Slashdot Mirror
Apple Launches New Legal Attack On Samsung
walterbyrd writes "Apple Inc has asked a federal court in California to block Samsung Electronics Co Ltd from selling its new Galaxy Nexus smartphones, alleging patent violations. In a suit filed last week in San Jose, Apple said the Galaxy Nexus infringes on patents underlying features customers expect from its products. Those include the ability to unlock phones by sliding an image and to search for information by voice."
These kinds of software patents are patently bogus.
....has been on Android long before it was on iOS. I guess we know Apple is going to use their warchest to be anti-competitive.
Yay software patents.
No slide to unlock? Perhaps we should make a "place genitals here" unlock mechanism. At least that may not be patented yet.
This is starting to become childish.
I like my Apple products, but this endless pissing match between them and Samsung doesn't endear them to me.
That has been going on since the advent of language. Walk into a crowded room... "HAS ANYONE SEEN MY KEYS?!?"
:)
Nothing new...
This will become interesting only when Apple files suit against Microsoft (one if Apple's largest shareholders) for searching for information by voice -- a long time feature of Windows phones.
That google has had for a long time, and they had search by image. Please apple try and infringe on this. I hope google sue you into oblivion.
- http://www.milkme.co.uk
Apple is an outsourcing manufacturer of niche products. Samsung is a global innovator AND manufacturer.
"search for information by voice"?!
Telephones do that. We had automatic, electronic voices answering questions more than five years ago.
They were as stupid as Steve Jobs and Siri combined and either stood no Turing test at all.
It's not like Apple has the vision and single-mindedness of Steve Jobs to fall back on any more.
In the end, this only benefits lawyers and kills future innovation.
I don't see how Apple is benefitting long-term from this mentality and cultural mindset. It's a shortterm win at best and then a death by a thousand cuts as any of it's own innovations will be dealt with the same way by other companies.
I don't particularly blame Apple for this, but they certainly could afford a few lobbyists to turn this crap system around.
Apple should of never been allowed to get that patient! I would say the ability to unlock a phone through touch motion is active public domain knowledge and should fall outside the requirement for filing a patient. I think it's time for some major change in the US patient office. Technically Apple can now block EVERY single touch screen phone on the market and being developed. They have been allowed to secure a monopoly in a growing field, how on earth it that fair? Whats next is Apple going to patient toilet paper and go to court with everyone who goes to the bathroom?
What is up with the first sentence of TFA?
"In a suit filed last week in San Jose, Apple said the Galaxy Nexus infringes on patents underlying features customers expect from its products."
I think it's supposed to be saying "patents OF underling features THAT customers expect"... But this seems to imply that the reason that the patents are valid is because customers expect Apple to have the features that these patents cover, which is not a basis for a patent, and certainly not the basis for a patent infringement claim.
I am very, very frustrated with the state of tech reporting regarding patents, and the tortured English and tortured understanding of the nature of the suit even in the very first sentence of this article just makes it worse.
Microsoft is one of Apple's largest shareholders? Are you talking about the stock they bought in the 90's? Because even then, they weren't one of the largest stockholders, and they sold that stock ages ago. I bet they wish they'd kept it now.
http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2012/02/apple-launching-sidelong-attacks-against-google-with-new-lawsuits-in-us.ars
Including a breakdown on FOSS Patents blog:
http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2012/02/apple-requests-us-preliminary.html
The Slide-to-unlock patent in question: http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=7657849.PN.&OS=PN/7657849&RS=PN/7657849
It's important to mention that a Dutch court where Apple tried to claim infrigement on the same patent has already ruled it as invalid, after Samsung presented the Neonode N1m as prior art.
Dilbert RSS feed
Mod me down to a Higgs Boson, but Apple's lawyers have advised them as to a simple truth: If you don't zealously defend your intellectual property, you lose it. The system is hopelessly broken and needs to be fixed by the world's governments.
I am long time apple user. I love their OS, their software, and they way they implement those things on elegant hardware. I will probably always be a mac (and linux) user. (disclaimer: I use an android).
