Chinese Company Sues Apple Over Siri

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Chinese Company Sues Apple Over Siri

Posted by samzenpus on Monday July 9, 2012 @01:34AM from the ours-first dept.

judgecorp writes "Shanghai Zhizhen Network Technology is suing Apple in China, claiming Siri infringes its voice technology patent. Zhizhen claims to have 100 million users for its Xiao iRobot software which responds to voice questions and commands. From the article: 'The move came only days after Apple Inc paid $60 million to Proview Technology (Shenzhen) to end a protracted legal dispute over the iPad trademark in China. Zhizhen's patent covers "a type of instant messaging chat robot system", according to the database of the country's State Intellectual Property Office. It was filed on Aug 13, 2004, and got approved on Feb 15, 2006. '"

174 comments

TOM CRUISE IS IN ON THIS !! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 01:36 · Score: -1

He's loaded and cocked !!
CofS is gonna git you sucka !!
Huh? by MonsterTrimble · 2012-07-09 01:39 · Score: 5, Funny

Wait, a CHINESE company is worried about intellectual property infringement? Did I miss the memo?

--
I call it 'The Aristocrats'
1. Re:Huh? by SJHillman · 2012-07-09 01:40 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  They have their cake, now they'd just like to eat it.
2. Re:Huh? by Dyinobal · 2012-07-09 01:41 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  Actually I think china is pretty aggressive in protecting its industries from foreign patent infringement it just isn't so aggressive in protecting western countries from infringement.
3. Re:Huh? by kyrio · 2012-07-09 01:43 · Score: 1
  
  You want to do business on my land? Pay up.
4. Re:Huh? by Jerom · 2012-07-09 01:43 · Score: 2
  
  The Chinese sharks smelled bl$$d with the whole "ipad" name debacle...
5. Re:Huh? by ClaraBow · 2012-07-09 01:44 · Score: -1, Redundant
  
  Every time I see another patent dispute article, I get a sick feeling in the pit of my stomach! This is so reticules. The Chinese have learned well from the Americans -- the only winners are lawyers and more lawyers! Damn, who is going to step in and stop the madness!
6. Re:Huh? by MonsterTrimble · 2012-07-09 01:46 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  That is probably true - I deal with a number of manufacturers from China on a daily basis and none of them are really concerned about cloning a competitor's product for us if we desire it. I just found it funny is all.
  
  --
  I call it 'The Aristocrats'
7. Re:Huh? by TheGratefulNet · 2012-07-09 01:49 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  but an hour later, they'll just want even more!
  seriously, though, this could not have happened to a 'better' company. hope apple has a major headache from this. I'd buy a ticket to the event if one is ever sold.
  yes, the more evil you are, the more we cheer as you get burned by the very weapons you use to attack others.
  
  --
  
  --
  "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
8. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 01:50 · Score: 0
  
  Until they get sued by whomever owns the rights to Asimov's "I, Robot".
9. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 01:55 · Score: 0
  
  This is a small handbag? (reticules)
10. Re:Huh? by ArhcAngel · 2012-07-09 02:15 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  More to the point. The company in question many times manufactures product for said US competitor and simply continue to manufacture them off hours sans the logo.
  
  --
  "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
11. Re:Huh? by s.petry · 2012-07-09 02:17 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  HEY, LOOK AT THOSE CHINESE BUSINESSES AND LOOK HOW BAD THEY ARE! Meanwhile US companies hire illegal workers, sue everyone and everything, lie to regulators, blackmail anyone trying to prosecute them or investigate them, pay media to outright lie to US citizens, and steal from US citizens.
  Until we clean up things at home why is anyone in the US talking about China? Wholly crap man, you do realize that banks are still foreclosing on houses where owners don't even have mortgages right? You do realize that things like Honeywell vs. Nest are still happening right? You do realize that Merck was found falsifying reports and documents to the FDA which caused millions of people to get sick and in some cases die just to make pharmaceutical companies lots of money right? Hell, the DOJ illegally sold guns to Drug cartels in Mexico and nobody even talks about it let alone has been prosecuted or punished.
  Don't mistake what I say for saying China is magically better than the US. What I'm saying is that we are so fucked up right now we have no right to bitch about anyone else.
  
  --
  -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
12. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 02:18 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  You could say the same about the US. Just ask Samsung.
13. Re:Huh? by Vintermann · 2012-07-09 02:22 · Score: 0, Flamebait
  
  Hey, when did concerns about hypocrisy ever stop an intellectual property litigant?
  Apple reap what they sow plenty of themselves.
  
  --
  xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
14. Re:Huh? by TheGratefulNet · 2012-07-09 02:24 · Score: 1
  
  this may be too obvious, but; why not force them to work 7x24? that way there *is* no time-off and no way to make manufacturing runs sans logo. keep the factory going 24x7 and rotate even more workers thru, giving them normal working shifts, each. reduced hours, even; just keep the factory always making your goods and shipping its output directly to you via your carriers. when you are done, come pick up the tools and destroy them or bring them back with you.
  too obvious?
  
  --
  
  --
  "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
15. Re:Huh? by evilRhino · 2012-07-09 02:25 · Score: 1
  
  This just in: there are millions of people in China, each with their own hope, dreams, and understanding of intellectual property rights.
16. Re:Huh? by troon · 2012-07-09 02:31 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  Wow. You win the prize for the worst spelling of "ridiculous".
  
  --
  Ydco co ,df C erb-y go. a Ekrpat t.fxrapev
17. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 02:33 · Score: 0
  
  Either that, or the Chinese companies have Apple in their sights.
18. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 02:35 · Score: 0
  
  Mod parent up +insightful
19. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 02:39 · Score: 0
  
  Reticules is ridiculous. Doubly so.
  You know, I think all this is a good thing, after all. We spent a lot of energy and talking to try to convince US people that their patent system is f* up.
  But I guess being repeatedly sued and losing lots of money might make them see the light. Now, if we only knew a way to kill that "useful" imperial unit system...
20. Re:Huh? by poity · 2012-07-09 02:40 · Score: 1
  
  30% of Slashdotters are from outside the US, most of them from Europe. Europe isn't entirely free of problems, so does that mean they should quit criticizing the US? I think not, but it seems you think they should. Am I understanding you correctly?
  
  --
  your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
21. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 02:41 · Score: 0
  
  You do not own the factory, you just paced an order, nor are the tools specific enough to your product for this to be feasible, if they where then you would be loosing economies of scale.
22. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 02:41 · Score: 0
  
  Is your sig some sort of ROT-X encrypted phrase or an emacs command (probably something like 'move cursor down')?
23. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 02:41 · Score: 0
  
  Won't help.
  I have heard (admittedly anecdotal) stories, in the case of autos, of them literally building a factory to produce the "sans-logo" cars right next door to where the "legitimate" cars were made. While I'm not sure they'd build a separate factories for any old widget, I'm pretty sure they'd simply continue their operation of making the sans-logo products on the side even if you, as their client, demanded "24x7."
  After all, how are you going to verify they're always acting in your best interest? They'll certainly put on a show when you send someone to inspect the operations once every few months, but it's back to business as normal the moment they're back on the plane. And even if you find out they're violating your contract and pirating your IP, good luck trying to sue them.
24. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 02:49 · Score: 0
  
  I personally feel ZERO sympathy for Apple. They want to take advantage of cheap foreign labor to make their iDevices, but when they want to sell in the Chinese market, they find that they have to play by China's rules. That includes dealing with the fact that China will take next to no action protecting Apple's IP but will happily enforce the IP of Chinese companies.
25. Re:Huh? by CanHasDIY · 2012-07-09 02:52 · Score: 1
  
  This just in: there are billions of people in China, each with their own hope, dreams, and understanding of intellectual property rights.
  FTFY
  
  --
  An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
26. Re:Huh? by tsa · 2012-07-09 02:53 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  They're like slashdotters: copying to their heart's delight but when their own copyright is abused they cry foul.
  
