German Court Issues Injunction Against iPhone & iPad

Great! by Daetrin · 2011-12-11 14:15 · Score: 5, Interesting

Maybe if _all_ the big players suffer enough then there will actually be some support for real patent reform.

(Not to mention of course that it's nice to see Apple get nailed after all the patent crap they've pulled on others.)

--
This Space Intentionally Left Blank

Re:Great! by Trepidity · 2011-12-11 14:17 · Score: 5, Insightful

I'd put my cynical money on them finding some way to reform the patent system that only really benefits large companies while still screwing over individuals, small businesses, and free software developers, but I do hope you're right.

--
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
Re:Great! by wvmarle · 2011-12-11 14:23 · Score: 5, Insightful

Well, let's see, the tally so far.
Apple is blocked from selling iPad and iPhone.
Samsung is blocked selling their tablets and phones elsewhere.
Now with a little luck within a year or two no-one is allowed to sell any smartphone or tablet anywhere in the world.
The winners will be: the Chinese manufacturers who don't care about patents and copyrights, who will just continue to produce, and sell their products all over the world on the grey markets at rock-bottom prices.
Works for me.
Re:Great! by TheGratefulNet · 2011-12-11 14:36 · Score: 5, Insightful

teach your children how the system really is, not how they want you to think it is. (note, this be challenging as everyone is going to fight you on this, schools and everyone else 'in charge').
then hope that by the time they have power and are in control of things, they remember the lessons you taught them and they can make changes.
its absolutely hopeless for our generation. but the next one, maybe. maybe. IF we teach them how bad the current one is and stop covering it up and sugarcoating (disney-ing, to so speak) it.
I was brougth up with the myth that mr policeman is there to help and mr government man is, also. both are blatant lies and it took me decades to learn the real truth. I'd like to hope that the next generation might actually learn from OUR mistakes and make things better.
but for us, right now, nothing will change. inertia is too great. big bodies in motion keep going in their same directions.

--

--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
Re:Great! by giorgist · 2011-12-11 14:42 · Score: 2

The Chinese build the i* devices anyway, and the Samsung devices are getting unblocked
Re:Great! by gman003 · 2011-12-11 14:49 · Score: 2

I think we should start calling this whole thing "the 2011 Patent War". That's basically what it is - a war, just fought in global courtrooms instead of global hills and fields, and fought with lawsuits and injunctions instead of artillery and carpet-bombing.
And, eventually, one of them is going to get majorly destroyed. Especially if international court cases can be taken as precedent - once one case is decided, they'd all fall in line. IANAL, so I don't know if that's the case.
Re:Great! by GumphMaster · 2011-12-11 15:05 · Score: 5, Insightful

No reform required. That's exactly how it works now. The small guy holding a patent cannot afford to enforce it against the big guys. Even a small guy that would eventually win, with damages and costs awarded, has to stump up the costs in advance from a cash flow that typically cannot sustain it.

--
Patent litigation: A doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction... in which everyone seems willing to push the button
Re:Great! by obarthelemy · 2011-12-11 15:08 · Score: 2

That, and the system actually needs to benefit lawyers too, since lawyers are a disproportionate part of politicians and political contributors and lobbyists. They have right now a system that serves them well, they'll fight change or find a way to make it better for them (ie, even more litigious).

--
The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
Re:Great! by wvmarle · 2011-12-11 15:10 · Score: 3, Interesting

Patents are supposed to work the same all over the world. They may differ in details such as amount of penalties, back-penalties, etc - the basics (what is covered, and what constitutes infringement) should be roughly the same. So indeed if one courts rules one way, likely courts in other countries will rule the same.
But to come back to your statement about war: mind that there are no winners in war. There are only losers. In WWII the allied forces were considered the winners, but the rest of Europe was as much in tatters as loser Germany was. Both sides lost huge in form of people killed or seriously wounded and disabled, buildings destroyed, infrastructure destroyed, economic losses due to the high cost of warfare and the lost production, etc. It took enormous financial support from mainly the US to help get Europe back on its feet.
In these patent wars there will be no "Marshall plan" when the dust settles. Both Samsung and Apple (I think they can be considered the main parties here) may end up seriously crippled. Samsung has much more than just phones and tablets (they produce many other consumer electronics, and also parts for them, including parts for Apple products), Apple otoh is more reliant on their phone/tablet business, and losing too many of this kind of suits may cause them to go bankrupt in the end. And for side players like Google the mobile phone business is merely a way to expand/protect their core business, so they don't have much to lose there.
Re:Great! by Man+On+Pink+Corner · 2011-12-11 15:17 · Score: 3, Insightful

This is just a recapitulation of what happened when wireless tech was ramping up in the first few decades of the 20th century. The patent wars were nasty, brutal, and long enough to put an entire generation of lawyers' kids through college.
Nothing changed. It won't change this time, either, because there are more lawyers at the controls of the US government today than there ever have been.
Re:Great! by Myopic · 2011-12-11 15:21 · Score: 3, Insightful

That's basically what it is - a war, just fought in global courtrooms instead of global hills and fields, and fought with lawsuits and injunctions instead of artillery and carpet-bombing.
I have to say, I strongly prefer this kind of war.
Re:Great! by ohnocitizen · 2011-12-11 15:28 · Score: 5, Insightful

If we wait for our children to take up the fight, we will wait forever. As children grow, our generation will replace our parents as "the ones in charge", and we will oppress them and keep them from the halls of power the same way the previous generations do now. It is a cycle without end, unless we say WE are the generation to make change, and act on it. If that isn't enough to get you active, consider this: while we wait for our children to somehow rise up, we let everyone harmed by the current state of the world suffer.
Re:Great! by Fluffeh · 2011-12-11 15:40 · Score: 4, Funny

I think I would prefer to see these companies slug it out akin to the ancient gauls:

Another very important aspect of Celtic ritual warfare at this time was single combat. To settle a dispute and measure one's prowess, it was customary to challenge an individual warrior from the other army to ritual single combat to the death while cheered on by the opposing hosts. Such fights were common before pitched battle, and for ritual purposes tended to occur at river fords. For examples of this behavior, one can read the epic literature of Ireland, such as the Ulster Cycle and Fenian Cycle, as well as accounts of Gaelic wars such as the "Wars of the Gael with the Foreigners" and Geoffrey Keating's "History of Ireland.
Ritual Combat would later manifest itself in the duel, as seen in the Scottish Martial Arts of the 18th century. The victor was determined by who made the first-cut. However, this was not always observed, and at times the duel would continue to the death.
"You there! Lawyer with the brown briefcase, I pick YOU for combat. Prepare yourself!"

