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.
Tim Cook and Larry Page Working to Address Patent Issues Between Apple and Google
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
yes, I have wondered that, but not because of Moto patents.
Because of NFC and payment patents. Yes, Apple has an iWallet patent, but Google is already doing it, they likely already have a portfolio of pay from mobile via NFC patents that could be blocking Apple from adding it to the upcoming iPhone, and they want to start developing the features into Passbook for next years iPhone.
So what do you suggest is the solution to this predicament googles put themselves in.
The fewer Android handsets sold = Less income for Google.
Add three more samsung phones to the potential loss.
Apple targets more Samsung products in patent suit :
"Seeking to capitalize on a major legal victory over its rival Samsung Electronics Ltd, Apple Inc has asked a federal court in a separate case to find that four additional Samsung products, including the Galaxy S III, infringe Apple's patents."
Looks like the talks between Larry Page and Tim Cook are going great.
Add three more samsung phones to the potential loss.
Apple targets more Samsung products in patent suit :
"Seeking to capitalize on a major legal victory over its rival Samsung Electronics Ltd, Apple Inc has asked a federal court in a separate case to find that four additional Samsung products, including the Galaxy S III, infringe Apple's patents."
Looks like the talks between Larry Page and Tim Cook are going great.
Last edited:
You've clearly never used Ice Cream Sand which or Jelly Bean, they blow away iOS. Then again, I guess its Apples Fault for " innovating " in 07, then changing nothing.
Google doesn't make money on the Android phones themselves, they make money selling detailed, targeted information about the people who buy Android phones. But you knew that...
Hum, no, they don't. They make money by selling ad placement based on the fact that they have detailed, targeted information about the people who own android phones, use Google services, use Admob partners, etc..
Google doesn't sell their information, that would be shooting themselves in the foot. You don't sell your golden egg laying goose, you make it lay eggs.
This is what the Galaxy Nexus, SGIII, Note and Note 10.1 are being included for
5,946,647 (the 647 Patent)
System and method for performing an action on a structure in computer-generated data
6,847,959 (the 959 Patent)
Universal interface for retrieval of information in a computer system
8,046,721 (the 721 Patent)
Unlocking a device by performing gestures on an unlock image
8,074,172 (the 172 Patent)
Method, system, and graphical user interface for providing word recommendations
8,014,760 (the 760 Patent)
Missed telephone call management for a portable multifunction device
5,666,502 (the 502 Patent)
Graphical user interface using historical lists with field classes
7,761,414 (the 414 Patent)
Asynchronous data synchronization amongst devices
8,086,604 (the 604 Patent)
Universal interface for retrieval of information in a computer system
the Amended complaint
http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/1329077/261.pdf
----------
sad how much some people here hate on Google for something they don't even do
5,946,647 (the 647 Patent)
System and method for performing an action on a structure in computer-generated data
6,847,959 (the 959 Patent)
Universal interface for retrieval of information in a computer system
8,046,721 (the 721 Patent)
Unlocking a device by performing gestures on an unlock image
8,074,172 (the 172 Patent)
Method, system, and graphical user interface for providing word recommendations
8,014,760 (the 760 Patent)
Missed telephone call management for a portable multifunction device
5,666,502 (the 502 Patent)
Graphical user interface using historical lists with field classes
7,761,414 (the 414 Patent)
Asynchronous data synchronization amongst devices
8,086,604 (the 604 Patent)
Universal interface for retrieval of information in a computer system
the Amended complaint
http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/1329077/261.pdf
----------
sad how much some people here hate on Google for something they don't even do
And it's clear people aren't reading even the last page of this thread. Google ALSO makes money on selling their Apps. I'm sure it's not a HUGE boon to their income - but it's false to say they don't make any money from Android.
----------
The problem is that some people choose to be lazy and believe everything they read - on FORUMS and/or biased rumor sites instead of seeking out the truth for themselves. Then they go ahead and repost the information and it's like the worst game of "operator" on the internet possible because what might have started out as a slight bit of misunderstanding turns into "canon" and is recited over and over as fact.
http://www.google.com/patents/US5946647
This is the "HTC ban" patent. IE, detecting a phone number/e-mail address and turning into a clickable link.
http://www.google.com/patents/US6847959
http://www.google.com/patents/US8086604
These two seem to be the spotlight patents. IE, the "Google search box searches online and locally so it infringes" patents. Samsung already had to issue a workaround for this for the Galaxy Nexus, amending the complaint to a wider set of phones is a no brainer and will just force Samsung to work around it for all their handsets.
http://www.google.com/patents/US8046721
Slide to Unlock.
This one (or at least a few of its claims) are contested based on this earlier patent :
http://www.google.com/patents/US8095879
Filing date 2002. It's funny because Apple has a more recent (filed in 2011) slide to unlock patent where they now acknowledge the Neonode patent as prior art :
http://www.google.com/patents/US8209637
Seems they know that '721 is probably invalid and filed a new one for their improvements over Neonode's '879. Samsung is probably going to go for invalidation for this one ('721 I mean).
http://www.google.com/patents/US8074172
2007 filed patent for the iPhone spell checking system that automatically suggests corrections and enables to perform them by using the spacebar or cancel them by touching the X. Applies only to mobile devices with touch screens according to the claims.
http://www.google.com/patents/US8014760
This one is a doozy. Basically, they've patented the list of "Missed phone calls with callback based on a touch". Obviousness ? Is there even any other way to do this ?