But all I can say anymore to mainly apple and a lesser extent other manufactures is:
Give me a fucking break already! Aim for cooperation and interoperability. Those two things would benefit end users on both sides more than spending billions on squabbling! All of these endless back and forth lawsuits is ruining both the mac and android experience for me. I know I'm kinda rambling but I'm getting to a tipping point. Looking forward to WebOS this September.
Brought to you by Carl's Junior.
"Search for information by voice"? Prior art: 411
Not to mention, of course, that the concept of making any sort of vocal request and having it acknowledged and responded to in a comprehensible fashion is entirely obvious, even if the exact implementation of how to get a computer to do it is not.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
...
If you can't innovate
litigate!
Laters Sol "Have you found the secrets of the universe? Asked Zebade "I'm sure I left them here somewhere"
... When tech companies actually sold products consumers wanted, instead of suing each other over the common features of said products?
Pepperidge Farm remembers.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
Well in the UK it IS a valid argument. ^_^
http://mattwpbs.com/2009/08/10/i-refer-you-to-the-reply-given-in-arkell-vs-pressdram-1971
Laters Sol "Have you found the secrets of the universe? Asked Zebade "I'm sure I left them here somewhere"
This is what happens when I dont read my morning "paper" before I post. Looks like sony is still king - http://digg.com/newsbar/topnews/sony_music_jacks_price_of_whitney_houston_music_immediately_following_her_death
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
Yeah I was surprised at that myself. Maybe he's busy working some other forum and blogs.
I don't what it will take for you, but Apple has no allure for me anymore. I have had their products for many years and still have three in house, but I am done with buying their products going forward.
Fortunately Samsung just announced a Android 4 tablet coming in March, seven inch form factor which the Kindle Fire convinced we was best, so I may just be able to ditch that iPad.
This certainly ain't a property of Apple post Steve, they started down this road before he died and after reading quotes attributed to him I am quite sure this direction came from him too.
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
Can Apple sue Bell laboratories- the earliest phones were voice operated for searches.
"Operator, can you connect me to Oswaldina McWeaney in Memphis Tennessee please?"
- incidentally I wonder if any operator was named Siri?
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
Wow. What a nicely incoherent collection of rambling.
Patents may be "anti-competitive", but that's exactly what they are supposed to be! Thanks for the non sequitur.
It is not despicable that Apple relies (uses) the IP of others. No one creates in a vacuum. They publish the source code for all the Open Source code they use; even the BSD code. They do not (knowingly) violate software licenses. They purchased CUPS, and yet they still make their changes public. They are doing absolutely nothing to remove OS from the marketplace. Your ramblings about Apple's software strategy is completely nonsensical, and is not based in reality.
There is nothing what-so-ever to recommend about your post other than that it's a great essay for the entrance exam of your nearest Bigots-Are-Us club.
Please do not blame Samsung, that is just not fair. If a guy gets mugged in an ally, and tries to fight back, do you blame the victim or the mugger? Apple is the mugger.
I remember when Amiga and Atari both came out with machines based on the Motorolla 68000 processer (the same as the first mac). I owned an Atari ST during that time. Apple sued Atari over the TOS desktop, specifically they were mad about the Trash Can icon (among other things).
Then there were the emulators. Since they shared the same processor it was only a matter of time before someone wrote an emulator to let Mac run on Atari. "Gadgets by Small" was hounded by Apple's lawyers when they published Spectre 128 and Magic Sac. The ST ran 68000 Mac software with very little impact in performance.
Actually, I hope that this results in an all-out patent war between the big players. Right now, they have little incentive to pour money into lobbying Congress to change the patent system because they're all benefiting from it. As long as they all don't sue each other and only pick on little guys, why would they want to upset the status quo?
However, if the mutual assured destruction scenario actually plays out and they all start suing the crap out of each other, only then would they finally realize that buying tens of thousands of patents as a defensive measure against getting sued is not an acceptable solution to the patent problem. Ultimately, the answer is that software/business process patents need to permanently go away. That can only happen when they stop spending so much on lawyers building, defending, and in some cases, using as weapons their patent portfolios and start actually making meaningful changes in the system.
