11.5 million Nokia smartphones were sold in the markets where it competes with Apple. That in turn means they outsell Apple by a factor of 3.
Now Nokia do have issues - they don't have a comparative handset to the iPhone and their smartphone sales are mid tier not top end. However they do dominate the market and will continue to do so for a while.
So, in summary, anyone assuming that Nokia are doing this because their phone business is failing and they jealously want some of Apple's success is flat out wrong.
As for the lawsuit. I have no idea what it's about. If Apple have used Nokia's patents without permission then they'll lose. If they haven't they'll win. It's that simple.
On the subject of browsers - the default is indeed a WebKit based browser. You can, of course, use Opera Mini or Skyfire if you choose though.
Sounds like you're asleep at the wheel. Nokia has had their change in sight. It's called Maemo. They've been working on it for several years, with pilot device releases (3 so far (770, N800, N810), 4th due out in the next few months (N900)).
Their crime is taking 3+ years to get there... not that they're asleep at the wheel, or that they don't have a plan for the future.
Apple should counter sue
Apple should sue every company out there who has used some form of it's multitouch / finger gesturing it has patented.
Funny how this comes after Nokia announced that they are makeing changes to regain market share lost to better ideas from much better engineers.
Apple should sue every company out there who has used some form of it's multitouch / finger gesturing it has patented.
Funny how this comes after Nokia announced that they are makeing changes to regain market share lost to better ideas from much better engineers.
The Nokia's press release refers exactly to 10 patents. It could be a mere coincidence. Anyway, these are patents recently granted in the US, but yet granted in other countries some years ago.
Also, in the wikipedia article you point to (see the footnotes) the holder of the GSM-EFR rights is said to be not Nokia, but VoiceAge Corporation, that is NOT fully owned by Nokia.
Nokia is only one of the three main investors, the other two being Sipro Lab Telecom and the Université de Sherbrooke:
http://web.archive.org/web/20071013161736/http://www.voiceage.com/corporate.php#investors (see the end of the page).
So, Nokia (if not acting on behalf of Voice Age Corporation, if Nokia has some kind of power of attorney) cannot sue Apple about the GSM-EFR patent.
Also, until Apple official position on the matter, we don't know if and how GSM-EFR, or a compatible interoperability original solution developed by Apple, is accomplished on the iPhone, nor if one of the iPhone's chip suppliers is YET a VoiceAge Corporation licensee.