Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Appeals Court Bans Features From Older Samsung Phones

Posted by Soulskill on from the of-barn-doors-and-horses dept.

walterbyrd writes with news that Apple has finally emerged victorious in a long-standing patent case against Samsung — though it's more of a moral victory than a practical one. Samsung is no longer allowed to sell some of its older phones unless the company disables features that infringe upon Apple patents. "The market impact will likely be limited, since the lawsuit was filed in 2012 and covers products that came out that year, like the Galaxy S3. Furthermore, software updates to Samsung software mean that the patents may not be infringed anymore. For instance, Samsung's Android phones no longer use a 'slide to unlock' feature on the bottom of the phone. In dissent, U.S. Circuit Judge Sharon Prost paints a sharply different picture (PDF) from the majority. 'This is not a close case,' she writes, noting that Apple's patents cover a spelling correction feature it doesn't use, and two others cover 'minor features' out of 'many thousands.'"

8 of 69 comments (clear)

  1. Seriously? by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So the 'slide to unlock' feature is some sort of amazing proprietary invention?

    What's next, patenting the layout of the 0 ~ 9 dialpad?

    --
    Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    1. Re:Seriously? by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Don't just blame the court. In some respect, they are doing their job enforcing an approved patent. The real culprit is the patent office allowing just trivia to be patented. At some level, the courts can overrule, but it is harder than enforcing.

    2. Re:Seriously? by mark-t · · Score: 2

      It goes back further than that.... *WAY* further than that.

      Try apartment deadbolts.

      --
      File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
  2. Re:Wait what? by acoustix · · Score: 2

    Slide to unlock goes back to a feature in Windows CE back in 2005. How Apple can claim this is their's is totally beyond me.

    --
    "A plan fiendishly clever in its intricacies"- Homer Simpson
  3. Shame, my Galaxy S3 was a far better phone by kalpol · · Score: 3, Insightful

    My Galaxy S3 is still plugging along and is a far better phone than its contemporary iPhone counterparts. The Samsung software is another story but I don't use those apps.

    --
    12:50 - press return.
  4. Re:Wait what? by gstoddart · · Score: 2, Interesting

    And on doors for hundreds of years.

    Sorry, but there are real world analogs to this ... which makes this yet another moronic patent which essentially says "a system and methodology for doing something which is well understood in the real world, but with a computer".

    So many of the visual metaphors used in computers are basically copies of things you do with real physical things. Granting patents on them means the concept of patents has become useless.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  5. Re:Thank God! by Tablizer · · Score: 2

    I've heard that Apple did pay royalties to Xerox for GUI technology. But, by most accounts they got a lousy deal.

    --
    Table-ized A.I.
  6. Immoral by Tough+Love · · Score: 2

    it's more of an immoral victory than a practical one

    Fixed that for Soulskill

    --
    When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.