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
No! That would just make it impossible for smaller companies to challenge the three. Patent reform is what is needed.
Google is not Samsung.
Google has a different track record than Samsung. The thermonuclear SJ stated was rather on the concept and on riding the wave to make smartphones which are somewhat similar to iDevices. Now, even the Samsung case showed that this is not gonna fly with the courts. Also, Google basically supplied the nails to Samsung's coffin in the $1bn case by asking them to change the appearance because it is too Apple-like. In other words: Google's Android is different and even Google is interested in having an own trade dress.
This case is rather between Motorola and Apple and it is also about things Motorola had way before Apple even got onto the market. Now, keep in mind, all these names are U.S. American. You might not think but that really plays a role. It does not matter who would win a case, it will offend someone here and that is not in anyone's interrest. The PR dissaster resulting is more expensive than the compromise - which you get free marketing by the press for.
As I see it:
Apple probably infringed on Motorola's patents
Android probably infringed on Apple's patents.
Best solution for both:
Google cross-licenses for Motorola products with Apple and gets a deal with Apple so that any other producer using Android can license the whole Apple IP package for a certain IP fee. In the end, Google wants the profits from the adds on Android and that will still work. Apple wants the royalties because workarounds against their IP does not help them at all.
Google has a different track record than Samsung. The thermonuclear SJ stated was rather on the concept and on riding the wave to make smartphones which are somewhat similar to iDevices. Now, even the Samsung case showed that this is not gonna fly with the courts. Also, Google basically supplied the nails to Samsung's coffin in the $1bn case by asking them to change the appearance because it is too Apple-like. In other words: Google's Android is different and even Google is interested in having an own trade dress.
This case is rather between Motorola and Apple and it is also about things Motorola had way before Apple even got onto the market. Now, keep in mind, all these names are U.S. American. You might not think but that really plays a role. It does not matter who would win a case, it will offend someone here and that is not in anyone's interrest. The PR dissaster resulting is more expensive than the compromise - which you get free marketing by the press for.
As I see it:
Apple probably infringed on Motorola's patents
Android probably infringed on Apple's patents.
Best solution for both:
Google cross-licenses for Motorola products with Apple and gets a deal with Apple so that any other producer using Android can license the whole Apple IP package for a certain IP fee. In the end, Google wants the profits from the adds on Android and that will still work. Apple wants the royalties because workarounds against their IP does not help them at all.
I would hope this would treat standards patents separately from the patents that differentiate iOS from Android. Similar to the Apple-Microsoft agreement that says Microsoft can't clone the iOS interface.
Incorrect.
Such a deal would require small companies to *innovate*, something that is great for jobs, the economy, ect.
Patent No. 5,883,580 “Geographic-temporal significant messaging”
This patent, issued on March 16th, 1999 talks about “messaging devices that process messages logically for a user in the context of space and time”. Translated from legalese – it’s about your iPhone being able to display geographically relevant messages when you are at a certain place. E.g. traffic alerts when you are near the congested intersection, ability to schedule reminders when you are approaching your workplace or leaving your home, getting a pop-up to remember to buy some milk when you are in a grocery store, etc;
Patent No. 5,922,047 “Apparatus, method and system for multimedia control and communication”
The ‘047 patent, issued on July 13, 199 is really broad and, according to Motorola, covers such basic device functionality as being able to launch and use any media application, while also being a phone. E.g. tapping on video player icon on iPhone 4S constitutes infringement, because it means that your phone switches to another operating mode (video player) among many (telephone, music player, browser, etc
, in response to a first control signal (tapping on a video icon) and, after video player launches, it is controlled via multiple other control signals – e.g tap to Pause/Play, Fast Forward, etc;Patent No. 6,425,002 “Apparatus and method for handling dispatching messages for various applications of a communication device”
‘002 patent was issued on July 23, 2002 and covers the API for routing incoming and outgoing messages to the correct applications. Motorola thinks that Apple’s Push Notification functionality, allowing your apps to automatically send and receive push messages, is covered by ththis patent and infringes on it.