Yes, they'd have more competition. Yes, that means that sometimes, competitors might mercilessly steal some of your clever ideas. But it also means that instead of spending billions of dollars on lawyers, you can now redirect that money towards research and development to blow competitors away with awesome products (thus gaining brand and product loyalty) instead of trying to blow them away in a courtroom (which is nothing but a colossal waste of time and money).
given that Android has had voice search for more than two years now (introduced i think in 2.0 or so) and Winmobile had it also for 7 or more years.
When will this patent madness finally end?
Apple is using Tonya Harding tactics, just like MS routinely does. Apple is abusing the system because Apple does not want to compete in a fair market.
These junk patents, and junk lawsuits, have nothing to do with Apple defending any real IP.
Except that all of the mentioned patents are bull**** it is even worse that Android had voice search 1-2 years before Apple. Same goes for slide to unlock, a dutch court just threw apple out of the court after Samsung showed prior art regarding slide to unlock. What apple here simply does is landgrabbing and then suing people left and right and sometimes even people who have contracts with the original landowners.
I've been waiting a while for data plans to no longer cost extra (or at least minimal extra) before buying a smart phone.
Yes, I'm going to be a late adopter- but at one point I was fairly neutral in the whole Apple/Android debate. I wasn't keen on Apple's "everything goes through us" approach- but I was aware that Apple was, at least nominally, more sound. I had planned to research heavily prior to buying- but until then, take a hands-off approach.
I must say, whilst taking a back seat view with my pop-corn, I've been put off by apple. I was once a potential customer but their legal shenanigans have made it very unlikely (not impossible but unlikely) I would consider them when I finally do take the plunge and get a smartphone. In fact- despite previously being apple-neutral, this has put me off buying ANY of their products in the future. I don't want my hard-earned money going towards some lawsuit to squish innovation.
I wonder if I am an "odd one out" or if I represent a larger portion of society. At what point do their legal games drive away more customers than they gain by throwing out competitors from the ring? The consumer doesn't win; Samsung doesn't win; I'm not sure Apple wins- at the end of the day there are a lot of happy lawyers but everyone else misses out.
To be fair, just like the Foxconn scandals- Apple is not the only one to blame so I (and the public) are probably a little unfair- but Apple are the most prominent. Everyone sues everyone it seems- but Apple seems to be going "above and beyond". Is it because they are just more letigious- or because they have more resources to pay countless lawyers?
Either way- each lawsuit makes it less likely I will buy from them- and probably puts more people in the anti-apple camp. Even if they are the best- if they turn everyone towards the "anti-apple" castra; they will eventually marginalise themselves.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
In view of the actual lifetime of a mobile phone, and the Apple cash mountain, I'd suggest a realistic valuation is between $200 and $300 billion.
In order to maintain the appearance of invulnerability Apple must sue, sue and sue again - just like SCO - as part of the preservation of the image that no other company can (or will be allowed to) possibly compete. If it starts to lose too many patent suits, its share price will suffer, and if, post-Jobs, it has somewhat lost direction (or is up against growing technological barriers like battery life), it doesn't really have a counter.
While the Chinese economy continues historically weak I don't thing the rulers of China will rock the boat - but at some point I suspect they will look at Apple's profits and say, in effect "Hey, we do all the work, we deserve some of that". One option would be a dramatic rise in factory gate prices. Another would be a slow rise in the currency.
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
Yeah I was surprised at that myself. Maybe he's busy working some other forum and blogs.
This whole article is a flame war that hasn't happened. This has been a huge disappointment to me.
Could it be that even shills cannot defend this behavior?
Please explain how raising prices, reducting choice, and stifling innovation is a benefit to consumers?
...Both Microsoft and Apple HATE open source and this is their way to kill it. Will it work? who knows.
You can't kill open source. Not without wholesale censorship at least.
You can kill OSS business models though.
MS, Apple, and Oracle; are all working together to beat up google. Or do you actually think it's just a coincidence that all the bogus lawsuits against Android started at the same time?