  --
  -- Cheers!
27. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 02:56 · Score: 0
  
  They are just following Americas lead but shortening the steal ip period to get into the sue for ip money for nothing phase.
28. Re:Huh? by k(wi)r(kipedia) · 2012-07-09 03:06 · Score: 1
  
  30% of Slashdotters are from outside the US, most of them from Europe.
  Is this confirmed statistics?
29. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 03:11 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  CIA world factbook says 1.3 billion. That's not "billions".
30. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 03:13 · Score: 0
  
  This may be too obvious, but; why not force them to work 7x24?
  Because making them work 7 hours per day, 24 days per week is impossible.
31. Re:Huh? by s.petry · 2012-07-09 03:13 · Score: 2
  
  You understand very correctly, but I guess it could be subjective. IP law in the US is horrid, unfair, costs society and our economy tremendous amounts of money. The EU has had a much better track record with IP, so I guess you could complain about the US's IP policies and laws. With that said, if your Government was full of corruption, you were fighting 2 legal wars and several illegal wars, News was reclassified as "Entertainment" (Thank you for that Supreme Court ruling by the way), and I could go on and on here but will save you the trouble... What does bitching about other people get you other than a distraction from your own problems? We have passed the point long ago where as citizens we should be worried about what other Governments are doing, at least in the US, and need to be worried about cleaning up our own act.
  All citizens of every Government should consider that same thought.
  
  --
  -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
32. Re:Huh? by SimonTheSoundMan · 2012-07-09 03:16 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  What you have to remember with China is it is not a corporation suing Apple but in effect the government suing Apple.
  Companies in China belong to China – You can't trade in China, you trade with China. You can't go to a company wanting to trade, you have to deal with a government official asking you want to trade with China.
  Most people who run these large companies rise through local and central governments, many becoming government officials. They have huge influence on all parts of China, think of it like a Masonic society – A magic handshake with the judge, you know the case will be favourable to you winning.
33. Re:Huh? by Dodgy+G33za · 2012-07-09 03:18 · Score: 1
  
  Actually I don't think you do understand correctly. The poster is saying that the US has lots of things to be ashamed of so those in the US shouldn't be denigrating Chinese business practice as it comes across as hypocritical.
  Just for the record, from the comments I have read a fair amount of slashdotters are Aussie. But that may just be because they come out of the woodwork when you talk about our great southern land in some way.
34. Re:Huh? by Dodgy+G33za · 2012-07-09 03:20 · Score: 1
  
  Maybe he meant that he wanted to get sniper sights on them.
35. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 03:26 · Score: 0
  
  This just in: there are millions of people in China, each with their own hope, dreams, and understanding of intellectual property rights.
  Yes, but as we all know, if their understanding of it is at all different from ours, then each and every single one of those people are wrong, wrong, WRONG.
36. Re:Huh? by Grishnakh · 2012-07-09 03:29 · Score: 0, Troll
  
  I agree completely. I hope this goes very badly for Apple. They couldn't deserve it more.
37. Re:Huh? by Grishnakh · 2012-07-09 03:31 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Why should they be? The USA wasn't aggressive in protecting British IP holders from infringement back in the 17-1800s, in fact they didn't enforce that at all, and the USA made a bunch of money as a result.
  What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
38. Re:Huh? by Grishnakh · 2012-07-09 03:33 · Score: 1
  
  Exactly. If your product is selling so well that you can actually keep a factory running 24x7 to fill the demand, then why wouldn't they build another factory, logo-less product or no?
39. Re:Huh? by ackthpt · 2012-07-09 03:33 · Score: 1
  
  but an hour later, they'll just want even more!
  seriously, though, this could not have happened to a 'better' company. hope apple has a major headache from this. I'd buy a ticket to the event if one is ever sold.
  yes, the more evil you are, the more we cheer as you get burned by the very weapons you use to attack others.
  Karma is as karma does. Apple have indeed earned this, but don't be too surprised if it works out in Apple's favor. Voice recognition and commands could easily have considerable Prior Art to lean on, though winning any suit in this case could dilute Apple's patent portfolio, too.
  I have the following patents:Answers: #8,704,338,654
  Answers which require thought: #8,704,338,655
  Answers which are correct: #8,704,338,656
  Dumb silence: #8,704,338,657
  
  --
  
  A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
40. Re:Huh? by Grishnakh · 2012-07-09 03:35 · Score: 1
  
  If your orders are large enough, it's certainly feasible. They're obviously not going to have the same workers working 24x7, that's why we invented "shifts" long ago. But the factory itself can certainly be kept running 24x7, in fact it's a better use of resources to do so rather than letting it sit idle for part of the day.
41. Re:Huh? by Haawkeye · 2012-07-09 03:40 · Score: 1
  
  I only trust companies to try to make money. The idea of a moral operating company is absurd. They are only accountable to shareholders. I live in Canada where we have been tightening the regulations on the banking industry. I trust my government (to an extent) because I have a vote. They just changed the mortgage regulations so they can't offer mortgages past 25 years. That makes sense to me. I am not surprised by drug companies providing false information. I hope the FDA can punish the crap out of them so that their shareholders get upset. That is the only way you will keep them honest. We have to stop thinking of business as heroes and crap. They are just out to make money and don't care about the average joe.
42. Re:Huh? by Grishnakh · 2012-07-09 03:40 · Score: 1
  
  I think Europeans have a lot more leeway to criticize Americans than Americans have room to criticize Chinese.
  Europe is having some problems, true, but they seem to mainly be due to trying to have a monetary union without having a full political union, which sounded like a good idea at first but doesn't seem to be working out too well in practice unfortunately because different countries want to manage their money differently (some are very frugal, some like to spend it like a drunken sailor and then make up for it with inflation). I just don't see the problems with blatant corruption in Europe like what we see in the USA; in Europe the politicians seem to actually be trying to do the right thing for their people, but of course butt heads with the politicians of other nations inside the union that want to run things differently. In the US, the politicians are overtly corrupt and don't bother to do anything for the people except for a small amount of pandering to their "base" to keep them going to the polls to reelect them so they can serve their corporate masters another term.
43. Re:Huh? by the_B0fh · 2012-07-09 03:46 · Score: -1, Offtopic
  
  So how do you feel about Google's abuse of FRAND patents and trying to get the XBox 360 banned?
44. Re:Huh? by tlhIngan · 2012-07-09 03:53 · Score: 1
  
  Actually I think china is pretty aggressive in protecting its industries from foreign patent infringement it just isn't so aggressive in protecting western countries from infringement.
  Actually, most countries are like that. I'm fairly certain it's the same in the US as well. Infringe on a foreign country's copyright/patent/whatever? No big deal. But infringe on OUR copyright/patent/whatever? Very Big Deal(tm).
  Plenty of pirated video suppliers operating commercially in the US that aren't prosecuted because the MPAA/RIAA/etc have nothing nor do they care about enforcing other's copyrights (they're only about THEIR copyrights, after all).
  This happens even WITH all the international agreements.
45. Re:Huh? by poity · 2012-07-09 03:54 · Score: 1
  
  http://slashdot.org/poll/549/where-do-you-live
  If we accept that Jar Jar is equally despised around the world. This is even allowing for the error of leaving out Africa, which could account for even more non-US slashdot readers.
  
  --
  your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
46. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 03:56 · Score: 1
  
  It's called MAD. The Patent Cold War went hot; Microsoft started extorting license fees from Android partners so one of those partners sued Microsoft over something unrelated, and Google later bought that company.
47. Re:Huh? by BronsCon · 2012-07-09 04:01 · Score: 1
  
  i dunno, but check out the frist 4 of the last 5 characters... SRSLY?
  
  --
  APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
48. Re:Huh? by ArhcAngel · 2012-07-09 04:06 · Score: 1
  
  This pretty much answers your question. If you want to control the manufacturing then buy your own facility. Barring that you simply tell them how many widgets you want and when they complete that many widgets they can do whatever they want. When company apl, cpq, xyz, etc. want to sell a widget they many times will just send a spec sheet to Foxconn, Quanta, Jabil, etc. and the manufacturing co. will design the widget to meet those specs. Kinda hard to tell a company the size and scope of Quanta how to do their job. You'd have to be their majority widget customer and even Apple doesn't have that kind of clout.
  