--
Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
Re:Great! by 0123456 · 2011-12-11 15:49 · Score: 3, Informative

Patents are supposed to work the same all over the world.
Why?

But to come back to your statement about war: mind that there are no winners in war. There are only losers. In WWII the allied forces were considered the winners, but the rest of Europe was as much in tatters as loser Germany was.
WWII destroyed the British Empire, handed about half the human race over to communists where they couldn't compete with Western manufacturers and destroyed most of Europe's industrial production capacity. America benefited massively from the war because it was left with no real competition and the only large-scale manufacturing capacity in the West.
Re:Great! by wvmarle · 2011-12-11 16:08 · Score: 3, Insightful

Patents are supposed to work the same all over the world.
Why?
Because 1) they are supposed to fully and clearly describe an invention, so testing whether another machine uses a certain invention doesn't leave much grey area, and 2) they're based on international agreements.
Note that I say "supposed", I know it's idealising and that practice leaves a lot of room for interpretation. Yet in practice if a patent is found to be infringed upon in one country, very likely other countries' courts will come to the same conclusion.

WWII destroyed the British Empire, handed about half the human race over to communists where they couldn't compete with Western manufacturers and destroyed most of Europe's industrial production capacity. America benefited massively from the war because it was left with no real competition and the only large-scale manufacturing capacity in the West.
America was a remote party of the war, like they are now in Iraq and Afghanistan. It costs heaps of money, leaves the target in tatters, but nothing much happens on home soil. Same for WWII: there were no bombardments of US cities, no US bridges blown up, few US merchant vessels sunk. Compare that to the European countries.
Like now if Samsung and Apple (aka Germany and the other European countries) kill off each other, Google (aka US) maybe chipping in as secondary party getting hurt on the sidelines but not in their cores, parties like Google and of course all other manufacturers see two major competitors gone, opening up a huge market potential for them.
Re:Great! by gman003 · 2011-12-11 16:18 · Score: 2

Both sides are already taking damage by not being able to sell their goods in certain areas, and they're spending fortunes on lawyers. It's only going to get worse - I can envision these legal cases going on for years (it's taken *how* long to nearly kill SCO?)
So Apple's more threatened. That means they're more likely to do something stupid and desperate. You think they'd try to block them from being manufactured, by getting involved with the Chinese judicial system? That would be a near-instant kill - you can't sell what you can't make, and without China it's hard to manufacture mass products cheaply.
Best-case scenario, of course, is that the War causes so much damage that patent reform becomes a pressing issue even for those who thought they were benefiting from it.
Re:Great! by meerling · 2011-12-11 16:25 · Score: 5, Insightful

Most of the people in power are those that vigorously sought it out.
Those people are almost always those who want power to have power, not to wield it for the greater good, justice, or compassion.
These, of course, are the worst people to have that power.
So even if you raise a generation of 99.9% kind and caring people, 90% of the positions of power will belong to that power grubbing remainder.

The only way to change that is either eliminate all positions of power, find a means to ensure that would be power mongers can never attain it, or somehow alter humanity itself so there is no such thing as a desire for power. Honestly, I don't think any of those will ever happen, though I can imagine a dictatorial situation where all the power is held by one small group so no-one else can attain any power, but that just eliminates competition, not the problem.
(And yes, I dream of a utopia where the would be politicians and such can never obtain the power they crave because they are considered unfit for the job, but the problem with utopians is that even science fiction writers don't believe in the possibility of a utopia being real.)

Of course this whole thing with Apple is the result of a pissing contest it looks like they started. Guess they are going to have much bigger problems if the wind keeps shifting direction. (Patenting a flat rectangle that's black with beveled edges. What moron let that through?)
Re:Great! by TheGratefulNet · 2011-12-11 16:34 · Score: 2

we can start now, but I don't think its realistic to expect to SEE change in our lifetime.
those who are the 'haves' are not going to give things up without a fight and I don't see a french (or any other kind) of physical violent revolution coming to the US anytime soon.
change (nonviolent kind) has to be slow and that's in lifetimes, not decades.
wish I was wrong. prove me wrong, I won't mind ;)

--

--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
Re:Great! by wvmarle · 2011-12-11 18:15 · Score: 2

The Chinese are fully capable of ramping up production and swamping the market with competing devices - like they're doing already. The only restriction might be in getting the parts for those devices, as those again are often made by high-tech giants like Samsung.
Re:Great! by gl4ss · 2011-12-11 18:41 · Score: 2

newsflash: western planes didn't have the range to bomb eastern europe in ww2. russians and nazis did what they could of course, going scorched earth two ways kinda does hamper industrial output, no matter how free you make the proletariat from the chains of capitalist oppression.
post-ww2 eastern europe industrial capability was largely hindered by not having a free market, by having production goals dictated by dickheads and not getting paid for the produce and their exporting possibilities severely hampered by politics. unilateral trade was great for some countries who did trade with them(the eastern block) though, while fair trade would have been better still.

--
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 19:27 · Score: 2, Insightful

The police, in 99% of cases, ARE there to help. Just like in any profession, there are bad apples, and they spoil the bunch.
They'd also be a lot less paranoid and twitchy if there weren't so many of you "fuck the police" assholes.
Re:Great! by mvdwege · 2011-12-11 20:34 · Score: 3, Insightful
There are so many "fuck the police" rationalists, because:
1. There are too many bad apples.
2. The bad apples are being protected by the 'good cops' ('Thin Blue Line' ring a bell?)
And finally, even if you were wholly right, and it's standoff between assholes and a police force with a few bad apples, it's the police who have power, so it is incumbent upon them to make the first step to change the situation.
--
"I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
Re:Great! by anonymov · 2011-12-11 23:02 · Score: 2

Well, original motivation for patents included those "providing better products at cheaper prices". As in, preventing situation when small inventor creates something new and big company screws him and starts stamping clones on the cheap using their established manufacture and supply chain.
But since those times the idea got screwed and crooked from "support small innovator with groundbreaking inventions" to "raise entry barrier by patenting every gearwheel"

Mayhem in Mannheim by siddesu · 2011-12-11 14:17 · Score: 4, Insightful

If it was not yet obvious to someone that patents and litigation do more damage to free commerce than blatant and slavish copying, the abyss of ridiculosity that ha ensued in the wake of the recent Apple vs. * and * vs. Apple cases should have proved it once and for all with vengeance. Alas, the business leaders of the world and their political clients will continue to be oblivious to the issues. In the meantime, Florian Mueller and the rest of them patent "experts" rub hands in satisfaction in the background.

Re:Mayhem in Mannheim by poena.dare · 2011-12-11 15:40 · Score: 2

"...not yet obvious to someone that patents and litigation do more damage..."
CEO: Are patents and litigation do more damage to free commerce than blatant and slavish copying?
Consulting Lawyer: Preposterous!
Lobbyist: Never!
CEO: OK then. Carry on.

Re:P0WN3D! by Dunbal · 2011-12-11 14:20 · Score: 4, Insightful

The poetic part is that they fired the first shot, with Samsung. Will be fun to watch where the dominos end up.

--
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.

Checkers anyone? by metalmaster · 2011-12-11 14:28 · Score: 3, Interesting

If these patent wars continue the map of Europe will look like a checkerboard. White country gets the Google product while black gets the Apple product

Re:Checkers anyone? by SteveTheNewbie · 2011-12-11 14:44 · Score: 4, Funny

Won't work. Apple will sue as they own the colour white as well.

Re:P0WN3D! by exomondo · 2011-12-11 14:30 · Score: 5, Funny

Will be fun to watch where the dominos end up.

fallen....like a house of cards....checkmate.

It won't change anything by dbIII · 2011-12-11 14:30 · Score: 3, Insightful

Marconi vs Telsa was also ridiculous, as was Edison against a lot of people. The US patent system has degenerated a lot since that time instead of improving.

Slammed ... by giorgist · 2011-12-11 14:36 · Score: 4, Informative

Slammed ...

Even better considering that apple was caught flogging off their patents to a patent troll, hoping to hurt as many "competitors" as possible.
Every article written will hopefully include all the stories together to paint the apple darling in a new light.

http://techcrunch.com/2011/12/09/apple-made-a-deal-with-the-devil-no-worse-a-patent-troll/

Re:Slammed ... by Mark19960 · 2011-12-11 16:27 · Score: 3, Informative

No,... so they could defend themselves.

He who lives by the sword... by stox · 2011-12-11 14:42 · Score: 5, Insightful

dies by the sword.

Apple will soon learn.

Ever wonder why you see so few patent lawsuits from IBM relative to their portfolio? IBM uses their portfolio like a scalpel. Apple has uses theirs like a shotgun.

--
"To those who are overly cautious, everything is impossible. "

Re:He who lives by the sword... by ross.w · 2011-12-11 15:41 · Score: 3, Funny

I think in this case, it's more likely to be "Fruit Ninja"

--
If my call is important, why am I talking to a recording?

Serves Apple right. by unity100 · 2011-12-11 14:48 · Score: 3, Interesting

They not only tried to prevent samsung on grounds of 'rectangular shapes', but they also transferred their patents recently to a proxy company to sue ALL mobile phone providers.

All is the result of the strategy jobs laid out. 'theft' my ass. theft of rectangular shapes that is.

anyways. what goes around, comes around.

--
Read radical news here

Re:Serves Apple right. by erroneus · 2011-12-11 15:10 · Score: 4, Insightful

No, this does not serve Apple right. This doesn't even come close to the damage and harm Apple has caused through their legal actions of these sorts. For them to be served right, the public would have to stop buying iThings for at least long enough for Apple to notice.
Re:Serves Apple right. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 16:28 · Score: 2, Informative

Pretty great passion and moral outrage there. Don't let the facts -- like the way "rectangular shape" was one of 7 design attributes that Samsung cloned -- get in the way of a good rant.
Re:Serves Apple right. by tsa · 2011-12-11 16:53 · Score: 3, Insightful

My colleague always says: "Never let the facts get in the way of a good story."

--
-- Cheers!
Re:Serves Apple right. by AmiMoJo · 2011-12-11 20:32 · Score: 2

For them to be served right, the public would have to stop buying iThings for at least long enough for Apple to notice.
Hopefully this ruling can be implemented fast enough to halt xmas and January sales. Imagine an Apple store unable to sell iPhones...

--
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Re:Serves Apple right. by delinear · 2011-12-12 01:53 · Score: 2

The real crime is that such blatant and obvious patents make it through the process at all. I suspect most companies, if handed such a ridiculously broad patent that could effectively be put to use against 90% of what's out there right now, would struggle not to use it. That doesn't excuse Apple's behaviour, or the behaviour of any big company that exploits these things, but let's not forget the gloriously broken patent system that made it all possible

What goes around comes around by Billlagr · 2011-12-11 14:55 · Score: 2, Interesting

Did Apple seriously think that they could get away with their asshole-ish behaviour forever without any repercussions? It was seriously short sighted of them to think that there wouldn't be an eventual backlash, or that they underestimated how much of a backlash once it got up some momentum. Just my own observations too, the backlash seems to be trickling down to the consumer level, I've heard quite a bit of talk around the office of jumping ship to Android when phone contracts expire from people who previously wouldn't part with their iPhone. YMMV.

Re:Phone Wars by similar_name · 2011-12-11 14:59 · Score: 4, Funny

Begun, the phone wars have.

What exactly costitutes an expert? by bogaboga · 2011-12-11 15:11 · Score: 5, Insightful

The linked article refers to Florian Mueller as a patent expert. What exactly constitutes one?