These patent fights are making me dislike Apple and MS more and more. I have never been huge fans, but for them to make it impossible to get the products I desire so I have no choice but to accept their crap alternatives simply won't work. They can't put the cat back in the bag, and by making it harder to get these devices will only make them more aluring. In short, you will have to pry my android phone from my cold dead hands!
Jobs loved junk patents, and bogus lawsuits, more than anybody. Apple's Tonya Harding tactics started long before Jobs died.
Does this mean that I owe Apple £0.10 every time I mutter to myself to help me remember something?
And behold, a command prompt and he who sat upon it, his name was shutdown and -h 3:11 followed with him
No offence intended, but did you submit this article just so that you could post flamebait like this?
It's a really poor article, with very little information in it. There are many more articles on the same subject available on the 'net - I've linked to some in my other comments.
It's an interesting subject, but your submission is pedestrian at best and your comment here is pretty worthless and adds nothing to any sort of debate or analysis that could occur on the subject.
My better half is a handheld device at times. Does this mean I am violating Apple's patent anytime I shout, "Honey, where are my keys?"
A kitten is tortured to death every time a big corporation gets a patent on anything obvious to the world of geek culture.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
It seems to me he posted the article because he is not so narrow minded and blinded as to prevent him from seeing what is going on with big corporate businesses stacked with lawyers, both for suing, and for churning out worthless patents on every tiny bit of technology they are making in-house where patents are not the incentive to make it in the first place.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
I think Apple's goal is to get to the point where it extracts enough licensing deals out of Android manufacturers that Apple starts to make more off of Android sales then Google does. Cornering the market by extortion.
Am I the only one to think as a hardware company the sentence "Apple Launches New" should be followed by the name of a new gadget? Apple got loved for launching iMac, iPod, iPhone and iPad. Lately, the only thing they're launching is frivolous lawsuits.
Orly? Surely the point of posting an article is to create discussion?
How do comments like "Bullshit. These are junk patents." and "Apple is a scummy company" promote discussion? Without analysis, reasoning, justification or citation, comments like this merely stoke the inevitable flamewar.
I know, right? It's so totally unfair, how's Apple supposed to make any profit at all when everyone's copying their very original ideas! They're barely turning any profit at all from iDevices as it is, and if evil Samsung has their way Apple will lose what little profit margin they have!
Oh crap, reality called: turns out Apple's making huge profit, and it's bigger than Microsoft. Microsoft founder Bill Gates has turned into a philanthropist and turns out Steve Jobs was a misanthropic lunatic before he died. Apple's making more profit than Exxon or Walmart. Want more reality? Apple's original ideas were stolen from others too. Apple's crap isn't new, it's existing shit marketed to general populace. It's the technology made in a way so soccer moms and douche bags can use it too. The only thing Apple discovered is that soccer moms and douche-bags are a huge market of people with money to waste.
I had a first gen iPhone and now an HTC Evo. I'm pretty darn sure my next phone will be a Samsung running Android.
Keep the Classic Slashdot.
This is not a hate of Apple (there are some reasons to hate Apple, but this isn't it). Instead, it's a case of Apple doing what many other companies do because of a broken patent system.
People have wanted these small mobile devices for years before the iPhone. And Apple would even have made them earlier if the CPU capability were around earlier. Steve Jobs had a very good insight into what the market wanted. But he wasn't the only one who has that insight. In other companies, the many insights Steve Jobs had might not all be in one person, and so those companies react slower. Apple had the advantage by having the top guy also having insights into the market. But this is NOT unique innovation. Steve Jobs did not personally oversee every detail. He just made sure there was a framework for others to put the ideas in. But that's the kind of thing that can happen at any company.
The patent system's purpose is NOT to create monopoly, specifically. Instead, it's purpose is to create innovation that would not have happened, otherwise. The monopoly of reward is the means of the patent system to encourage innovation that would not have happened.