Patent No. 6,493,673 “Markup language for interactive services and methods thereof”
This patent, issued on Dec. 10, 2002 covers interactive voice services delivered over the internet, and goes after Siri. Motorola does not care much about the artificial intelligence and all other fancy stuff Siri does. According to the patent claims, Motorola has invented the basic interactive dialog process Siri uses. And the way Apple renders XML files to allow you talk to Siri, is a no no without a license. “Siri, set a reminder for 2, tomorrow”, “2PM or 2AM”, “2PM” , “OK, setting reminder for 2PM on Wednesday, Aug. 22nd” . Doesn’t matter how Siri figures out what to ask and what to tell you. Simply by performing this dialog, and using a markup language to do it – Siri infringes. Or at least that’s what Motorola claims.
Patent No. 6,983,370 “System for providing continuity between messaging clients and method therefor”
The ‘370 patent, issued on January 3d, 2006 talks about seamless IM session switching between various devices, and says that all iMessage capable devices are infringing on it. Started your iMessage chat on your MacBook, then continued it on the way to work on your iPhone? Google says that the way Apple does this – by storing your chat data on its servers and then transferring the chat data from MacBook to iPhone – is Moto’s invention. This patent is also part of Motorola’s litigation with Microsoft in U.S.
Patent No. 7,007,064 “Method and apparatus for obtaining and managing wirelessly communicated content”
‘064 patent, issued on Feb 28, 2006 goes after e-mail syncing between your Macs and iOS devices via iCloud. It is a rather narrow patent, and only insists that the way Apple keeps your e-mails in sync, by deleting messages on one of your igadgets when you delete that same message on the other, is an infringing use.
Patent No. 7,383,983 “System and method for managing content between devices in various domains”
This patent covers the ability to pause video or audio playback on your iPad, and then resume playing the content from the same place on a different iDevice.
I predict that will hurt Apple more than Google. Especially if Apple's maps look as bad as some of the screenshots I've seen.
Everybody is. The price of iToys certainly won't be coming down anytime soon.
Last edited by a moderator:
But where will all that energy from geek internet wars go then????
Ah well, I'm guessing people will find something else to fight about ... whew.
If true (and I'll wait to see for myself rather than take your word), there's still value in not allowing Google to track my every move.
Not to mention the galling "Sponsored Links" in the Google maps.
Ornamental and design patents are junk!
Mechanics patents, innovation that teaches How to make thins happen and be produced are what matters..A billion Bucks for rounded corners and similar looks, what a laugh, all the cars look the same too. am so tired of Apple thinking and acting like they are in someway doing something wonderful by making their phones, give me a break, work on the capability and provide more to the customer, Crippling Face time of Phone connection stupid and only done to make more money at the expense of the public.
Mechanics patents, innovation that teaches How to make thins happen and be produced are what matters..A billion Bucks for rounded corners and similar looks, what a laugh, all the cars look the same too. am so tired of Apple thinking and acting like they are in someway doing something wonderful by making their phones, give me a break, work on the capability and provide more to the customer, Crippling Face time of Phone connection stupid and only done to make more money at the expense of the public.
To be honest I love apple and google though apples maps on the iPhone with turn by turn extra are smoother :/
There are only so many touch gestures.
Giving two or three companies exclusive access to things like pinch to zoom and bounce back scrolling hardly forces anyone to innovate.
I don't and I am positive that you don't have any idea the patent portfolio that Google has so who's to say it wouldn't benefit both?
You mean "sights"?
But no, the point is much simpler - Samsung has been found to infringe, and was condemned for that.
Lawsuits exist all over the place, and they are especially prevalent in the context of the broken US patent system (who the hell came up with software patents in the first place?)...that doesn't mean they will lead to a Samsung-like result. Not to mention that most Motorola Mobility patents are FRAND.