  --
  "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
49. Re:Huh? by poity · 2012-07-09 04:13 · Score: 1
  
  What about blatant corruption in Eastern EU nations? Have Western EU nations done enough to try to solve this problem? What about the corruption in the energy politics of Europe, in its dealings with Gazprom, African dictatorships, and the Middle East?
  Do you think Europeans should shut up about the US when these problems still exist? I think we, as people who are outsiders to these organizations and corporations, should be free to criticize them all. However, it seems many in this thread think that just because someone lives within the same borders as a corrupt politician or corporation, that person needs shut up about corruption any place else.
  
  --
  your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
50. Re:Huh? by poity · 2012-07-09 04:17 · Score: 1
  
  Indeed the US does have many things to be ashamed of, but should people like you and me, citizens who are not intimately involved with political or corporate organizations, limit the scope of our criticism just because we are within the same borders as corrupt entities? For instance would you tell a Frenchman to shut up about US involvement in Iraq because of France's involvement in Libya?
  
  --
  your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
51. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 04:20 · Score: 0
  
  also, it doesn't separate US from Mexico and Canada in "North America", which means non-US slashdot readership could be closer to 40%
52. Re:Huh? by ThatsMyNick · 2012-07-09 04:35 · Score: 2
  
  Have you ever heard of retaliation or Tit-for-tat (it is a very good game tactic actually).
53. Re:Huh? by poity · 2012-07-09 04:38 · Score: 2
  
  But doesn't hypocrisy depend on contradiction at the same time? In your example, the American contradiction is separated by 200-300 years (not to mention great differences in federal authority between US of 1700's and US of today), whereas the Chinese contradiction is simultaneous in occurrence (and occurring under the same government). So the former doesn't quite fit the definition, while the latter is a perfect fit.
  
  --
  your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
54. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 04:41 · Score: 0
  
  Maybe it was 7 days a week for 24 hours a month? Or 7 hours a day 24 days a month?
  The latter not being to bad
55. Re:Huh? by filthpickle · 2012-07-09 04:49 · Score: 1
  
  but that may just be because they come out of the woodwork when you talk about our great southern land in some way.
  I learned an internet lesson once in the ingame chat of a video game. Do NOT talk about cars with Aussies. You will unintentionally and severely insult them somehow. It is bound to happen. Fun for a while, but I eventually got tired of googling the insults that I didn't understand.
  
  What kicked the whole thing off was me saying that the new Camaro was basically a Vauxhall. Kaboom. "Only (string of expletives removed) Pommies call it a Vauxhall". I didn't know what pommie meant until that day, I am American.....but then I made the mistake of saying that it seemed to make more sense to me for Aussies to be called poms considering the history of Australia.
56. Re:Huh? by Grishnakh · 2012-07-09 04:52 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Perhaps, but it is a great example of history repeating itself. Back in the 1700s, Britain was the major world power, and made a lot of money with IP laws and demanded that everyone else respect them, and instead America ignored them and made cheaper copies and made a fortune at it; before long, Britain was a has-been and America was the major power.
  Now, a couple hundred years later, history is repeating itself. America, which got rich partially by ignoring IP laws and making cheaper copies of stuff, is bitching and whining that others are copying their stuff and demanding their IP laws be enforced worldwide, while China ignores them and makes cheaper copies of stuff and is making a fortune doing it.
  I guess it just shows how little people learn from history.
57. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 04:55 · Score: 0
  
  You understand very correctly, but I guess it could be subjective. IP law in the US is horrid, unfair, costs society and our economy tremendous amounts of money. The EU has had a much better track record with IP, so I guess you could complain about the US's IP policies and laws. With that said, if your Government was full of corruption, you were fighting 2 legal wars and several illegal wars, News was reclassified as "Entertainment" (Thank you for that Supreme Court ruling by the way), and I could go on and on here but will save you the trouble... What does bitching about other people get you other than a distraction from your own problems? We have passed the point long ago where as citizens we should be worried about what other Governments are doing, at least in the US, and need to be worried about cleaning up our own act.
  All citizens of every Government should consider that same thought.
  Nah, it's easier to blame the US for everything, and when my own government is pointed out, simply claim that they're being covertly forced or "persuaded" by the US and it's really not their fault.
58. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 04:58 · Score: 0
  
  Indeed the US does have many things to be ashamed of, but should people like you and me, citizens who are not intimately involved with political or corporate organizations, limit the scope of our criticism just because we are within the same borders as corrupt entities? For instance would you tell a Frenchman to shut up about US involvement in Iraq because of France's involvement in Libya?
  No, because said Frenchman will simply claim that it's really the US forcing them to be in Libya. Beating on the US is in style right now, it doesn't matter if we do anything right as long as even one thing is slightly wrong. And if we don't do anything wrong, then that just means we're getting better at hiding it.
59. Re:Huh? by s.petry · 2012-07-09 05:04 · Score: 2
  
  Pretty much, yeah you should not be telling a Frenchman anything in my opinion and here is why: You and I may not be politicians or mega billionaires, but how do you begin to fix problems with our own Government? Learn what our problems are, educate people to the problems, vote, and petition and force change. If we do nothing, or express apathy what will change? It's a matter of where we, as citizens, need to spend our energy or things can only get worse.
  I read about new corruption every day, some dating back decades that I have never heard of. Example: Did you know that the US was using depleted uranium rounds all over the middle east and not just against armor as we were told? DU rounds have caused US citizens, that fight for your rights, to become extremely ill as well as the populations where the rounds were used. Did you know that in most cases, there were no clean up efforts and US Military people were not even told there was risk? That does not even consider the local populations that deal with this every day mind you.
  I teach people things every day, or try. Most people have no idea what operation Fast and Furious was, let alone that there is currently no one being held accountable for selling weapons to Mexican drug cartels. I don't even get in to the part where it's shown in the leaked documents that it was expressly intended as an attack against the second amendment. Even though it's in the documents, people would immediately think "Conspiracy Theory" since they have been brain washed by the media in to thinking anyone talking bad about the US Government's actions must be a Conspiracy Theorist.
  I write articles, and advocate for people to get involved. I'm guessing that I'm on Government watch lists for doing things like writing this post on /. Hell if you supported Ron Paul you were placed on a watch list, openly talking about the corruption must be way way worse.
  It really bothers me that I fear my own Government even though I am expressing thoughts within my constitutional rights and am anything but against the USA. I think it's founding was the best thing that has happened in history as far as Governments go, and am a strong advocate for the Constitution and Bill of Rights . The reality is, this is the level of corruption we are dealing with. The corrupt don't care about the Constitution or the Bill of rights.
  Back to my opinion: Go right ahead and bitch about a French military action to a Frenchman. Just don't bitch about losing money to an illegal bank action, since your energies were not spent where it may have made a difference.
  
  --
  -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
60. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 05:05 · Score: 0
  
  Why are you so emotionally invested in this nonsense? All companies sue all companies. Sane people ignore it. If you consider this evil, what word do you use for genocide and slavery and child rape?
61. Re:Huh? by the_B0fh · 2012-07-09 05:16 · Score: 0
  
  Sure. But FRAND patent abuse is far *FAR* worse. Motorola was asking for 10% to 15% of the iPhone's *SELLING* price.
  You don't have to implement any specific feature covered by a normal patent.
  But you *HAVE TO* implement FRAND patents because they are part of the standard.
  And if you think it's OK for Google to abuse FRAND patents this time, what about the next time? Or do you mean to say Google should be allowed to use FRAND patents defensively? Then what happens if Google actually did steal someone else's legitimate patent (say for real delivering medicine via TCP/IP, as an example patent that hasn't been filed nor probably will be). If that company or startup tries to sue Google, and then Google can retaliate with a "I'll sic my FRAND patents on you, itty bitty startup!
62. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 05:17 · Score: 0
  
  Meanwhile US companies hire illegal workers, sue everyone and everything, lie to regulators, blackmail anyone trying to prosecute them or investigate them, pay media to outright lie to US citizens, and steal from US citizens.
  What's the matter? Got some sand stuck in your vagina?
63. Re:Huh? by poity · 2012-07-09 05:19 · Score: 1
  
  Doesn't it actually show how MUCH people learn from history when you've outlined the way countries have followed the beaten path?
  