99% of the patented "innovations" in smart phones, whether done by Apple or others, is not something the patent system was made for. These are things many dozens of engineers or programmers could have made, very often trivially. Patent lawyers won't recognize that because they are not paid to. If the company boss says "patent everything we can get away with", those lawyers will. The real tests need to be applied by the patent office. But they have a fundamental problem: they need more, and better, patent examiners, but that would also mean less money coming in. So in the end, we get junk patents. And in this day and age of 99% of technology being trivial, we get 99% junk patents. In the 19th century that might have been around 50%, given that the vast majority of the population was entirely out of tune with science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Today, we have so many more people (millions) into STEM. Very very little of technology today is "something we would not have but for that one inventor making it" that the patent system was made for.
I do not agree that these are blatant knockoffs. They are designs that work well. We would have these designs whether Apple did it first or not, because the design is so obvious to hundreds of UX engineers. Notice that the tablet is so obvious it's design even existed in the 1960's (which you would have seen had you watched Star Trek). Had you asked me to design a phone that is also a personal mobile computer, I could have come up with the design we see as an iPhone or a Nexus as early as the mid 1970's. The finer points of the styling might be special to Apple, but the basic bar design and most of the technology in it is just obvious.
I'm outraged over the stupid corporate monopoly-oriented attitude about this. Where would we be without a patent system today? Would Steve Jobs have just said "screw it, I'm not going to make anything cool because I won't get to be the only supplier of it"? I think not.
I'm not opposed to the patent system concept. I think it still has a place. And there may well be some technology in smart phones which we would lack without a patent system. But not much. I'd bet more people would be willing to jump in and start creating even more if they didn't have the FUD caused by the risk that some company with lots of lawyers might come along and take it all away just because that company managed to trick an incompetent patent process into issuing patents for little things.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
Maybe gene's estate should just issue a mass lawsuit and have the settlement be "you cannot patent any idea that was in any science fiction story before it was on your technology"
OTOH, any aspect of how to make it actually work, that is not obvious (a point the USPTO fails to check), should be patentable.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
It's really just part of the broken patent system. All these big corporations sue each other all the time over trivial and/or obvious patents. Then they kiss and make up and share their patents (and some money, etc). Then they sue all over again. In the mean time, consumers are the big losers. And this is all because the USPTO does not check patents for appropriateness with regard to the original purpose of patents (to encourage innovation of things that could not be created by someone else knowledgeable in the current science and art involved). They just let anything go through, and 99% of what is issued in the past few years is junk we either do not need, or someone would still do it anyway without a patent system.
Apple's behavior is just a symptom of the problem.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
I always said Apple would be worse than Microsoft if it was ever given a chance. I hate being so very right.
It's for your own good. Not only is your post irrelevant to the subject being discussed, it seems to be irrelevant to everything.
Okay, nevermind, I will leave to scream hysterically, and incoherently, about google.
Apple is using junk patents to mug Apple competitors. We both know it. Why do you pretend otherwise?
DISCLAIMER: The lawsuit farce is just getting silly, and software patents are getting ridiculous.
And yet you defend Apple? Hypocrisy much?
ATT capped bonch's bandwidth; he couldn't post from his iDevice:
http://news.yahoo.com/t-customers-surprised-unlimited-data-limit-080906861.html
Check your premises.
I call 'em as I see 'em.
We both know these are junk patents. We have both seen Apple pull the same scam again, and again. Who are you kidding?
Or, you really expect us to believe that Apple spent billions "inventing" rounded corners?
.......... dude. just, let it go, alright ? there's no point in that anymore. be rational.
Read radical news here
This is just a case of Apple using junk patents, to file bogus lawsuits, because Apple want's to pull a Tonya Harding and break the knee caps of Apple competitors.
Do you actually believe otherwise? Then please tell us what Apple actually invented?
really. we can do it. we are all tech people, developers, bloggers, administrators, moderators, networkers, this that. we all have participation in communities and we have our own small or big websites. if we start educating people as to what apple is doing, and we advocate for prevention of it, we will make them stop it. or, we will make others stop it. so much that all we need is to talk, advocate, put up banners and informational pages and so on.
dont think we can ?
well, we did it with firefox.
even google used the power of these crowds ( small webmasters and developers and communities ) with adsense/adwords - which propelled them into the predominant status they have today.
so, we can do it. its our internet. our phones. its our digital age. apple and all others should be obliging to us, not us to them. lets make them. setting apple straight in that fashion, would send a message to all the other 'big' ones out there.