When it comes to this particular case, this "expert" predicted Motorola's doom by fronting the ideas that it (Motorola), was suing over what he termed as "standards essential" and therefore "weak" attack or defense patents.

No wonder he sounds humbled by this development on his blog.

Re:What exactly costitutes an expert? by exomondo · 2011-12-11 15:30 · Score: 4, Interesting

The linked article refers to Florian Mueller as a patent expert. What exactly constitutes one?
Whoever wrote it likely made the mistake of searching for antonyms rather than synonyms when searching for an alternative word to 'incompetent' to follow 'patent'. Florian Mueller is the bumbling idiot that has made countless idiotic assertions (most disproved with just a cursory look at the evidence) to drive hits on his blog, he's the JarJar Binks of the patent world.
Re:What exactly costitutes an expert? by Mark19960 · 2011-12-11 16:34 · Score: 3, Informative

Florian Mueller is not an expert.
He is a troll, plain and simple.
Burn that name into memory and as soon as you hit that name in any article stop reading it.
That is all I can suggest to avoid permanent brain damage from reading his blathering.

Re:*cries* by shutdown+-p+now · 2011-12-11 15:16 · Score: 2, Funny

You can't - I've patented that business method.

Re:Be done by Cigarra · 2011-12-11 15:20 · Score: 3, Funny

Just ban all mobile phones and tablets and be done with it.

King Solomon, is that you?!?

--
I don't have a sig.

Karma... by luis_a_espinal · 2011-12-11 15:21 · Score: 3, Funny

... is a poetic, totally awesome bitch.

Re:Ever since Steve died by Myopic · 2011-12-11 15:26 · Score: 2

Yeah, but Apple Computer did pay Apple Corps handsomely when they made their music store. Money solves problems like that.

Re:P0WN3D! by spyder-implee · 2011-12-11 15:35 · Score: 5, Funny

I thought the poetic part was that the German economy was the only one in the Euro where people might actually be able to afford an iPhone/Pad.

--
Take what ye can. Give nothing back!

Re:Ever since Steve died by Daniel+Phillips · 2011-12-11 15:41 · Score: 2

Perhaps there are more anti-Apple articles because Apple's practices have become more despicable? And that more because of Jobs than because of his absence.

--
Have you got your LWN subscription yet?

Re:Samsung tablet designs pre-iPad? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 15:41 · Score: 2, Informative

Have you seen the Samsung tablet designs before the first iPad come out and the designs after the iPad came out

Do you find it odd that Samsung's photo frame design circa 2006, is almost identical to their Tablet design that followed it? Right down to the Samsung logo on the front and the lack of any visible buttons on the front? That's just Samsung's product design.

Re:P0WN3D! by poetmatt · 2011-12-11 15:50 · Score: 5, Informative

the article is idiocy and so is your comment.

We have the fact that apple already tried to sue Motorola over the xoom. This is just the response, which was done well before google acquired motorola.

The "Google" Action will be if/what we see from google as a result of this reflecting on them going forward, which could be entirely nothing.

The interesting part by Luckyo · 2011-12-11 16:04 · Score: 2

This is patent MAD at work. Funnily, or sadly even insanity like this will not diminish support from big companies to tightening patent rules and laws even further.

Why? Because as long as patents can be enforced like this even against big names, no one small or new will ever be able to even try to enter the same business to compete.

Re:Payback is a bit (1/8th of a byte) :p by DJRumpy · 2011-12-11 16:05 · Score: 3, Informative

Be careful what you wish for. These are FRAND patents that are in question. Motorola successfully argued that they did not have to license a FRAND patent to Apple unless Apple paid damages above and beyond the cost of the standard FRAND license rate issued to everyone else for 'past' infringement, and the additional damages are left vague under German law, meaning any ridiculous amount could pop out of the courts.

Given that Google is the new 'OS' kid in town, you should probably read up on FRAND patents and why they are supposed to be offered at a standard rate to everyone.

Patent wars are business as usual but when they start mucking around with FRAND patents in this way, it should make anyone in the tech business pay attention.

Re:Be done by Fluffeh · 2011-12-11 16:19 · Score: 2

King Solomon, is that you?!?

I think Soloman would have suggested they cut the patent in half and give one half to Apple and one half to Samsung.

Actually, in this case, that wouldn't be a bad idea. Cutting up all the patents...

--
Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!

The best part of the article is not even mentioned by JonySuede · 2011-12-11 16:43 · Score: 2

according to Florian Mueller, who has been closely following patent lawsuits in the mobile industry. Mueller is a patent expert who sometimes does consulting work for companies including Microsoft.

--
Jehovah be praised, Oracle was not selected

Re:P0WN3D! by Colonel+Korn · 2011-12-11 16:47 · Score: 3, Funny

Just take a deep breath and try for one moment to appreciate just how many Motorola's Apple's $81 billion bux would buy, outright. How many legal hours do you think that represents? How many companies can afford to do battle at these scales? Do you really think Germany is that important when China sits there with a 1% Apple penetration?

Legal issues aside, sonny, you may want to reconsider calling this dominoes. It's clear you're not familiar with the game or business, in general.

And it's clear you're not familiar with a mixed metaphor.

--
"I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)

Re:Payback is a bit (1/8th of a byte) :p by hedwards · 2011-12-11 16:57 · Score: 4, Insightful

That's mostly because Apple filed suit having never paid for a license in the first place. Seems reasonable to me, I'm not sure how precisely making somebody pay above and beyond the standard royalties in a case like this isn't fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory. Apple could have avoided it by paying the licensing fee at the time or by not suing.

I'm not personally sure I understand how charging somebody that just filed suit against oneself isn't fair or reasonable.

Re:Be done by hedwards · 2011-12-11 16:58 · Score: 2

Actually, you'd make more progress cutting attorneys.

Re:Google acted in self defense by hedwards · 2011-12-11 16:59 · Score: 2

The deal with these patents is that everybody infringes, it's just a question of whether you've got a big enough patent warchest to force cross licensing.