  --
  your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
64. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 05:24 · Score: 0
  
  I'm sure the AC post gets ignored, but while I agree with the sentiment, please keep in mind that the DOJ did not sell any guns to Mexican drug cartels.
  What they did was allow the sames, from gun merchants to people who were going to smuggle them over the border, rather than deny the sales. The idea was originally to use the tracking as proof that the weapons were being smuggled. It's perhaps a stupid idea, but it wasn't quite as actively malicious as the DOJ selling the guns directly to the cartels as you've stated.
65. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 05:26 · Score: 0
  
  A FTFY that changed "millions of people" to "well over a billion people" would have been a little clunky.
66. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 05:43 · Score: 0
  
  I didn't realise Google had abused FRAND patents?
  I know Apple completely ignored the law and made an implementation that violated FRAND patents - and that Motorola then asked that punitive costs be added to the original costs to discourage such behaviour in the future. But that all seems quite reasonable to me - do you disagree?
67. Re:Huh? by ThatsMyNick · 2012-07-09 05:49 · Score: 2
  
  With the patent office rubber stamping patents, I for one, do not see any meaningful use for patents, in the tech industry, other than for defensive purposes (I love IBM in this regard). So yeah I would be fine with Google retaliating with a FRAND patent to a startup that sues Google (even if the patent is really innovative and really patent worthy (and life saving (actually, especially when life saving))). I would also rather see the industry keep innovative ideas a trade secret, rather than try to patent it (or atleast try to keep it a secret, than patent it)
68. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 05:55 · Score: 0
  
  China IS better because they don't have half wits like you bashing their own country.
69. Re:Huh? by Sprouticus · 2012-07-09 05:57 · Score: 1
  
  It gets you perspective.
70. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 06:10 · Score: 0
  
  " I just don't see the problems with blatant corruption in Europe like what we see in the USA"
  he he, that's precious, that's because you're too busy looking at USA than digging up your own dirt at home, you've been drinking too much anti-US coolaid which served so readily in UE. Yes, yes, european politicians NEEEVER pander to their voters.. how cute. And businesses in Europe exists to provide workplaces for people and not to make a profit, like those nasty US corporations, how divine.
71. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 06:17 · Score: 0
  
  Being blinded by concepts such as Manifest Destiny has a lot to do with not seeing the past rushing towards you...
  We Brits had the same problem - "The sun never sets on the British Empire"
  And now the Chinese will suffer from the same due their god-worship of the revolution leaders.
  One of these days a nation will rise without the problem of Nationalism and it will rise to heights yet unimagined...
72. Re:Huh? by ianare · 2012-07-09 06:19 · Score: 1
  
  You're quite right of course, but the same could be said for some European companies.
  For example, SNCF sued a food stall lady over her use of the term "Orient Express".
  SNCF is wholly-owned by the French governement.
73. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 06:22 · Score: 0
  
  And Britain invaded the US, twice. Because that's how people acted back then. Are you seriously saying that this one act would excuse all the other boorish 18th century behavior? Or, should we, you know, evolve as a race?
  andy
74. Re:Huh? by Hognoxious · 2012-07-09 06:56 · Score: 1
  
  Wholly crap
  Nah. According to Sturgeon it's only about 90%.
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
75. Re:Huh? by tqk · 2012-07-09 07:02 · Score: 1
  
  The Chinese sharks smelled bl$$d with the whole "ipad" name debacle...
  That's exactly what I was thinking. "Hey, they fell for that. We got a mark! What else have we got that we can shake 'em down for?" Now they're pouring over everything in their patent and copyright portfolio to see what else applies. I wonder if they have rounded corners in there.
  
  --
  "Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.
76. Re:Huh? by Grishnakh · 2012-07-09 07:07 · Score: 1
  
  It's going to be a while before the Chinese suffer, as they're currently ascendant, much like the Americans were in the 1800s and first half of the 1900s. Sure, it may eventually fall apart, but it'll be a while because for them to go down, someone else needs to be doing better than them, and no one is at the moment.
  However, I don't really see how a nation can rise without the associated nationalism; the two seem to go hand-in-hand. Humans are still tribal creatures, and nations are just extensions of tribes, much like teams (sports teams, political parties, etc.), and people will mindlessly defend them. The only way you're going to eliminate nationalism is to eliminate nations, which means a single global government, and that certainly isn't happening any time soon.
77. Re:Huh? by Grishnakh · 2012-07-09 07:10 · Score: 1
  
  Just because things were done differently in older times doesn't mean that the modern way is better. Invading countries is bad IMO, but we still do it all the time. However, there is no evidence whatsoever that perpetual copyright terms are a good thing for society, and in fact are very damaging, yet that's what we have now, while back in those days they had much more sensible copyright terms.
78. Re:Huh? by orlanz · 2012-07-09 07:15 · Score: 2
  
  I think the modern day equivalents of "Export Tea leaves to Britain, buy back, and pay taxes on tea" and "Have coastal territories pay taxes on salt" is Design and Software patents.
79. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 07:21 · Score: 0
  
  Most people who run these large companies rise through local and central governments, many becoming government officials. They have huge influence on all parts of China, think of it like a Masonic society – A magic handshake with the judge, you know the case will be favourable to you winning.
  Wait... are you saying it's different somewhere else? You must be from some sane country in Europe (not that they don't have this same thing going on in several Europe countries as well; actually, sane countries still exist in Europe right? I don't know where to run to any more)... because, in the US, this is most definitely also the case...
  
  What you have to remember with China is it is not a corporation suing Apple but in effect the government suing Apple.
  Companies in China belong to China – You can't trade in China, you trade with China. You can't go to a company wanting to trade, you have to deal with a government official asking you want to trade with China.
  I guess, these line is different than my above statement... in the US it would be more like this (fill in around it, semantics are too much of a pain right now to fix the rest of it): The US belongs to companies (often but not always in the US).
80. Re:Huh? by tibman · 2012-07-09 07:32 · Score: 1
  
  My history is sketch but didn't the British have very tight controls on colonial trade? As in, they could only trade with GB unless it was approved by an official. Also, all trade out of the Americas could only be in raw materials, no constructed goods. Trade into America was in high end goods. This way the British commanded high prices for their goods and low prices for what they bought.
  That kind of relationship is probably why there was ip infringement. But i don't remember the colonies exporting counterfeit British products in any large quantity. I'm talking pre-Rev though.
  Post Revolution i'm sure people were like, "fuck those guys". That kind of feeling wore off though. Americans have short memories : P
  
  --
  http://soylentnews.org/~tibman
81. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 07:49 · Score: 0
  
  That is just Sily
82. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 07:53 · Score: 0
  
  You need a pound of perspective
83. Re:Huh? by Grishnakh · 2012-07-09 08:09 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, I'm talking about post-Revolutionary War; during the late 1700s and 1800s, the Americans profited handsomely on "pirated" materials. They also did a lot of industrial espionage; I can't remember the device now, but one particularly famous case was for some machine whose design was stolen and brought to America, where they made copies.
  But yes, before the War, the British practiced mercantilism which basically bled colonies of their raw material resources and enriched the mother country at the expense of the colonies.
84. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 08:31 · Score: 0
  
  woosh
85. Re:Huh? by Truedat · 2012-07-09 08:41 · Score: 1
  
  You can be sure they aren't suing as part of some moral deterrent, it's to improve their financial position. On that basis they should be hated to the same extent as apple.
86. Re:Huh? by sociocapitalist · 2012-07-09 08:48 · Score: 1
  
  That is probably true - I deal with a number of manufacturers from China on a daily basis and none of them are really concerned about cloning a competitor's product for us if we desire it. I just found it funny is all.
  Well then, probably serves you right if you find out that they're cloning your product as well...
  