Read radical news here
The iPhone is a beautiful, quality, product. Apple deserves a lot of credit for making a great product, that has sold very well.
But, in deference to the Apple zealots, Apple did not invent the smart phone, or a handheld device with icons, or rounded corners, or a device that accepts voice commands, or everything shiny.
See - the sad thing is, I honestly can't decide if this is a troll post or what someone actually believes.
Check your premises.
Ever think of that? I wonder if Foxconn workers love Apple?
Except... they weren't the first. Including with swipe to unlock or voice activation or search.
Check your premises.
OTOH, again, that is not the way Apple is using their junk patents. Apple is acting as if Apple invented the idea of voice commands, and suing anybody that creates a device that uses voice commands. I do not see Apple suing over a specific implementation.
It's really just part of the broken patent system.
No, Apple chose to file all these junk patents, and Apple chose to file all the bogus lawsuits.
Who are you kidding?
Or, you really expect us to believe that Apple spent billions "inventing" rounded corners?
Should I respond to your straw man with an ad hominem? Nah, let's not bother tonight, eh?
...but just last week wasn't there was an article from apple saying stuff like this should stop?
Oh...of course...they just meant stop against them.
What do I know, I'm just an idiot, right?
Especially if it's something that cost Apple a huge amount of R&D. And especially, especially, if it pertains to the flood of lawsuits coming from Apple these days.
Please name some that is an actual, non-obvious, Apple invention.
Name something that - irrefutably - Apple was the very first to implement. An Idea that absolutely did exist before Apple. Something that Apple spent a huge amount of money developing.
Do you really expect anybody to believe that rounded corners, or voice commands, are Apple "inventions?"
I'm talking about the straight up Samsung copied the iPhone 3G suit
Exactly what, in the suit, is an actual Apple invention? Can you specify something that nobody did before Apple? How about something that took a load of R&D dollars?
I always wanted to make my own unlock screen for android, but you cant do that, you have to code an entire launcher which is annoying.
What i wanted in an unlock though was for 3 buttons to come up on the screen in some random locations and have to click them all in order... slide to unlock just annoys me personally.
Name something of Apple's that was copied by Samsung, other than an obvious junk patent.
Clearly, Apple did not invent slide to open, or rounded corners. Such things are junk patents anyway.
So what did Apple spend so much money inventing, that Samsung copied?
A lot of cars do look a lot alike.
As I posted before, I can tell the difference between the apple product, and the so-called samsung ripoff with my eyes closed. I can do it easily, With my eyes open, I can the difference in a fraction of a second.
Furthermore, wouldn't that be a trademark issue, and not a patent issue?
To extend the car analogy, if ford acted like apple, ford would be suing other car makers who put the steering wheel on the right, or had four wheels on their car. In fact, those would be ford patents.
If you doubt that, then look at the laughably silly "inventions" that apple is claiming.
Are you on drugs Basil? I just got the iphone 4s and its a piece of crap with shit battery life and a soso OS. Very disappointed, and stuck with the piece of shit for 2 years.
Just to get rid of all the tension between them. It's like a badly written sitcom.
Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
You do realise that not one thing about an iphione was new, and smartphones were available elsewhere for years?
No wait your a fanboy so logic doesnt apply. Fuck I am sick of brain dead apple fanboys. Just got a iphone and frankly its a piece of crap, no better or worse than nay other phone, and its battery life is fucking hopeless.
You can't kill open source. Not without wholesale censorship at least.
You can kill OSS business models though.
You cannot kill that which is already dead.
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
infringes on patents underlying features customers expect from its products
That sounds like "whatever anyone else thinks of that we or our customers like for our product, we've already got a patent on it"
Rushes to patents office and takes out a patent on "All your base are belong to us"