Database Info

It was bound to happen sooner or later...

Google sue themselves.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-15212599
Well, OK, not quite, but they're bankrolling a company which Motorola Mobility is being sued by.

Thats rediculous and moronic and another reason why patent trolling should be reigned in. If you do not have the ability or intention to produce what is describled in your patents then you should not be able to patent them. There should be a timeframe in which patents become obsolete if not acted upon by the patenting person/company. If a company doesn't have the ablity to produce a patent, they can contract or license it out to maintain its validity, but if its proven to be an impractical abstract idea or beyond the technological or practical abilities of the time, the patent should be thrown out. Thats my 2c anyway.

Patent trolls are the worst. What Microsoft and Apple are doing is already bad, but at least those two have actual products. Patent trolls though... yuck. I especially love how they talk about "our intellectual property". Yeah, cos it's so very yours when you didn't even come up with it, you bought it!
Oh, and how I wish news outlets would stop referring to Florian Mueller as a "patent expert".

It would be interesting if corporate patents couldn't be transferred, only licensed, so if a company stops trading it's patents become open.

LMAO!
Motorola is being sued in a patent row by a company partly bankrolled by Google - which wants to buy Motorola.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
best news ever

I agree.That's rediculous and moronic and another reason why patent trolling should be reigned in.

No wonder "Neither Motorola Mobility nor Google has commented on the case".

Software patents are causing more harm than good.

Exactly. (10 charrr)

You know what's really ridiculous? Misspelling ridiculous

russ18uk said:
You know what's really ridiculous? Misspelling ridiculous
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hey, take it easy...ridiculous is one of those hard words with letters that sound like other letters, and letters you can hear, and all sorts of ridiculous-ness...

baboex said:
Hey, take it easy...ridiculous is one of those hard words with letters that sound like other letters, and letters you can hear, and all sorts of ridiculous-ness...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why is "phonetic" not?
I often get ridiculous wrong too.

Google finally has some Ammo in the Lawsuit Battles

http://www.talkandroid.com/91827-go...ion-pull-down-bar-still-pending/#.Tz8Ts-ywVz3
Saw this posted over on Droidforums. With everything that Apple has sued over, Google has not had the means to return the favor as it has not done much in the way of patenting things that seem intuitive, or have they? Seems they filed a patent for a notification tab all the way back in '09, just hasn't been approved yet. Looks like iOS 5 may pay for so blatantly ripping off Android after all the whining about things that Android has supposedly "stolen" from Apple. Guess we'll see what comes of this.

Once Motorola merger completes GOOG will be in much better position to protect itself from the nonsense patent lawsuits. Motorola patents would be a deterrent to Apple.

I hope Google rips Apple.

akashvani said:
Once Motorola merger completes GOOG will be in much better position to protect itself from the nonsense patent lawsuits. Motorola patents would be a deterrent to Apple.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yup, Motorolla has been making mobile phones/mobile communication since 1928, so you bet they have MANY patents that relate to how a mobile phone works.

adelmundo said:
Yup, Motorolla has been making mobile phones/mobile communication since 1928, so you bet they have MANY patents that relate to how a mobile phone works.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They do but in europe that means they are legally obliged to allow others to use those patents as without them no others could make phones. Its called frand and there must be equivalent rule in usa and other countries.
Dave
Sent from my LG P920 using Tapatalk

mistermentality said:
They do but in europe that means they are legally obliged to allow others to use those patents as without them no others could make phones. Its called frand and there must be equivalent rule in usa and other countries.
Dave
Sent from my LG P920 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The patent holder has to agree they are covered by FRAND, normally in order for products to be made and sold, or in order to match the requirement of a standard (ie a consortium agrees a new standard, then manufacturers set out to be the first to make the technology to fit the standard).
For instance if Motorola came up with a new technology that would give 10 days battery life and 1Gbps connection but didn't release that as FRAND, mobile equipment manufacturers (tower makers etc) would find it very difficult to make equipment to use that technology so Motorola can then sell phones that use it.
What happened with the Apple FRAND 3G issue is they didn't bother to make any payments so "stole" the technology. Now they've been caught out and told they must pay, they're objecting to being penalised for stealing, which is why they're trying to put pressure on the patent system to have the rules changed in their favour.
There are plenty of other patents which don't come under FRAND, the push email that Apple have infringed for instance.