Re:Payback is a bit (1/8th of a byte) :p by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 17:04 · Score: 4, Insightful

And again Apple fanboys come up with stupid "they're FRAND, that means Apple can do whatever it wants with them".

Nope, Apple should have secured the license before starting to produce iPhone. Instead they said "Screw it" and later proposed to Motorola "We'll generously pay you standard rate and in exchange you don't sue us for past offense".

I've got a simple rule by anonymov · 2011-12-11 17:22 · Score: 4, Insightful

When you see "expert" where you expect "lawyer", "engineer", "doctor" and so on, it's a sure sign of incoming bullshit.

Re:P0WN3D! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 17:25 · Score: 5, Informative

It's obvious to anyone with common sense viewing Samsung's designs that Samsung is deliberately aping Apple's designs.

oh yes because this design of Samsung's from 2006, before the ipad, looks nothing like this, you'd have to be an idiot to think those look the same wouldn't you :P

Re:P0WN3D! by PopeRatzo · 2011-12-11 17:29 · Score: 5, Interesting

The poetic part is that they fired the first shot, with Samsung. Will be fun to watch where the dominos end up.

At this rate, nobody will be able to buy a handheld tablet until sometime the 22nd century, and then it will have to be trapezoidal in shape, no multi-touch and nothing resembling a screen on one side and a back on the other.

But at least by then it will almost certainly be all open source, hardware and software, because if the human race is going to survive to the 22nd century, it will only be because we've finally jettisoned the obsolete notion of patents and copyrights.

--
You are welcome on my lawn.

Re:P0WN3D! by mug+funky · 2011-12-11 17:32 · Score: 2

you fail to realise the profound effect this will have on the big patent "reform" lobby.

this can only make things better, if the companies that have been clusterfucking innovation finally realise that they're not able to innovate because of all these damn patents.

Re:P0WN3D! by anonymov · 2011-12-11 17:34 · Score: 5, Insightful

> The dimensions are the same

Yeah, after Apple lawyers photoshopped them to match, not in real life.

> the look is the same

Except for all the parts that aren't.

> the chargers and cables are the same

Now after previous two these is just straw-grabbing.

> the packaging is the same

Or as it says in that original pic "You open the box, and you see... [the product front]". Shocking. No one thought about it before.

> They even stole Apple artwork and used it on the walls of their retail stores

You mean "Some electronics retail shop in Italy, which has Samsung section, decorated walls with all kind of icons, including Google's and Apple's"

I didn't think there were still Apple apologists who still hang on to that "OMG DEFINITE PROOF" pic.

> that Google's patent acquisitions were purely for defensive purposes. Well, Motorola is now seeking injunctions

How's countersuing is not defensive? What constitutes "defensive purposes" then?

Re:P0WN3D! by Samantha+Wright · 2011-12-11 17:35 · Score: 3, Informative

For the answer to this week's word puzzle, see pg. 46.

--
Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!

Re:P0WN3D! by Daniel+Phillips · 2011-12-11 17:37 · Score: 5, Insightful

Slashdot historically has had a bias against things that are popular...

Not really. It is more a bias against evil.

--
Have you got your LWN subscription yet?

Re:P0WN3D! by anonymov · 2011-12-11 17:41 · Score: 5, Informative

"Patent troll" usually means "non-practicing entity", not "anyone who sues on patent grounds".

Like, you know, that Digitude Innovation who recently got some patents from Apple to sue everyone with.

Unlike Motorola, who got sued for Xoom, and now sues Apple in retaliation.

Re:What the hell? by anonymov · 2011-12-11 17:43 · Score: 3, Interesting

Defensive - "Lay down and take it like a man! Why do you even need that Xoom and whatnot anyways?", offensive - "OMG, why are you hitting back, you bully!"

Re:P0WN3D! by Galestar · 2011-12-11 17:47 · Score: 4, Insightful

Because Apple is a huge, influential player now after the success of the iPhone, Slashdot has decided that they don't like Apple anymore

No, I think most people here have always hated Apple - they are the Fisher-Price of consumer electronics. We do not hate them because they are popular, we hate them because their products are garbage yet they market them as if they are gold, and some people buy into it.

--
AccountKiller

Re:P0WN3D! by oxdas · 2011-12-11 17:49 · Score: 5, Insightful

In his defense, the LCD's, nand, and processors are the same. Of course that's because they are all made by Samsung.

Re:P0WN3D! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 17:54 · Score: 5, Insightful

Slashdot has decided that they don't like Apple

Yes everyone but you.

Slashdot discussion has become so boring in the last few years. Even the trolls used to be more interesting. Unfortunately, because Slashdot's news posting is so behind everyone else's

But here you'll stay, continually posting because the reality is that you don't really believe what you wrote there, if you did then that would mean you believe the whole community is trolling you but you just don't have the mental ability to resist responding and continually posting. So we will keep seeing posts from bonch because he just can't leave, even though he believes he's being trolled he just can't help but respond.

Re:P0WN3D! by Teun · 2011-12-11 18:22 · Score: 2, Insightful

You seem to have strange ideas about very large parts of the European economy.

--
"The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."

Re:P0WN3D! by hairyfeet · 2011-12-11 18:22 · Score: 5, Insightful

Won't happen and here is why: cross licensing. Look at AMD and Nvidia, or Intel and AMD for examples. even when they are at each others throats they never revoked their cross licenses and you know why? Because it makes a hellish barrier of entry for everybody else. imagine if anybody could make an X86 CPU, or a GPU for that matter, you'd probably go back to the days of WinChip and Cyrix and having tons of free choice. but of course that would mean the two or three competitors we have now wouldn't be splitting the pie between themselves and a two way pie is a hell of a lot bigger than a five way pie, so they'll just sit their lawyers down at a table and cross license.

Mark my words Apple will play their "look and feel" game for awhile longer and then they'll finally, after a couple of legal spankings, sit down and cross license. Hell I wouldn't be surprised if you see Apple and MSFT get together with a cross license to 'fucking kill Google" as that is one thing they both seem to agree on if Jobs rants were true. But you get the big players to cross license you have put up a toll booth so expensive nobody with less than Warren Buffet money has a prayer in hell, and even if they take a shot they'll be tied up in court for a decade or maybe two because it doesn't really cost MSFT nor Apple squat. Any fines they get could be payed with the change in the couch compared to how much they make owning the market..

