yep. that's the fundamental rule for appeals. A lot of ppl seem to think an appeal is a "do over" to try again, when the basis of an appeal has to be that the trial court made an error of law in their decision based upon the facts presented. You can't present new evidence on appeal.
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.
Samsung Owes Apple $120 Million in Longstanding Slide-to-Unlock Lawsuit
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
yep. that's the fundamental rule for appeals. A lot of ppl seem to think an appeal is a "do over" to try again, when the basis of an appeal has to be that the trial court made an error of law in their decision based upon the facts presented. You can't present new evidence on appeal.
Do a google news search for "software patents". If Samsung can keep appealing and drag it out until the law changes and all software patents are invalid.
http://m.slashdot.org/story/317171
Ever since TouchID, on both of my iPhone and iPad its a single press with a fingerprint-approved finger. Or a click with anything and then present a fingerprint approved finger for unlock.
One click. This was true before iOS 10 and remains true after iOS 10.
I see that the option to use slide-to-unlock is gone, but I don't understand why it would be considered more elegant. So you wake the phone by clicking something, then switch to swiping across the screen, then place your thumb on the TouchID sensor. I don't understand how that's more elegant than just placing your thumb on the TouchID sensor and clicking once.
I don't have to click multiple times. If you do, something is wrong.
That's funny because I haven't used the "elegant design" since the 5S was released. I've always used one button press to unlock with my fingerprint. It's quick and secure.
So glad the German courts had sense and threw this patent out when Apple tried to use it! It should never have been awarded and it seems ONLY in America does it stand, altough I thought that this was a patent being disbanding by the US patent office?
I haven't used iOS 10, but if I had to make a guess why not having slide to unlock might be a big deal is that slide to unlock pretty much always works.
Touch ID, can sometimes be a PITA. When it works, it is great, but when it doesn't, like when my hand is wet/moist, sweaty, dirty, oil, and sometimes clean, it doesn't always work.
At which point, after clicking the home button and your fingerprint being rejected, the keypad pops up just like it would after a swipe and you enter your passcode. Is that not your experience? I honestly haven't swiped on the lock screen of my phone since 2013, so I'm having a hard time remembering exactly how the interactions differed.
My point is that there isn't a "patent troll" anywhere to be found in this story...
There were major corporate patent battles over early automobiles as well.
And desktops, laptops and their software have been litigated too...
Last edited:
Yup, this is what happens.
Actually, this is a little off topic, but I find it annoying that the Touch ID to unlock stops working if you hit the home button a few times over a period of time just to check the time, or see if you got an email.
I have the exact same problem as you with wet fingers, but I don't really understand how this is related.
If I did Slide-to-Unlock, I still had to do TouchID authentication anyway (or enter a passcode). So Slide-to-Unlock isn't some way around TouchID authentication not working.
To unlock your phone it works. I don't have issues typing in a passcode if my hands are wet or moist, just the Touch ID.
So I guess I'm saying I don't see how having a fingerprint rejected is any different or more time consuming than swiping to unlock. But again, it's been years.
Why? Samsung blatantly copied early iPhone designs which got them to where they are today. Eventually, they were a notorious enough competitor that they could make their own designs and brand. But the damage was already done. Those early ripoffs have cost Apple billions in lost revenue over the years.
probably not in all nickels.. These are all electronically done these days.
Now, I thought the slide-to-unlock was invalidated by the USPTO, why is this still at the center of the patent dispute.
[doublepost=1475865498][/doublepost]
I haven't read the decision, but I'm willing to bet that they are issues that Judge Koh rejected to present to the jury because it would favor Samsung, as she had done in the first 2012 trial.
[doublepost=1475865614][/doublepost]
All hail VirnetX? Yay, Apple could use the judgement to pay for 1/3 of Virnext's damage award.
Last edited:
Way to simplify the description to serve your own argument.
Data Detectors are far more advanced that what you just described.