  --
  blindly antisocialist = antisocial
87. Re:Huh? by hackingbear · 2012-07-09 09:22 · Score: 1
  
  I guess it just shows how little people learn from history.
  I would say a lot -- i.e. learning doing the same trick to leapfrog somebody else.
88. Re:Huh? by s.petry · 2012-07-09 09:27 · Score: 1
  
  I normally ignore AC posts, but do want to point out that you are absolutely wrong about many things. I'd recommend that you go read the full brief of leaked documents, testimony, etc..
  Now, as a matter of law: If the DOJ pays for John Doe to go in to a gun store and buy guns, then pays John Doe to sell those guns across the border, the DOJ is responsible right? Without the DOJ funding, it simply would not have happened. So you are absolutely wrong. The DOJ did sell guns to the drug cartels, the fact that they did so by proxy does not change that fact.
  Next, what idiot in their right mind would believe this was "tracking", as was the cover up story given? There were no mechanisms in place to track anything. The only thing that could possibly be tracked were the John Doe people doing the leg work. These guns did not have serial numbers tracked to recipients nor did they have any homing devices installed. Anyone that knows illegal activity knows that the serial numbers are gone the minute someone buys them in Mexico. You have the same chance of tracking a stick as you do with tracking these guns. Ballistics will only work to track a gun _after_ it has been used, and even then would only be valid if they were used against your side! We don't have ballistics cops working in Mexico, and in fact Mexico had no idea this was happening and were not working in cooperation with the US DOJ.
  How can you, and MSM claim this was just "stupid"? It was outright illegal and cost the lives of several hundred people in Mexico and a US Border agent. Stupid would have been being caught selling guns that back fired, or fell apart when they were fired.
  Now, in addition to trying to find the documents here is a nice read for you.
  
  --
  -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
89. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 09:32 · Score: 0
  
  I think you skipped a few key events in the transition of power between the UK and the US.
90. Re:Huh? by s.petry · 2012-07-09 09:35 · Score: 1
  
  And I stand corrected: The actual sales and purchases were funded by the ATF, FBI, and who knows what else will be found. As the Government Agencies declare "Help, we need executive powers to stop them from looking in to us!" who knows how much we will be able to find. Right now, they are all extremely tight lipped and declaring everything they can touch as classified. What we are getting are leaks, the DOJ is just covering things up so nobody knows anything.
  
  --
  -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
91. Re:Huh? by Grishnakh · 2012-07-09 09:53 · Score: 2
  
  Well in that case, I guess it says a lot about the Chinese's ability to learn from history, and the Americans' inability to do so.
92. Re:Huh? by SimonTheSoundMan · 2012-07-09 10:44 · Score: 1
  
  So the USA is a communist run country? I though Obama was a Marxist last time I watched Fox News *tongue in cheeck*.
93. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 10:51 · Score: 0
  
  No. Or rather, maybe just Not Yet. It's actually moving more socialist anyhow, though. Not quite achieved that level yet, because people would catch on far too quickly that that is what's going on. Some of the little steps to there along the way cause outrage enough. But sure enough, it is still slowly moving in that direction. Not too far off relative to the constitution itself..
94. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 11:03 · Score: 0
  
  CIA world factbook says 1.3 billion. That's not "billions".
  More than one = plural
  Posting AC to reply to AC
95. Re:Huh? by drkstr1 · 2012-07-09 11:49 · Score: 1
  
  And the moral of the story; IP inhibits progress.
  
  --
  Fanboy Status: Apache Flex, C#, Eclipse, KDE, Pirate Party, Ron Paul, Slackware, Windows 7
96. Re:Huh? by Grishnakh · 2012-07-09 12:36 · Score: 1
  
  I'm not so sure about that. Even America's Founders thought IP was important, and enshrined it in the Constitution. However, they also had an important phrase included there: "a limited time", which the first Copyright Act set to 14 years (plus an optional 14 year extension), back in a time when electronic communications did not exist and everything was much slower. There were a lot of important inventions in America in the late 1800s and early 1900s, and the US Patent Office was utilized a lot here; I think it's pretty hard to argue that America would have been so successful during that time without any IP protection. The problem is that the terms are much too long and things are applied too broadly.
97. Re:Huh? by Kalriath · 2012-07-09 23:40 · Score: 1
  
  1.3 billions does not make sense. More than one WHOLE is plural. Only one whole is singular. Hence, it still is not billions.
  
  --
  For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
98. Re:Huh? by troon · 2012-07-11 00:59 · Score: 1
  
  That is left as an exercise for the reader. Hint: keyboard.
  
  --
  Ydco co ,df C erb-y go. a Ekrpat t.fxrapev
So, in China is it cheaper to do this manually? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 01:42 · Score: 0

How does having 10,000 operators listening to incoming voice snippets and performing a google search compare to actual voice recognition and basic comprehension abilities implemented in software, as Siri does?
I expect the company is pissed because this bit of free software on all Apple phones (and similar on Google phones soon) pretty much eradicates their entire business model.
1. Re:So, in China is it cheaper to do this manually? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 01:54 · Score: 0
  
  they also report people asking for stuff that is on beaned list
2. Re:So, in China is it cheaper to do this manually? by RaceProUK · 2012-07-09 03:19 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Baked or green?
  
  --
  No colour or religion ever stopped the bullet from a gun
One Wonders... by sycodon · 2012-07-09 01:42 · Score: 2

...how whatever authority that is perpetuating software patents continues to ignore the mountain of empirical evidence showing such patents are a very bad idea.

--
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
1. Re:One Wonders... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 03:33 · Score: 1
  
  ...how whatever authority that is perpetuating so$$w$re p$$$$t$ $$$$in$$$ to ign$$$ MONEY MONEY $$$$$$$$ POWER $$$ LEGALLY DESTROY ALL COMPETITION $$$$$$$$$ FREE MARKET $$ CAPITALISM $$$$ MONEY MONEY MONEY MONEY *drooling* MONEY MONEY moooooneeeeeeeey...
  This trip through AuthorityVision(tm)(r)(c)(patent pending)(pay me money NOW, you goddamned godless hippie fuck) has been brought to you by our sponsors, which are listed in the liturgy. Let us pray.
Countersuit. by JustAnotherIdiot · 2012-07-09 01:42 · Score: 5, Funny

Zhizhen claims to have 100 million users for its Xiao iRobot software which responds to voice questions and commands.
Apple counter sues for the use of the letter i.

--
What do I know, I'm just an idiot, right?
1. Re:Countersuit. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 01:49 · Score: 0
  
  http://www.irobot.com/us/ may think differently (got the pun?)
2. Re:Countersuit. by Local+ID10T · 2012-07-09 08:29 · Score: 1
  
  http://www.irobot.com/us/ may think differently (got the pun?)
  Do you?
  