--
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.

Re:What the hell? by LynnwoodRooster · 2011-12-11 18:26 · Score: 3

Sorry, this is retribution - Apple sued Motorola (pre-Google buyout) over Xoom. This is Motorola/Google responding. Your little fantasyland of Appledom notwithstanding...

--
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!

Doling out power by Beryllium+Sphere(tm) · 2011-12-11 18:29 · Score: 3, Interesting

Make it like jury duty. Select leaders at random. Maybe have a test for specialized positions, or a general civics exam.

I'm not sure I believe in this myself, but it would have advantages over the current system.

Re:Doling out power by isorox · 2011-12-11 20:13 · Score: 3, Interesting

Make it like jury duty. Select leaders at random. Maybe have a test for specialized positions, or a general civics exam.
I'm not sure I believe in this myself, but it would have advantages over the current system.
In the UK there are very powerful, unelected, civil servants that run the country (see Yes Minister for an exagerated example). I assume the same happens in the U.S.
I genuinely believe most new politicians (at least the UK) have principles. I might not agree with them of course. After a few years on the job they're brow-beaten, same as in any large organisation. They're allowed to make the occasional grand gesture for PR purposes, but generally the ship keeps steering the course with noone at the helm.
Re:Doling out power by blue_goddess · 2011-12-11 22:39 · Score: 2

Random government won't have democratic legitimation, even if it will be chosen with uniform distribution among entire population (possibly with some age restrictions like 18-75 or so). That situation will backfire when it does something unpopular (and that seems to be the frequent case), so you will get some bonus social unrest (that is, more than normal). That unrest will probably be well enough to overthrow such power, so that is not really an option.
My sig seems to be correct also this time.

--
As a computer, I find your faith in technology amusing.

Re:P0WN3D! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 18:34 · Score: 2, Funny

Okay, the hyperbole just crossed some event horizon of hilarity.

Mankind's great challenge over the next 88 years: patents and copyrights. They will DESTROY HUMANKIND.

Re:Ever since Steve died by jo42 · 2011-12-11 18:34 · Score: 3, Insightful

The ball on this started rolling BECAUSE of Steve Jobs

Exactly. Instead of pissing away millions of dollars on legal fees and douche bag lawyers, Apple should put the money towards improving their products and getting even farther ahead of the "we're all copying Apple anyway" competition.

Re:P0WN3D! by bloodhawk · 2011-12-11 18:36 · Score: 2

Motorola is an entity that is producing a product and responding defensively with the only way the system allows companies to respond, nothing about what they are doing can be considered trolling. Apple on the other hand have setup a shell company that produces nothing but has a portfolio of patents for the very purpose of suing competitors, that pretty well fits perfectly with the definition of trolling.

Re:P0WN3D! by hairyfeet · 2011-12-11 18:45 · Score: 5, Interesting

Not to mention we already went through this in the states with them over 20+ years ago. Anybody remember "look and feel"? because that is pretty much EXACTLY what we are talking about here. Just as with look and feel Apple is claiming that generic thing A plus generic thing B equals patentable and makes about as much sense as saying "Well you can build a car with square wheels, or motorcycle handlebars, but you build a car with round wheels and a steering wheel that's mine". There isn't a damned thing on the iPad that wasn't done somewhere else first. grid of iCons? Palm. Squarish tablet? Samsung and Sony and Toshiba ALL had WinTablets with the same dimensions they just weighed more. Touch screens? older than dirt. the only thing I'd give Apple is the gestures although even with those i'd want to compare them to the gestures Opera had back in the day before i'd issue a patent.

Personally I predicted this would happen when Jobs died. like it or not apple has always been "The house that Jobs built" and just like before without a dictator running the shop and putting their foot down things break down over there. I predict they'll file more lawsuits trying to hang onto what they have, but there won't be anymore of those "holy shit, where'd THAT come from?" brand new hot products just popping out of Apple. Again like him or not you had to give the man credit, as Jobs had a vision of what he wanted and stuck with it, but I just haven't seen anything from Cook to make me think he has that same overarching vision. Instead just like under the pepsi guy they'll just be updating existing lines while suing like crazy trying to hold onto share.

They probably have one or two at the max products left in the wings from Jobs tenure, after that I bet the well runs dry.

--
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.

Re:P0WN3D! by R3d+M3rcury · 2011-12-11 19:12 · Score: 3, Interesting

Not to mention we already went through this in the states with them over 20+ years ago. Anybody remember "look and feel"? because that is pretty much EXACTLY what we are talking about here.

While I agree, keep in mind that Apple lost those cases not so much because Apple was in the wrong but because Apple had actually granted rights to Microsoft to use the "look-and-feel" in Windows (Apple claimed that Windows 2.0 used things that Apple had not granted a license to, but the judge found otherwise).

There is no licensing here.

Re:Payback is a bit (1/8th of a byte) :p by LordLucless · 2011-12-11 19:18 · Score: 5, Insightful

Motorola successfully argued that they did not have to license a FRAND patent to Apple unless Apple paid damages above and beyond the cost of the standard FRAND license rate issued to everyone else for 'past' infringement

That seems eminently sensible to me. Otherwise, what would be the disincentive for ignoring FRAND licenses? If what you seem to endorse was the case, and I was a new startup, I'd just ignore FRAND patents for as long as I could. When I finally got called on it, it'd be no worse for me - and I'd have had all those years longer with my money, and kept costs down during the delicate phase of launching a new product.

If all the courts could do was require standard payment, why would anyone, ever pay for FRAND patents without being compelled to by the court?

--
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face

Re:P0WN3D! by jeti · 2011-12-11 19:20 · Score: 2

But they're now in bed with trolls. So I wouldn't insist on this distinction.

Re:GRPS and LTE by anonymov · 2011-12-11 19:24 · Score: 4, Informative

> the AND part means that Apple, if they were to licence it, should pay exactly the same amount as HTC, Nokia, etc.

