Slashdot Mirror
Apple Wins Injunction Banning Import of HTC Devices
Newly accepted submitter squish18 writes "All Things D reports that Apple has won an injunction banning the import of some HTC phones starting in April 2012. The ruling by the ITC stems from two claims of the '647 patent concerning software used to enter personal data in mobile devices. It is interesting to note that the ITC has also reversed previous rulings regarding regarding infringement of two other '647 claims, as well as patent '263 claims."
It looks like Apple's victory is relatively minor. They lost claims on all patents except for one, and HTC/Google can work on implementing similar functionality in a non-infringing way.
Just another reason why our patent system needs to be changed. And another reason I don't know who to vote for these days. It seems that all politicians (or most) support the current patent system or don't care to do anything about it. I mean, how can you patent touching a phone number on a screen? That isn't even close to an invention. Absurdity.
NO! The patent system, as it stands, is the reason why every company seems to be suing every other company! It's completely broken, and it seems like companies have to sue each other as part of their operating procedures so they can have leverage when they negotiate cross-licensing! It's completely maddening!
Isn't competition what drives innovation? Where's the innovation if everyone just does what everyone else is doing?
Who's going to be able to innovate if they're being forced to waste their time looking for ways to work around stupid patents instead?
have to
Nope. It's a choice. Apple is choosing to strangle the competition while they have the strong hand. Microsoft chooses to set up a protection racket with companies that infringe on their vaguely-defined Linux patents. In contrast, IBM and Google (generally?) don't pursue patent suits unless they're attacked first. (At least, that's the impression that's been put forth by tech journalism.)
Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
Essentially apple patented a method where an 'analyzer program' checks text for patterns (such as phone numbers and email addresses) and makes them actionable with a click.
The patent goes on to discuss that arbitrary patterns can be searched for using a plugin and that the analyzer software allows for users to select the program that handles the type of link. It seems that Android does indeed violate this patent in every way possible. I wonder if automatic hyperlinking of email addresses count as prior art; although this does not include the user interface element asking which program to use.
Either way; I think this is a sucky patent to have to contend with. It reminds me why I don't like software patents to begin with.
Sure, companies are choosing to act the way they are, but the current patent system is incentivizing this behavior. The question should be whether there is a system with better incentives, not whether companies should stop doing what they are doing, because some companies will behave responsibly, but others invariably won't and you have to expect that behavior.
i believe word processing software does this with spell checkers.
the first example of a realtime spell checker i encountered in 1997 with MS Word.
autofill has been in all browsers since about that time as well.
google does the same as you type into the search box.
Apple are full of the worst kind of shit in this case.
Once again, Apple is using a law supposedly about innovation to ruin everybody else's chances in the marketplace. Their time on top is over, and legal protection for bogus patents is the only thing they have left.
Further, this was a horribly expensive "win" for Apple. They lost claims on 4 or 5 patents (these can never be re-asserted) and they won a tiny UI feature, that can easily be programmed around. Apple won't be able to enforce those patent claims against any other phone makers either.
The permanent loss of the patents far outweighs a UI quirk that can be avoided with a minor programming change which will be in place before the ruling takes affect. Its like going to war with 4 entire divisions, getting totally out trounced, but coming home with a mess-hall cook as a POW.
A few more wins like this and Apple will need a whole new patent portfolio.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
Apple has to sue them and protect their IP.
What IP? "rectangular with rounded corners" is no IP, it's something that was around for thousands of years. (clay tablets, anyone?)
Putting the screen more or less in the center was there before (just about any TV).
Apple did NOT invent the MP3 plaer.
Apple dit NOT invent the smartphone.
Apple did NOT invent the touch screen device.
Apple itself is only copying.
Mouse? GUI? Design of iAnything?
Apple is not willing to pay for past use of somebody elses IP (current Motorola case in Germany), but everybody is supposed to respect Apples IP.
Apple is evil.
I'm not saying that the other players aren't, too.
But Apple is EVIL, and the worst of the bunch, in my book.
This claim concerned a design patent, specifically granted for the "ornamental nonfunctional design" of an object. The prototypical example is the Coke bottle: there's no functional reason it has to be shaped like that.
Alas, there are rather good functional reasons for a tablet to be flat and rectangular with an aluminum body, rounded corners, and a black bezel.
On the other hand, it seemed to many observers inside and outside the courtroom that the Galaxy Tab was not only flat, rectangular, ..., but in fact designed to look like an iPad.
In my eyes, it's just a silly game, really, and most likely intentional on Samsung's part, a calculated risk that, at worst, might lead to iPad-related publicity for the Galaxy Tab, not so much because they're "shameless cloners," but simply because they're trying to sell stuff and the press likes to talk about the iPad.
Apple may be similarly silly, but this hardly arises to the level of "evil," if only because, in the grand scheme of life and death, we're talking about somewhat trivial aspects of somewhat trivial products, and marketing stunts that are mildly entertaining rather than either "soul-sucking" or invasive. Evil is the assholes who want to enjoin medical diagnoses derived from "protected knowledge."
Sure, companies are choosing to act the way they are, but the current patent system is incentivizing this behavior.
If you own a shop and someone sets up a similar one across town and takes away some of your business you are incentivized to throw a petrol bomb through their window, but that doesn't make it right. In both cases the incentive is profit, and profit can never justify being evil.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC