dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer

Search Topic:
uniqs
322
share rss forum feed

Kamus

join:2011-01-27
El Paso, TX

Are any of you guys surprised about this?

I'm not surprised.

The consequences of this could mean that the next paradigm in personal computers comes from international companies as a result of all this patent madness.

The whole idea that apple "invented" the smartphone is an insult to intelligence. Anyone that knows anything about miniaturization saw this possibility long ago.

The iPhone wasn't "invented" in the year 2000 for a reason:
It wasn't possible back then. Just like it's not possible for them to "invent" a computer that fits in your blood cells at the moment.

But i can't wait for them to claim they were the ones that thought of it first once it becomes technically feasible.


cdru
Go Colts
Premium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:7
said by Kamus:

The consequences of this could mean that the next paradigm in personal computers comes from international companies as a result of all this patent madness.

How do you figure? All the phones are already made in other countries, even for domestic companies. A foreign company needing to import a phone likely would have just as hard of a time if not harder time getting a phone distributed in the US then a domestic company.

The whole idea that apple "invented" the smartphone is an insult to intelligence. Anyone that knows anything about miniaturization saw this possibility long ago.

Apple never said they invented the smartphone. Their guff with Samsung is over design patents, how it looks as a whole.


Simba7
I Void Warranties

join:2003-03-24
Billings, MT
said by cdru:

Apple never said they invented the smartphone. Their guff with Samsung is over design patents, how it looks as a whole.

Ya.. Because Samsung's phones look EXACTLY like an iPhone.


aaronwt
Premium
join:2004-11-07
Woodbridge, VA
said by Simba7:

said by cdru:

Apple never said they invented the smartphone. Their guff with Samsung is over design patents, how it looks as a whole.

Ya.. Because Samsung's phones look EXACTLY like an iPhone.

Apple has a 4.8 inch screen? The iphone looks like a toy compared to many of the other phones out there.

Kamus

join:2011-01-27
El Paso, TX
reply to cdru
said by cdru:

How do you figure? All the phones are already made in other countries, even for domestic companies. A foreign company needing to import a phone likely would have just as hard of a time if not harder time getting a phone distributed in the US then a domestic company.

I realize they are made in other countries, and yes i also know it's easier to ban imports than domestics.
Now, Lets fast forward just 7 more years, and technology allows for new products that aren't possible today. You have the means to bring this product to reality. Where do you go?
My guess is you wouldn't even try to test the legal system of the U.S. Instead, you could just target the rest of the world for your market. China should be just as big as a market as the US by then, if not bigger. and well, then there's the rest of the world.

If you start to really think about what is really going on here. It's companies fighting for the "ownership" of consumers.
We've already seen what the government is willing to do for the likes of the MPAA, and we're about to find out what it's willing to do for Apple.

And sure, i understand that their "guff" with Samsung is about the look and feel of the competition. Well, at least that's the reason they give. When in fact we all know the real reason is that they have a formidable competitor that is beating them everywhere else in the world.

I guess the only thing we can do is /popcorn. and watch this charade go on.

itguy05

join:2005-06-17
Carlisle, PA
reply to aaronwt
said by aaronwt:

Apple has a 4.8 inch screen? The iphone looks like a toy compared to many of the other phones out there.

Really? I know someone with a 4.8 screen phone and the thing looks freaking huge. Not something I'd want to carry around. Heck, when I had my Treo 650 it was considered a brick compared to other phones of the time.

I'd settle for a 4 inch screen but in reality the high resolution of the iPhone has made it less painful going back to a smaller screen than I thought it would have been.


jseymour

join:2009-12-11
Waterford, MI
reply to cdru
said by cdru:

Apple never said they invented the smartphone. Their guff with Samsung is over design patents, how it looks as a whole.

Yeah, like "an essentially rectangular device with evenly-rounded corners." C'mon. My Palm Centro meets that test, and it's certainly no iPhone. I doubt even Apple has so little shame as to accuse Palm of having copied them, being as the Centro and iPhone were introduced at roughly the same time.

Many of Apple's patents are nonsense. Unfortunately, for Apple, my guess is most of Motorola's are not.

Jim

Cogdis

join:2007-03-26
Floral Park, NY

1 recommendation

reply to itguy05
said by itguy05:

Really? I know someone with a 4.8 screen phone and the thing looks freaking huge.

Which is why the lawsuits don't make sense. Nobody would confuse a Galaxy S with an Iphone. Apple does not have a patent on the color black. Actually I think Samsung did away with black for the S3 anyway...