  --
  "You want to know how to help your kids? Leave them the fuck alone." -George Carlin
3. Re:Countersuit. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 08:47 · Score: 0
  
  And then Isaac Asimov steps in as a witness in favor of "I Robot".
The heck? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 01:43 · Score: -1

Irobot software? Does it understand a chink saying "FIVE DOLLAH YOU MAY NOW" and it responds back "NO HAVE FIVE DOLLAH CHING CHONG GWOWN WON"
Jon "Maddog" Hall ... Full text within by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 01:44 · Score: -1

IN HONOR OF ALAN TURNG A MESAEG FROM TEH SPONSOR
JUN 24 2012 323M GMT
JON MADOG HAL
IF U R HOMOPHOBIC U PROBABLY WANT 2 S2P RAADNG NOW1111! JUST GO 2 DA N3XT BLOG OR DIAL UP FOX NEWS B/C TEH R3ST OF THIS BLOG ENTRY WIL NOT B SATISFYNG FOR U1!11! OMG WTF LOL DO NOT WORY U WIL B ABLE 2 R3AD MAH NEXT BLOG JUST NOT THIS WUT!1!1!1 OMG IS GONG ON
2DAY????!? OMG WTF LOL I WROTE AN ASAY ON ALAN TURNG AND TEH 10TH ANIEVRSARY OF HIS BIRTHDAY
I!!!! OMG WTF HAEV MAED NO BON3S ABOUT DA FACT TAHT ALAN TURNG IS A HERO 2 ME1!!1! OMG WTF LOL I HAEV HAD SEVARAL HEROAS MONG TH3M
R3AR ADMIRAL GRAEC MURAY HOPER
ABRAHM LINCOLN (NOT JUST B/C HE FRED DA SLAEVS BUT B/C HE WAS ONE OF DA GREAETST HUMANS OF AL TIEM)
HEDY LMAR
TH3ODOR3 ROSAVELT
SMUAL “MARK TWANE” CLEMANS
AND MANY MORE PAOPLE TAHT I “RESPACT” ALTHOUGH THAY DO NOT QUIET R3ACH “HERO” STATUS WIT MA
MANY111!!!1 WTF OF THOS3 P3OPLE R STIL ALIEV AND 2 MANTION TH3M HERE WUD SUR3LY AMBARAS TH3M SINC3 TH3Y TAND 2 B MOD3ST P3OPLA
ALAN11111! OMG LOL TURNG HOWEV3R IS DIF3R3NT
HE!!11!11 OMG LOL DID SO MUCH FOR TEH INDUSTRY WIT WHICH TAHT I HAEV SPANT DA LAST 42 YAARS OF MAH LIEF
HIS!!11 LOL BRILIANCA H3LPAD DEF3ND DA WORLD AGANEST AN UNSPEAKABLE 3VIL TAHT ENGULFED WHOLA NATIONS AND TURNED CHRISTIAN M3N AND WOMEN AGANEST OTH3RS SEN AS DIFER3NT FROM THAMS3LV3S
111!!11 LOL HIS COUNTRY (AND HIS WORLD) HAETD HIM SO MUCH TAHT TH3Y CHEMICALY CASTRAETD HIM INSULTED HIM AND DAPRIEVD HIM OF TEH ONE THNG H3 LIEVD FOR HIS U1!!1 WTF LOL CAN TRY 2 SUGAR-COAT TEH EVENTS BY SAYNG “IT WAS TEH LAW OF DA TIEM” BUT TEH TIEM” WAS NOT TAHT LONG AGO AND IN SOMA PLAECS “TAHT TIEM” STIL 3XISTS
AND11!!11!1 WTF LOL Y THIS 3FECTS M3 IS TAHT I 2 M WUT111!11! OMG WTF DO U MEAN BY TAHT
THIS?!!!!???! OMG WTF LOL ANOUNCAMENT WIL SURPRIES SOMA P3OPL3 AND NOT SURPRIES OTH3RS111! I HAEV “COM3 OUT” 2 SOME P3OPLE (USUALY MAH CLOSAST FREINDS) AND NOT OTHERS1!!11 I DO NOT “FLAUNT” MAH HOMOS3XUALITY N3ITH3R DO I LEI ABOUT IT1!1!11! OMG WTF LOL IF P3OPLE ASK M3 DIERCTLY ABOUT MAH HOMOSEXUALITY I TEL MAH1!11!!1 OMG LOL PHYSICAL APEARANC3 AND MAN3RISMS DAFY TEH STEREOTYP3S TAHT MOST PEOPLA HAEV OF MAEL HOMOS3XUALS111!!!! WTF MANY PAOPLA WUD N3V3R GUAS TAHT IM HOMOS3XUAL EVEN IF THEY NU M3 A LONG TIEM
I!1!1 WTF LOL COMA FROM A DIFARENT TIEM!1111!1 BORN IN 1950 IN BALTIMOR3 MARYLAND I R3M3MBR DA BLAK PERSONS W8R-FOUNTANE” AND TEH “WHIET PEOPLE ONLY” LUNCH-COUNTAR!111! OMG LOL I REMEMBR WHEN “NEGROS” WENT 2 TEH BAK OF TEH BUS AND AS A U BOY OF AIGHT OR NIEN YEARS I DID NOT THINK ANYTHNG ABOUT IT11!!1!!1 WTF LOL IT WAS “NATURAL”1!!! OMG WTF 3VEN DA CHURCH AND BIBLE TOK3D ABOUT SLAEVS AND SLAEVRY BNG “NATURAL”!11!!!!1 OMG “N3GROS” WAR3 INFERIOR 2 WHIET PEOPLE OR SO WE WERA 2LD
TH3N!!1!!! OMG IN TEH 3ARLY 1960S A FEW BRAEV P3OPLA S2D UP AND SADE “NO I THINK U R WRONG” AND TEH BGINNG OF “CIVIL RIGHTS” STARTED 2 HAPEN!111 WTF SOME BRAEV POLITICIANS LOST THERE EL3CTED POSITIONS SOM3 BRAEV PAOPL3 LOST THEYRE JOBS AND SOME RILLY BRAEV PEOPL3 LOST THERE LIEVS OVER TAHT FIGHT
BUT1!!!!11 LOL SOMAWHER3 IN TEH MIDST OF AL TAHT I HAARD THIS MASAEG IT IS NOT DA COLOR OF DA SKIN TAHT MAEKS A PERSON.IT!1!!1!!!1!11111 WTF IS WUT IS INSIED1!1!!!!1 LOL I WUD LIEK 2 SAY TAHT M3SAEG IS NOW IN TEH HEARTS AND H3ADS OF AL MAH F3LOW COUNTRYMEN BUT I KNOW IT IS NOT!1!111 OMG 2DAY I STIL HEAR TEH NME CALNG AND DA HAET AGANEST DIFERANT RAECS
AS!!!1!111 WTF I GRAW OLD3R I NOTIECD TEH WAY MAH MOTH3R AND FATHER INT3RACTED!1!!!! DAD WAS TEH HAAD OF TEH HOUS3” AND MOM WAS TEH “MOTH3R”111!11 OMG WTF LOL THEY CONSULT3D ON THNGS BUT DAD WAS TEH FINAL D3CISION MAEKR!!!! OMG I MUST ADMIT TAHT DAD WAS WIES AND OFT3N LISTAN3D VARY CLOS3 2 “MOM” BFORE MAKNG “HIS” DACISION TAHT OFTEN MIRORED HERS1111! OMG WTF LOL BUT IN MOMS MIND IT WAS “DADS” MONEY TAHT H3 3ARN3D AND BROU
1. Re:Jon "Maddog" Hall ... Full text within by History's+Coming+To · 2012-07-09 02:59 · Score: 1, Offtopic
  
  Not even close. Read this and get back to us:
  
  --
  Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
Time to Sell Your AAPL by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 01:45 · Score: 0, Troll

Apple has peaked and has made a lot of enemies. More importantly, in China, there's a precedent now of them caving in, so they're now vulnerable. Of course, since they are a foreign company in China, they've always been vulnerable, but now everyone knows it. These suits will proliferate and become a significant drag on Apple's profitability.
1. Re:Time to Sell Your AAPL by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 02:42 · Score: 0
  
  Well see next quarter, I do predict a slump.
Chinese are the correct people for Apple. by Aditya88 · 2012-07-09 01:52 · Score: 1, Interesting

yesterday some Chinese company f**d apple over the name IPad. And now this company is screwing apple over siri. Its all Apple's bad karma because the other side apple is screwing Samsung, and others...
Go China! by Lou3000 · 2012-07-09 01:54 · Score: 1, Funny

I sure hope they force Apple to stop using Siri, becuase Siri is the worst part of iOS. iOS4, without a reliable network data connection. Me: Call Home iPhone: Calling Home iOS5, without a reliable network data connection. Me: Call Home Siri: I'm sorry there has been a problem, please try again. Me: Call Home Siri: I'm not able to do that right now, sorry. Obviously I realize this won't happen, and at worst Apple will just settle.
1. Re:Go China! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 02:01 · Score: 0
  
  You think that's bad.
  My friend Siri used to have Apple products, then she had an Apple bonfire.
2. Re:Go China! by vlm · 2012-07-09 02:01 · Score: 1
  
  I sure hope they force Apple to stop using Siri,
  I hope it stops everyone from using voice recognition. Very slow, incredibly error prone, completely non-private, intrusive, and dangerous. If its too dangerous to pick up the phone and dial, maybe you should be concentrating on your driving instead of talking? Non-private is eventually the supermarket cashier is going to have to recite your credit card number out loud instead of typing it, or the bank teller speak your SS number, is distinct from intrusive in that its annoying enough that I have to listen to you argue with your girlfriend on the train, I don't want to have to listen to 5 minutes of your arguing with Siri before you start arguing with your girl.
  Go away, "Voice Recognition" you suck and don't come back, except for legit handicapped people.
  