I hope google gets his patent and goes to apple "Well we have a core feature of your OS on all your devices patented, we won't use this patent against you and force you to change your whole OS as long as you leave us, and the other handset makers alone"

xaccers said:
The patent holder has to agree they are covered by FRAND, normally in order for products to be made and sold, or in order to match the requirement of a standard (ie a consortium agrees a new standard, then manufacturers set out to be the first to make the technology to fit the standard).
For instance if Motorola came up with a new technology that would give 10 days battery life and 1Gbps connection but didn't release that as FRAND, mobile equipment manufacturers (tower makers etc) would find it very difficult to make equipment to use that technology so Motorola can then sell phones that use it.
What happened with the Apple FRAND 3G issue is they didn't bother to make any payments so "stole" the technology. Now they've been caught out and told they must pay, they're objecting to being penalised for stealing, which is why they're trying to put pressure on the patent system to have the rules changed in their favour.
There are plenty of other patents which don't come under FRAND, the push email that Apple have infringed for instance.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was under the impression from the patents blog that certain essential patents have to be licenced as otherwise the patent holder is stifling competition.
Apple did get caught not paying and got away with it by apparently saying they would make a new licence fee offer to motorola. This got the injunction lifted but their new offer was still less than motorola wanted as it was a clever but effective way to lift the iphone ban.
Apples attitude is "we are apple, do what we say or you will be litigated out of existence". And with such deep pockets no one can stop them because the world belongs to the lawyers.
There is no way even a big hundred million dollar company could afford to battle apple because sooner or later it comes down to who can pay their lawyers the longest and that's always going to be the richest company.
Dave
Sent from my LG P920 using Tapatalk

mistermentality said:
I was under the impression from the patents blog that certain essential patents have to be licenced as otherwise the patent holder is stifling competition.
Apple did get caught not paying and got away with it by apparently saying they would make a new licence fee offer to motorola. This got the injunction lifted but their new offer was still less than motorola wanted as it was a clever but effective way to lift the iphone ban.
Apples attitude is "we are apple, do what we say or you will be litigated out of existence". And with such deep pockets no one can stop them because the world belongs to the lawyers.
There is no way even a big hundred million dollar company could afford to battle apple because sooner or later it comes down to who can pay their lawyers the longest and that's always going to be the richest company.
Dave
Sent from my LG P920 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes in this case the patent is part of the 3G standard, so the 3G consortium agreed on the 3G standard and either tasked them with creating the technology to meet the standard or they were the the first/best of the bunch of companies that tried to make the technology to meet the standard. Had they not agreed to FRAND then another technology method would have been given the status as part of the 3G standard.
Remember the issues with different dial up modem technologies until one was picked as the standard? Oh fun times those were

http://www.bgr.in/manufacturers/app...ttempts-to-dodge-apple’s-slide-unlock-patent/
Another patent article, though what I found interesting is the mentioned-in-passing patent that Google has filed for Voice Recognition unlocking and possibly Face Recognition unlocking. Looks like Apple will have to pay licensing fees in the future or be left in the dust.
I'm hoping Google also beats them to the punch on fingerprint unlocking. Sucks that manufacturers and developers have to patent every damn little thing now though.

mistermentality said:
I was under the impression from the patents blog that certain essential patents have to be licenced as otherwise the patent holder is stifling competition.
Apple did get caught not paying and got away with it by apparently saying they would make a new licence fee offer to motorola. This got the injunction lifted but their new offer was still less than motorola wanted as it was a clever but effective way to lift the iphone ban.
Apples attitude is "we are apple, do what we say or you will be litigated out of existence". And with such deep pockets no one can stop them because the world belongs to the lawyers.
There is no way even a big hundred million dollar company could afford to battle apple because sooner or later it comes down to who can pay their lawyers the longest and that's always going to be the richest company.
Dave
Sent from my LG P920 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dave
Msft used to think they are above the law because of their deep pockets. Time will tell how long Appl will remain the big bully without paying for its crimes.
Sent from my SGH-T679 using Tapatalk

Aun no puedo entrar, ...

http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/16/google-files-patent-app-for-unlocking-devices-says-we-dont-nee/
And a little more

Its official - court rules that Motorolas patents cannot be used against Apple

http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2012/02/motorola-cant-enforce-standard.html
German courts have made a ruling that means if Motorola tries to use its most important patents against Apple in a court case the company will be in violation of European Anti trust law.
As the article says:
"Apple scored a breakthrough court victory today against Motorola. Its important can hardly be overstated. This is so huge that it even begs the question of whether Google's strategy for its $12.5 billion purchase of Motorola Mobility has failed before the deal is even formally closed (they're still waiting for some regulatory approvals)."
It would be nice to see Apple bought down a peg or two but the way things are going its likely to be Google-Motorola (and therefore also Android) that is on the losing side.
After all Motorola cannot use its genuinely essential patents in court now and yet Apple can still use dumb ones like voice search, touch screen, text completion etcetera that although every decent phone nowadays has these features Apple own the patents to and have been able to use in court cases so it seems Apple now have the upper hand.
Dave

Why, yes, Apple, you can patent intuitive actions on your devices all you please; and don't worry about those pesky other companies patenting worthwhile operating features, we'll make them play ball with you. Hahaha, let's go smoke this cigar together and laugh at all the little people.

this is getting hilarious...they all should concentrate on developing new devices instead of sueing each other. I hate Apple for all these lawsuits...