This one has a late filing, June 2007. I wonder what Windows Mobile, Palm Treos or Sony Ericsson Px phones could provide as far as prior art on this one.
I haven't read all the claims, it's a long one, but from the first few claims, it seems to me this is pretty broad. Does it get more precise near the end ?
http://www.google.com/patents/US5666502
This one is purely being used against the Galaxy Note. It's for pen-based computer systems, and it dates all the way back to 1995, having been granted in 1997. What's the expiration delay in the US ?
Anyway, seems to be pretty basic, but as its quite old, digging out prior art will probably be impossible. Basically, it's the "History" patent, ie, start "inputing" something in a text field and choices pop up based on recently typed data in the field. Think your web browsers search bar where you begin to type a URL and if it's a site you've visited, the browser suggests it based on the history file.
Except for pen based computers only. They've patented the browser URL bar on a pen based computer. In 1995 no less.
Of course... Samsung could go around this one fairly easily. If they use "Google Instant" instead of a history file, they're in the clear. Google Instant is based on results generated not from your previous entries, but from most likely entries based on their searching metrics and text detection. If they detect the start of a URL, based on DNS information they can complete it. If it's a string, they can start searching for that and return the first few results keywords or suggest more keywords.
Like Chrome now does. So Samsung could simply use Google Instant and replace the history file on the Galaxy Note. I doubt many users would notice. Once the patent expires, they can just add back the history functionality.
http://www.google.com/patents/US7761414
Pretty technical, not sure I'm grasping the extents of this one. On the surface, it looks to be very basic and cover a wide array of synchronization occurring at the same time you're using the device being synchronized, but it could be more precise in its application. Hard to tell.
Again, if its broad, obviousness comes to mind. Any programmer would have done the same (send synchronization to a background thread while continuing to execute the software on the main thread so that the user can keep using the device while synchronizing). This was filed in 2007. Depending on the claims, prior art might be doable.
No, they don't, Google doesn't track Android phones, Google makes money selling ad placement from web search, web use or ad mob. And ot works exactly the same in Android, iOS, WP7 or Symbian.
Mobile ads are where Google makes about 10% (and rising) of its money now, but the majority of it is not from searches. Read on...
Yes, that Google exec told Congress in Sept 2011 that about 2/3 of their (US?) mobile searches came because of their deal with Apple.
However, because of the way bloggers clipped the video, most people never listened to the rest of that conversation. Then it becomes clearer that the "2/3" only referred to number of searches, not percentage of revenue.
She went on to clarify that all the stats about Google having the most mobile searches were extremely misleading, as the majority of Google's mobile revenue comes from ads placed in regular apps... NOT from search.
Therefore Apple's implementation of their own maps will not have as much an impact as some think. Heck, it might even save Google map licensing fees.
Correct, and according to analysts, Google makes about $7 per year per mobile device, whether it's a phone or tablet, running iOS or Android. (Oracle claimed it was $14 per year per Android phone, but they were going for damages.)
So the way that Apple can most affect Google, is by pushing app developers to use iAds.
.
Last edited:
I don't think you read the link I referenced. It detailed how traffic analysis shows that, even though Samsung leads Apple in smartphone shipments, iPhone traffic outpaced competing Samsung smartphone traffic by eight times. Thats not year-old Google executive testimony. Thats recent traffic analysis.
And thats the big problem Android has: possession without utilization. (OK, I get that Android phone users probably use their phones to text, e-mail, and talk the same as iPhone users do.)
But talking, texting, and e-mailing don't make money for Google. Its generalized web-browsing (including search) that makes money for Google. Its not only a problem short-term (no web-based mobile search revenue) but also long-term, in that possession-without-utilization is what caused the RIM bandwagon to so rapidly shed its wheels. (Lots of folks bought Crackberries, but as soon as the iPhone - and Android - came along, they hadn't built up enough ecosystem buy-in to prevent them from switching.)
Sure, I read it. It's the same traffic analysis we've seen for years: more iPhone users hit those tracked websites than Android users, and more iPad users hit those sites than iPhone users.
Apparently you didn't read my post
Web browsing (including search) is NOT the majority of Google's mobile ad revenue. Ads inside apps are.
First, that's not recent analysis, it is from more than a year ago. And I think you haven't read this:
I hope this is sarcasm. I really hope it is or humanity has gone down in my estimation. Again.
Yes, it's sarcasm.
BRLawyer's trademark has been to close with an outlandish comment that "xxx is DEAD" - when often "xxx" has a dominant market position.
If you're coming in late, just follow the thread back a few posts to #291.
Google lawyer Susan Creighton's testimony before Congress last year.