Basically, what happened is this: Motorola found out Apple has not licensed this patent. As this is a FRAND patent, Apple could avoid the suit if they tried to negotiate a fair deal to license the patent.

Apple said "OK, but you can't sue us for damages from past infringement, we're gonna pay same rate for past".

Motorola said "Na-ah" and went to court.

Judge said "You've got caught infringing, so it's fair to demand extra for the time when you was breaking the law" and decided that was not a fair deal, so FRAND defense didn't work.

Re:What the hell? by moronoxyd · 2011-12-11 19:50 · Score: 2

Except this case started in 2007 or thereabouts, way before the split up of Motorola and Googles decision to buy one part of it.

But don't let the facts stop you from building you fantasy world.

Re:P0WN3D! by Hognoxious · 2011-12-11 20:21 · Score: 3, Funny

trapezoidal in shape, no multi-touch and nothing resembling a screen on one side and a back on the other.

Actually, the screen will be on the back because that's the only configuration Assple haven't patented. To use it you'll have to hold it wrong.

--
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."

Re:P0WN3D! by Plammox · 2011-12-11 20:21 · Score: 2

Are you saying the Dutch/Belgians/French/Austrians/Luxembourgish couldn't possibly afford iPhones? Guess, I'd better get rid of mine, then.

Re:Wait by moronoxyd · 2011-12-11 20:32 · Score: 2

I was under the impression that they were required to license all the standards-related patents under RAND terms.

Motorola is willing to do that.

But they are not willing to let Apple get away with using the technology without licensing it for several years.

Re:Tech Culture by LBU.Zorro · 2011-12-11 20:48 · Score: 3, Informative

I never understood why this patent was granted - back in 2006 the same gestures were demonstrated (and publicly) by Jeff Han with his FTIR multi-touch display.

http://www.ted.com/talks/jeff_han_demos_his_breakthrough_touchscreen.html - take a look from about 2:29 onwards, pinch zoom, scoll etc.

It really doesn't appear that Apple should have been able to patent it, especially if their file date was in 2007 and it looks like the grant date was 2011 (seriously? wtf?).

Still, who knows why it was granted, and if I can find that prior art surely the other big companies who were sued because of it could too so I assume I'm missing something.

There is a solution by aepervius · 2011-12-11 21:05 · Score: 4, Interesting

I think it was even done by ancient greek : democraty by lottery. Any adult at 20 is forced to pass a small test (nothing great, and certainly the test must not be allowed to filter out the population majority, only that you can count, basic litteracy stuff, and mental healthy, aka no life breaking psychose). Once the test is good, you are OK for the next 40 years to be in the lottery (forced in the lottery). Then each 4 or 5 years at election, a college of people is elected at random under hefty surveillance that no cheating happen with sheets of paper thrown at random and taken out for each seats of representative. Then those people are given a 2 or 3 hours refresher on constitutionality of law, the constitution , bill of rights etc... After that they are thrown in to vote for laws. For the next 30 years after their investiture they are looked at by tax, law representative, anti corruption team, whatnot to make sure there is no "gift" coming after their investiture.

There would still be cheating and corruption, but it would be a tad bit more difficult than with the elected pigs aristocraty we have right now.

Another solution would be that laws are not anymore voted by representative, but open for the whole folk to vote for/against electronically.

--
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org

Re:P0WN3D! by Runaway1956 · 2011-12-11 22:08 · Score: 3, Insightful

astroturfer, and troll tied into one? Come on, Phanboi - how long has Motorola been around? How long has Motorola been making radio devices? Go on, look at their history - then come back and tell us that Apple hasn't intentionally aped a single Motorola feature.

Oh, as for those "industry trends" that you cite? The trends these day favor Asian manufacturers. Blame Apple, among hundreds of other major US corporations, for having outsourced everything they could outsource. Face it, if you're training Asians to do all your work, and you're NOT training any Americans or Europeans, then you're actively promoting Asian growth while inhibiting American and European growth.

I don't feel sorry for Apple, or any other company that has been exploiting Asian labor markets. Fuck 'em all.

--
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br

Re:P0WN3D! by khipu · 2011-12-11 22:15 · Score: 5, Insightful

It's obvious to anyone with common sense viewing Samsung's designs that Samsung is deliberately aping Apple's designs. The dimensions are the same, the look is the same, the chargers and cables are the same, the packaging is the same. Defenders argue that there's no other way to design a tablet, but that's an example of success bias, where things that weren't obvious are only argued to be such after something successful adopts those attributes. They certainly didn't appear to be obvious before the iPad, because there was a much greater variety of tablet designs back then.

Thickness, bezel size, screen size, etc. are determined by available technology, but within that range, Samsung has made different choices (7" tablets, 4.5" and 5" phones, wide screen, horizontal setup, front cameras, etc.). Low-waste packaging was an upcoming trend. The appearance of innovation in those areas results from Apple being able to beat other companies to market by a few months, mainly because of better supply chain management, because of excellent execution, and because they charge a premium.

You are right that Apple's success with touch-only phones made those kinds of devices much more popular than they would otherwise have been, and other manufacturers have responded. But no company should be able to own a fad. In fact, I find it annoying that there aren't more hardware designs. And most of the design aspect that were not driven by technology or environment are aspects that Apple ripped off from others. There is almost nothing original in either the iPhone or the iPad.

This community has just become so incredibly bitter.

And we have reason to be as far as Apple is concerned: the company has ripped off the tech community for 30 years, claiming ideas and technologies as their own that they didn't invest a cent in developing. They have ripped off their partners and their software developers, they have made DRM widespread not just for music but for apps, and they outsource almost everything to low-cost labor in Asia. And now they are trying to monopolize the market further by using sleazy patent tactics in order to prevent others from doing what they have been doing for decades.

Yes, we're bitter as far as Apple is concerned: the company needs to be stopped, or the US computer industry and US computer nerds are in big trouble. And anybody who takes them on in court and fights them gets my cheers and my support.

Re:P0WN3D! by Runaway1956 · 2011-12-11 22:16 · Score: 2

I can't help remembering that Jobs was brought back for a reason. The company was headed downhill without him, so they begged him to come back. And, if that damned iPhone could connect to the afterlife, they'd be begging him to come back AGAIN!

--
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br

Re:Be done by znerk · 2011-12-11 22:19 · Score: 2

I like it!

There are entirely too many people making entirely too much money by arguing with each about what other people can and can't do.
We should follow Twain's advice on this matter.

--
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.

Re:P0WN3D! by SenseiLeNoir · 2011-12-11 23:09 · Score: 2

headphones? The iPad doesn't come with headphones, whilst the Tab does. In addition the the Samsung headphones are an in the ear style that are arguably better that the old style ones that come with the iPhone.

--
Have a nice day!

Re:P0WN3D! by delt0r · 2011-12-11 23:26 · Score: 2

Lets not forget that they are also popular in Eastern Europe. Most of the students i teach in Czech had Smart phones. They seem as ubiquitous in Slovakia as well.

Lets face it, outside news reports there really is no problem here. Christmass shopping is as high as always and hot wine is selling as fast as they can heat it up here in Vienna. Debt crises? where?

--
If information wants to be free, why does my internet connection cost so much?

Re:P0WN3D! by gbjbaanb · 2011-12-11 23:35 · Score: 4, Insightful

disagree (and I'm not an Apple fanboi BTW). I think people here hate Apple becuase of their closed-in attitude. You buy an iPod and you only (effectively) can access it with approved Apple stuff. You buy a iPhone and you're locked into their store, etc etc etc.

We have to give Apple credit for kickstarting the whole smartphone industry and changing the world. You have to give them credit for popularising GUI interfaces and similar.

You also have to criticise them for the lock in and overpricing though, but their products aren't garbage (or no-one would keep buying them).

Re:P0WN3D! by dropadrop · 2011-12-11 23:35 · Score: 2

Both SCSI and IDE drives have been available for PCs for as long as the technologies were around. It was a matter of whether it made sense to spend the extra money on SCSI for the particular need. Most desktop PCs did not benefit from having SCSI, so it would have been a waste of money. Apple didn't use the 68K CPU until the Macintosh. By that time PCs had the much more powerful 80386.

Every time I had a SCSI drive on a workstation I felt the benefit was huge. I think it was more of a "not worth it" thing then a question of not benefitting.

Anyway, the point seemed to be that back in the day Apple computers had hardware to back up the high price, these days the price consists mainly of design, marketing and so on.

I don't agree about all points with the OP, for example I appreciate the form factor of a Mac Mini / iMac enough to justify the price, but I fully understand you can get something faster consisting of the same components in a beige box for half the price. A few years ago I ended up without a computer for a while and took home a 5 year old G4 tower from work as a loaner. It had a really fast SCSI drive in it, and for most things (where the ~400mhz cpu and 768MB ram where not bottlenecks) it really was still a fully usable machine.

Re:P0WN3D! by phonewebcam · 2011-12-11 23:36 · Score: 2

I can't wait to see what TV's Apple come up with which aren't large, square, thin, black rectangular devices controlled by a remote, of the type Samsung has led the market with for over a decade. Because if they don't, it will be "obvious to anyone with common sense viewing Apple's designs that Apple will be deliberately aping Samsungs designs. The dimensions would be the same, the look would be the same, the chargers and cables would be the same."

iTouche.

Re:P0WN3D! by VortexCortex · 2011-12-12 00:06 · Score: 4, Interesting

Cars are not allowed design patents or copyrights; Neither does the fashion industry. Transportation & Clothing are "too utilitarian". I'm having a hard time in this day and age NOT classifying computing devices as utilitarian.

I mean: I wan REQUIRED to use a computer to get tax forms -- They were out of stock. I could have filed an extension, but now you're just being silly. College kids are REQUIRED to use computers for learning -- In fact, I had to repair my 12 year old nephew's computer SO HE COULD DO HOMEWORK (he attends US public school). There are no pay phones in a 10 mile radius of my home (where most accidents are said to occur), I must have a mobile cellular computing device (even feature phones run Java!). I've seen government subsidization for cellular phones, and talk of Internet access being a "human right" akin to having access to water. Even if you do not argee today that computing devices are utilitarian, you will soon (this, or you'll be too dead to care).

Before you point out the fallacy that access to this technology is not NEEDED to live, I would direct you to examine 3rd world countries which are rapidly adopting my views. Furthermore, You could live without toothpaste, agriculture, CLOTHING, or AUTOMOBILES as well, this does not mean these things are not utilitarian.

We don't have to get rid of technology design, hardware & software copyright & patents altogether, just do so for consumer electronics -- People need to be free. The market will survive, indeed the fashion industry and automotive industries are some of the most successful yet least protected by copyright & patents. Trademark law still applies, which is just enough to keep counterfeit knockoffs off the shelves.

THIS IS THE INFORMATION AGE. Would you not agree stone tools were utilitarian in the stone age? Would you not agree iron tools were also in the iron age? Automobiles were revolutionary once, and are utilitarian now. Computing was revolutionary once, and now is as commonplace as any essential advancement has become in the past.

Re:P0WN3D! by RyuuzakiTetsuya · 2011-12-12 00:32 · Score: 2

Cars are not allowed design patents or copyrights

Err, no.

When you fire up Forza one of the legal notices, and yes I noticed this bit of fine print because of Apple's litigation crap, is that design patents are among the things that car manufacturers licensed to Turn Six for Forza.

Try again?

I don't think you're allowed to patent the steering wheel, but AFAIK you are allowed to patent things that make your product different from your competitors.

--
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.

Re:P0WN3D! by bernywork · 2011-12-12 02:05 · Score: 2

You're holding it wrong

--
Curiosity was framed; ignorance killed the cat. -- Author unknown

Re:P0WN3D! by Dog-Cow · 2011-12-12 03:07 · Score: 2

No, the GP is correct. /. hates popular.

Apple is not evil. Mean, perhaps, but not evil.

Slashdot Mirror

German Court Issues Injunction Against iPhone & iPad

107 of 349 comments (clear)