Firetribe said:
this is getting hilarious...they all should concentrate on developing new devices instead of sueing each other. I hate Apple for all these lawsuits...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They can't develop new devices without violating apples patents anymore. When the new phones with android get released after mwc you'll see more lawsuits against those models too.
Apple will win because they have patents that are not subject to frand so don't have to let people use them.
Odd thing is that apples licence offer to motorola, which stopped the injunction on iphones in Germany, is still less than motorola asked for yet judges order them to not sue apple as a result.
Dave
Sent from my LG P920 using Tapatalk

Yeo, I know it was Apple who started it all... I just feel sorry for the time wasted in court, only to slow down the other side, time and money which could be used much better.
Sent from my HTC Incredible S using XDA App

Firetribe said:
Yeo, I know it was Apple who started it all... I just feel sorry for the time wasted in court, only to slow down the other side, time and money which could be used much better.
Sent from my HTC Incredible S using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Things got worse for motorola today as apple won court case over the android gallery and they have to change it or all their products running android get banned and recalled.
Dave
Sent from my LG P920 using Tapatalk

First of all you have to consider the source of this information to be able to evaluate the spin on this. Florian Mueller is a anti Google/Android pro MS mouthpiece who tends to be clueless.
This is a lifting of the preliminary injunction. The case itself is still pending, but It'll likely to take quite a while to finish up. Granted this isn't good news for Motorola, but it's NOT the end of the road.
Check out Groklaw for a different slant on this and other issues (eg Oracle/Google)

jcmm11 said:
First of all you have to consider the source of this information to be able to evaluate the spin on this. Florian Mueller is a anti Google/Android pro MS mouthpiece who tends to be clueless.
This is a lifting of the preliminary injunction. The case itself is still pending, but It'll likely to take quite a while to finish up. Granted this isn't good news for Motorola, but it's NOT the end of the road.
Check out Groklaw for a different slant on this and other issues (eg Oracle/Google)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually he uses android devices as he has a Samsung that was affected by the german court case against them last year and he is actually very knowledgeable.
I follow his work and have not noticed any pro apple bias but the things he states are facts, motorolas cannot sue apple using their patents for the duration of the appeal which is between one to two years so how would any bias change the facts?
Dave
Sent from my LG P920 using Tapatalk

He said "pro MS" and not "pro apple"
mistermentality said:
Actually he uses android devices as he has a Samsung that was affected by the german court case against them last year and he is actually very knowledgeable.
I follow his work and have not noticed any pro apple bias but the things he states are facts, motorolas cannot sue apple using their patents for the duration of the appeal which is between one to two years so how would any bias change the facts?
Dave
Sent from my LG P920 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk

atljatl said:
He said "pro MS" and not "pro apple"
Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
He said anti android as well which if the guy uses android as he does is unlikely.
Dave
Sent from my LG P920 using Tapatalk

Sucks for Motorola. I really had hope this would be a big battle for the long lasting.

starable said:
Sucks for Motorola. I really had hope this would be a big battle for the long lasting.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I thought that steve jobs was gone, apple would stop these law suits but it seems to be differing
OMG. Counter Strike On Android! http://cs-portable.net/

The patent trolling will never end.

Patent fraud is some really easy money, especially when you've got easy victories guaranteed, like Apple does.

Firetribe said:
Yeo, I know it was Apple who started it all...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Motorola sued apple first, which started the ball rolling..