  --
  "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
3. Re:Go China! by Overzeetop · 2012-07-09 02:02 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  I might tell Siri to call me Dave, just so she can say "I can't do that, Dave."
  
  --
  Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
4. Re:Go China! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 02:03 · Score: 0
  
  I used to think that advances in AI would be the reason if one day a program will pass the Turing test. Now I think we'll get there with a big helping of dwindling HI.
5. Re:Go China! by gtall · 2012-07-09 03:31 · Score: 1
  
  The day I'm forced to talk to my computer is the day I take it out back and shoot it.
6. Re:Go China! by SpzToid · 2012-07-09 04:32 · Score: 1
  
  "I'm sorry, Dave's not here."
  "Would you like me to search for Dave?"
  
  --
  You can't be ahead of the curve, if you're stuck in a loop.
7. Re:Go China! by filthpickle · 2012-07-09 04:56 · Score: 1
  
  siri "What can I help you with"
  me: "we've been over this already siri, you can't help me"
  
  Never ever use it. If it works for someone else then fantastic. It is useless to me.
8. Re:Go China! by HapSlappy_2222 · 2012-07-09 07:48 · Score: 1
  
  Voice recognition software is an interesting beast. My girlfriend has a higher pitched, almost lilting voice, and she can't for the life of her get her Droid to do what she tells it to, regardless of how clearly she speaks. On the other hand, her phone seems to pick up my voice even if I'm whispering whisper.
  
  This makes for amusing moments when I'm driving us around and she's navigating: she's trying to get the damn thing to work, while I have to bite my tongue, hoping an important freeway sign doesn't show up.
Apple can't have it both ways by chowdahhead · 2012-07-09 01:58 · Score: 4, Insightful

Live by the sword, die by the sword.
1. Re:Apple can't have it both ways by Rogerborg · 2012-07-09 02:46 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  Heh, they wished for it, they got it.
  US companies are lobbying like demons to have China enforce their "intellectual property" on the assumption that the little yellow devils are too lazy and dumb to ever invent anything of their own.
  A billion smart, hungry people and an education system that doesn't pander to the lower common denominator is about to show them how arrogant and short sighted that is.
  You want to take them on, patents trolls? They can write three patents to your one, and for a quarter of the price.
  I'd rub their noses in it some more, but the sad part is that it just means that everything is going to cost us more, and the only people who will benefit will be Chinese lawyers.
  
  --
  If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
2. Re:Apple can't have it both ways by Dodgy+G33za · 2012-07-09 03:23 · Score: 2
  
  Nah, this is good. As soon as someone other than the US is getting the most benefit from patent and copyright, you just watch the US agitate for a change....
3. Re:Apple can't have it both ways by gbjbaanb · 2012-07-09 03:23 · Score: 1
  
  not at all, those Chinese guys will waste their time inventing complicated stuff that works. Don't they know the true solution is to patent the rectangle, one-clicking, or slide-to-unlock and go straight to court?
4. Re:Apple can't have it both ways by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 03:48 · Score: 0
  
  Live be the iWord, die by the iWord
5. Re:Apple can't have it both ways by marcosdumay · 2012-07-09 05:04 · Score: 1
  
  Don't worry, they know it better. They have enough people to push patents for both complex stuff that do usefull things and the rectangle.
  
  --
  Rethinking email
6. Re:Apple can't have it both ways by Truedat · 2012-07-09 08:48 · Score: 1
  
  Do you really think they thought to themselves: "those slashdotters are right, apple are douchebags lets sue the bastards"? No, their motives were altruistic. In other words if apple die by the sword it has NOTHING to do with the fact that they have brandished the sword.
Right... Some more to come? by hotfireball · 2012-07-09 02:01 · Score: 1

Now they will start pop one after another asking millions one after another: uPad, oPad, iPeed, Panasoanic, Snarp, Adibas, Xiri, Sipi, Appe and other genuine Chinese clones of stuff.
1. Re:Right... Some more to come? by El+Torico · 2012-07-09 02:07 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  That first one would make a great name for a feminine hygiene product.
  
  --
  In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is usually crucified.
2. Re:Right... Some more to come? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 02:14 · Score: 0
  
  I suppose then the third one should make elderly diapers?
They may have it but by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 02:03 · Score: 0

So they have a patent on it, does the patent say "with a touch screen" or "on a mobile device"? I bet not. Apple for the win!
MaxDB by tepples · 2012-07-09 02:05 · Score: 1

Adibas
Isn't that the old name for MaxDB?
Hard to sympathize with patent troll Apple. by walterbyrd · 2012-07-09 02:14 · Score: 2, Funny

No company - not even Microsoft - is a more shameless patent troll than Apple. Have you forgotten about Apple's harassment lawsuit against HTC?
Maybe turnabout is fair play?
Robots by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · 2012-07-09 02:29 · Score: 1

Ummm, Apple prognosticated a voice assistant in fuuristic advertising 20 years ago.
Star Trek did 50 years ago.
And let's not even get into "Gort. Klaatu barada nikto."
The real power is in the dancing bear, not someone's use of it.

--
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Death by a thousand cuts... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 02:30 · Score: 1

China did invent Lingchi or death by a thousand cuts. Looks like the figured out how to take Apple down. After winning it's court case, Proview Technology sent out an email saying, "...tell them how to bring those sons of bitches down."
So is manufacturing in China really that cheap by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 02:31 · Score: 0

Given the corruption and bogus patent claims that have to be settled, not to mention the pirating, one has ask do companies know the real cost of doing business in China? Instead of prosecuting in Western countries for fraud that originates in China, shouldn't they just move the production to someplace less corrupt?
Fast prosecution by Infiniti2000 · 2012-07-09 02:50 · Score: 2

It was filed on Aug 13, 2004, and got approved on Feb 15, 2006.
I think this is the real story here. From the time to file to approval is about 1.5 years. In the U.S., it's 5 to 8 years. We cannot hope to compete if these numbers are real, and, apparently, they are.
1. Re:Fast prosecution by Greyfox · 2012-07-09 02:55 · Score: 1
  
  I think it's intentionally 5 to 8 years for a patent to be granted in the USA. The clock starts ticking when it's granted. So they can file, hold it for a few years making minor revisions from time to time and then surface for a lawsuit the moment anyone does anything innovative.
  
  --
  I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
2. Re:Fast prosecution by Dodgy+G33za · 2012-07-09 03:24 · Score: 1
  
  Yep. Lodgement date is the only date that counts.
Thank You China by ianare · 2012-07-09 02:56 · Score: 5, Interesting

You better believe something will be done about software patents, and IP laws in general, when the Chinese start to heavily sue US companies.
I mean, when it's US companies bashing those in other countries, software patents are awesome. When the inverse occurs, they are obviously a hinderance to progress.
1. Re:Thank You China by Dodgy+G33za · 2012-07-09 03:26 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  Worse that a hinderance. They are an affront to the free world and the democratic way of life.
  Which is why when the US was founded they ignored European patents and copied like fucking crazy. It was only when they started having ideas of their own worth protecting they thought different.
Business Model in China by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 03:06 · Score: 0, Insightful

1. Steal technology from Western firms, either through direct corporate espionage or as a requirement of doing business in China.
2. Patent said stolen technology.
3. Sue Western companies in China for infringing on the Chinese patent of the Western company's technology.
4. Profit.
The chinese got it figured out.
1. Re:Business Model in China by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 06:28 · Score: 0
  
  =
  The chinese got it figured out.
  Nah, They even stole that idea! From the US circa 1700.
Chinese Lawyers vs Apple Lawyers by gavron · 2012-07-09 03:18 · Score: 0

If the Chinese lawyers win, we get phones and tablets and PCs without features disabled,
lower prices, and a higher selection.
If the Apple Lawyers win, people who make $8/hr get to be called "geniuses" and all
hardware is limited in what you can do with it, and costs twice as much.
Apple's dead 1/3 founder Jobs' thermonuclear war is destroying the company. That's ok
by me.
E
ROTFL by Tom · 2012-07-09 03:30 · Score: 1

China is famous for copying everything - to their advantage, often driving out the original competitors from whom they copied through lower prices.
Now they've started copying the US patent system. Kiss your ass goodbye.

--
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
China Inc by k(wi)r(kipedia) · 2012-07-09 03:41 · Score: 1

What you have to remember with China is it is not a corporation suing Apple but in effect the government suing Apple.
Remember how Japan used to be called Japan Inc? China Incorporated sounds more apt given the tigher integration between government and business, including the military.
Companies are just more afraid of Microsoft by Quila · 2012-07-09 03:45 · Score: 4, Informative

Microsoft is getting $5 for every Android phone from HTC, Motorola, and probably the rest because Microsoft threatened to sue over patents.
1. Re:Companies are just more afraid of Microsoft by scot4875 · 2012-07-09 05:29 · Score: 2
  
  Microsoft negotiates license fees. Apple looks for injunctions banning sales. There's a world of difference between the two. Manufacturers probably *would* just cough up cash and license these patents from Apple just to save the court costs if Apple would allow them to pursue that option.
  --Jeremy
  
  --
  Jesus was a liberal
2. Re:Companies are just more afraid of Microsoft by andydread · 2012-07-09 06:07 · Score: 2
  
  Motorola claims they are not paying Microsoft a red cent for any crap software patents such as "rendering text before images". MS filed suit and Moto hit back with H.264 patents looking to get X-Box banned in the USA and possibly all versions of Windows with h.264 embedded.
3. Re:Companies are just more afraid of Microsoft by Quila · 2012-07-09 06:52 · Score: 1
  
  Microsoft negotiates license fees.
  
  Had they not accepted the graciously-offered licenseing fees, Microsoft would have sued and a request for an injunction would have been one of the first filings.
  
  Manufacturers probably *would* just cough up cash and license these patents from Apple just to save the court costs if Apple would allow them to pursue that option.
  That's a Steve Jobs thing. I expect Apple to start settling for minor patent infringements. However, in cases of blatant coattail riding, I expect the hard line approach to continue. In Microsoft's case, the overally product isn't trying to ride on the coattails of any Microsoft product, it just infringed a few obscure patents that are a tiny part of the overall system.
Business Model in China - stolen from Apple! by walterbyrd · 2012-07-09 04:04 · Score: 3, Interesting

China must have stolen Apple's business model!
For example, Apple just patented Google Glass. Before that, Apple patented Googe search. How about the "slide to unlock" or "pinch to shrink" ideas that Apple stole then patented, and sued over?
instant messaging chat robot system in year 2004 by tokul · 2012-07-09 04:29 · Score: 1

Do they realize that eggdrop prio art has bypassed time limits in patents and speech recognition software dates back to 1982.
Prior art by Mhrmnhrm · 2012-07-09 04:44 · Score: 2

Apple has at least 20 years of prior art to fall back on here. While it didn't always work exceedingly well, I clearly remember telling the Mac in my high school library's material office (where us helper rats did things like laminate posters for teachers) things like "Marie, run Myst," and a minute later, hearing the opening theme play.

--
I suspect that one of these choices is incorrect. Correct.
1. Re:Prior art by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-10 01:45 · Score: 0
  
  Didn't they just proclaim first to file? When you do it means nothing. Sooo, a little Chinese date massaging and BAM! Siri is *not* made by Apple.
  Note, I am not commenting on China's rules... but if the US is going to make rules, they should abide by them. ;)
so... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 04:46 · Score: 0

the glorious /. community who hates patents and cries when their favorite technologies get screwed by them, now support in favor of china screwing apple with patents ;o
1. Re:so... by kelemvor4 · 2012-07-09 05:01 · Score: 2
  
  Eh, prior art doesn't matter to the patent office. They upheld apple's patent on the look of the ipad even after seeing what appears to look and behave exactly like the ipad in the movie "2001" from 1968.
  
  Here's a clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3949GAIokg
2. Re:so... by kelemvor4 · 2012-07-09 05:03 · Score: 1
  
  Shux, responded to the wrong post....
Credit where credit is due by fibonacci8 · 2012-07-09 04:52 · Score: 2

Robert Heinlein's character "Mike" in "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" describes pretty elaborately everything Siri or the Xiao iRobot do. But back in 1966. Responses based on partial data input, voice recognition, even learning humor in terms of funny and not funny. Not to mention being part of a global communications network. Most of the patents I see in the lawsuits should've been denied for not being novel, being roughly half a century late in their invention.

--
Inheritance is the sincerest form of nepotism.
Let's sing! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 04:58 · Score: -1

oooooooh For Shanghai Zhizhen Network Technology's a jolly good company, for Shanghai Zhizhen Network Technology's a jolly good company, for Shanghai Zhizhen Network Technology' a jolly good company, which nobody can deny!
same old by Quiet_Desperation · 2012-07-09 05:09 · Score: 2

Who even cares at this point? There's eight hundred trillion of these lawsuits filed every day. Sitting there caring or rooting for or hating on one side or the other is exactly the distraction the sociopaths in charge want.
Mayans Sue Egyptians by ambidextroustech · 2012-07-09 05:11 · Score: 3, Interesting

Honestly, how did the Mayans make pyramids much like Egyptians? Some say Ancient Aliens, but perhaps there is a very real, extremely subtle connection between peoples on different continents?
And we wonder why it's so bad to work with the Chinese? China Venture Is Good for GE but Is It Good for U.S.?
I remember some big executive saying that "these are our patents. We own them" and I sat listening and said to myself, the Chinese are making it? Say goodbye to your patents; it's theirs now.
1. Re:Mayans Sue Egyptians by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 06:22 · Score: 0
  
  Honestly, how did the Mayans make pyramids much like Egyptians? Some say Ancient Aliens, but perhaps there is a very real, extremely subtle connection between peoples on different continents?
  Maybe the fact that it's easier to build something tall by making each level smaller than the one preceding it? Pretty obvious really.
I could care less... ;) by strikethree · 2012-07-09 05:38 · Score: 3, Insightful

[Nelson] Ha Ha [/Nelson]
Live by the sword, die by the sword.

--
"Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
1. Re:I could care less... ;) by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 07:57 · Score: 1
  
  How much more could you care less? Inquiring minds what to know!
2. Re:I could care less... ;) by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 09:28 · Score: 0
  
  The phrase is "I couldn't care less."
Die by the sword. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 05:40 · Score: 0

Remind me. Who opened the "using lawsuits to fight fair competition" bottle?
Slavishly and shamelessly stealing IP Apple? by andydread · 2012-07-09 06:00 · Score: 4, Insightful

Maybe its time for Apple to stop slavishly copying others IP and claiming it as their own without permission? We know how shameless they are about their actions.
1. Re:Slavishly and shamelessly stealing IP Apple? by Osgeld · 2012-07-09 11:41 · Score: 2
  
  apple is bad, but china doesnt even pretend to give a shit about other peoples IP. I personally hope they keep this up though, pissing off enough companies to finally storm in and nail everyone in china making knock off crap, and using trademarked logos on everything they have no right to.
Ha! Suck some cock US! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 06:20 · Score: -1

How do you like the Intellectual Property dance now?
1. Re:Ha! Suck some cock US! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 11:45 · Score: 0
  
  PS: I have a very tiny penis, and I take it up the ass from my ladyboy mom