Badonkadonk
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
kudos:5
Black S3 phones are on their way. I think they hit Asia first.

Badonkadonk
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Dish Network
reply to jseymour
Unfortunately, I think Mot has a ton-load of worthless patents. That being said, maybe they've changed over the last 10 years since I was there.
--
I've heard, and I don't know if it's true, that Harry Reid takes it up the kiester from farm animals.

Kearnstd
Space Elf
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
kudos:1
on the other hand even if they are worthless, looking at the patent litigation system today. Anything and Everything is ammunition for the patent lawsuit cannons.

Considering apple can sue over rounded edges, slide to unlock, and bouncing the screen back if you scroll passed the end.

it is pretty clear pretty soon there will be a credit card slot on our toilets because somebody out there will have patented taking a shit.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports


KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
reply to Simba7
NOT.


KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
reply to cdru
said by cdru:

Apple never said they invented the smartphone. Their guff with Samsung is over design patents, how it looks as a whole.

Right... using patents that shouldn't have been granted in the first place..... but even having been so, should CLEARLY be invalidated now.

You know, like Apple's patent for the concept of rectangular tablet with rounded edges..... such an innovative idea that NOBODY every thought up before that....

(Ignore this picture from 1994, it would damage Apple's patent case.)
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini


cdru
Go Colts
Premium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:7
said by KrK:

Right... using patents that shouldn't have been granted in the first place..... but even having been so, should CLEARLY be invalidated now.

You know, like Apple's patent for the concept of rectangular tablet with rounded edges..... such an innovative idea that NOBODY every thought up before that....

(Ignore this picture from 1994, it would damage Apple's patent case.)

Part of what they are arguing over are DESIGN patents. ALL parts of the patented design must be included. It's not simply enough to present similar appearing devices but have some aspects not fit. For instance in your picture it appears that the bezel around the LCD screen is raised on the front and no button centered at the bottom. This alone could be enough to set Apple's design as being different since it has smooth screen with no raised surround, as well as the button.

Just finding a bunch of different examples of tablets that fit some but not all of the individual components isn't enough to get the patents invalidated.

I think both sides are at fault. I don't think individual aspects of Apple's design are unique and weren't seen before. But I think that as a whole it was a unique design. And so I think that should retain the design patent. And I do think that Samsung's tablets and phones took some aspects from Apple's design. But I don't think they infringe specifically on the design patents.

I haven't paid enough attention on the utility patents for Apple or Samsung's counter suit to say anything one way or another...and I think that if they are upheld that we'll see a cross licensing agreement for them.


Simba7
I Void Warranties

join:2003-03-24
Billings, MT
reply to KrK
said by KrK:

NOT.

Ya.. Couldn't you sense the sarcasm?

Hell, my Captivate (Galaxy S) looks nothing like an iPhone. I don't see how they think it does.

Better watch it, KrK See Profile. Apple might go back in time and sue that tablet company to protect their future "inventions".
--
Bresnan 30M/5M | CenturyLink 5M/896K
MyWS[PnmIIX3@3.3G,8G RAM,500G+1.5T+2T HDDs,Win7]
WifeWS[A64@2G,2G RAM,120G HDD,Win7]
Router[2xP3@1G,2G RAM,18G HDD,Allied Telesyn AT2560FX,2xDigital DE504,Sun X1034A,2xSun X4444A,SMC 8432BTA,Gentoo]


KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
reply to cdru
Yes, but it's all examples of prior art which then leads to the failure of the "Obviousness" test.

Apple actually has patents based on how their devices look or are shaped.

This is what I mean by "should be invalidated."
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini

Badonkadonk
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Dish Network
Obviousness is strongest when only one or two pieces of prior art are used. Third is sometimes okay. More than that and the argument will usually fail. I had an examiner throw four pieces of prior art at me once. I called him up and we had a discussion. He agreed that four references was probably too many and he withdrew his rejection.
--
I've heard, and I don't know if it's true, that Harry Reid takes it up the kiester from farm animals.


cdru
Go Colts
Premium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:7
reply to KrK
said by KrK:

Apple actually has patents based on how their devices look or are shaped.

ALL design patents are for how an object look or are shaped. For example, Coke's bottle shape. That's what sets them apart from utility patents which covers functionality with no real regard for non-functional design.

I'm not saying that their patents are valid or not, but there are thousands upon thousands of design patents that are "obvious" but aren't really.