Tone_ said:
Motorola sued apple first, which started the ball rolling..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Motorola sued after apple didn't pay licencing fees in 2010, something apple still won't pay. Bit different to apple suing because phones can auto complete text for example.
Motorola sued for a good reason but apple do so to stifle competition.
Dave
Sent from my LG P920 using Tapatalk

So ridiculous.
European courts seem to be all over Apple's side.

mistermentality said:
Motorola sued after apple didn't pay licencing fees in 2010, something apple still won't pay. Bit different to apple suing because phones can auto complete text for example.
Motorola sued for a good reason but apple do so to stifle competition.
Dave
Sent from my LG P920 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
saw this and i thought i would say that apple originally started all of this by suing google and HTC first
they r trying to hold back developemnet becuz thats all apple has done is steal and try and stop competition
in the long run apple will fall
and ppl only buy apple products cuz they br pretty i buy google products for quality and interfacing
all in all apple products r made for the stupid and wealthy while android/windows r made for ppl that want to improve thru the reason y google is open source

Long live open source!
Apple are thieves.
Buy an Apple product and you support your own demise.
Wake up people!
Sent from my Inspire 4G using XDA

Do your own research and decide. His name is mud on Slashdot and Groklaw. Here's one article. found at m.paidcontent.org/article/419-is-patent-expertblogger-florian-mueller-getting-too-cozy-with-microsoft/
Partial quote:
The problem lies not with Mueller’s analysis—but with his impartiality. The engineer is right when he says that Mueller has the knives out for Google. Even a casual reader of the FOSS blog can easily discern that Mueller is quick to amplify any legal setback for Google’s Android or its affiliates. His tone can be crowing and haughty—see the tendentious “Google scores an Own Goal” post about Motorola (NYSE: MMI)—and for all the world echoes Microsoft’s own “they’re getting what they deserve” attitude to Google.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using XDA

The End is Near! Maybe.

Well, it took a POSSIBLE ITC ban of the Iphone to stir the pot, but it looks like Congress is getting involved in the tech patent situation and the effect on consumers. I personally don't care how we got to this point, I just hope someone can make it right!
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...rstechnica/index+(Ars+Technica+-+All+content)

From the article: "However, both Ramirez and Wayland said there may be circumstances in which injunctions are appropriate—for example, when a company refuses to pay any licensing fee or is outside US jurisdiction. Those are rare, though."
Sounds like both Apple and Microsoft to me. Funny that the government didn't start looking into this until those two companies became the targets of injuncitons. Wasn't a problem at all when they were doing it to Samsung, Moto, HTC and others. Whatever the case it will be nice if it makes for a correction in the flawed patent system.

MissionImprobable said:
From the article: "However, both Ramirez and Wayland said there may be circumstances in which injunctions are appropriate—for example, when a company refuses to pay any licensing fee or is outside US jurisdiction. Those are rare, though."
Sounds like both Apple and Microsoft to me. Funny that the government didn't start looking into this until those two companies became the targets of injuncitons. Wasn't a problem at all when they were doing it to Samsung, Moto, HTC and others. Whatever the case it will be nice if it makes for a correction in the flawed patent system.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly. It is bringing much needed attention onto the system.

When American companies are threatened, Congress gets involved. When it's anyone else: **** 'em unless they pay a lot of taxes.

When American companies are threatened, Congress gets involved. When it's anyone else: **** 'em unless they pay a lot of taxes.

Judge Koh seemingly skewing trial in Apples favour by excluding key evidence

http://allthingsd.com/20120731/sams...undercut-apples-design-claims/#slideshow-1-12
Given that Apple are arguing Samsung copied their iphone design, surely the fact that the judge refused to allow these iphone like designs (but that predate the iphone) as evidence is a sign of bias?
By not allowing the evidence to prove they were independently arriving at a similar design to Apple, Judge Koh has made Samsungs defence completely pointless because they now can't prove their point, yet conversely Apple are allowed to say that the same phone designs copy the iphone - even though they predate it, because the jury can never see the evidence to the contrary.
Surely this is a case of a judge sabotaging a case on purpose?
Dave

A US judge favouring a US company over a foreign one at the expense of justice?
Shirley no such thing could happen.... Oh wait

My hatred for Apple is so great that I shall post here as well. Yes, it seems that there is clear bias here, actually what may even constitute misconduct, though it would be almost impossible to prove.

Apple is a US company in name only: All the employment is in China, and all the money is in offshore banks out of the IRS's reach. They don't really benefit people in the US so there is no point in favoring them.
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2

MissionImprobable said:
My hatred for Apple is so great that I shall post here as well. Yes, it seems that there is clear bias here, actually what may even constitute misconduct, though it would be almost impossible to prove.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree, if the point of the trial is to show samsung didn't copy apple, and the evidence that proves it is excluded by the judge, that makes the case pretty unwinnable for samsung.
Not sure what Koh used as an excuse but even I'm wondering if she is biased now and I've been trying to keep an open mind about her rulings.
Dave
( http://www.google.com/producer/editions/CAownKXmAQ/bigfatuniverse )
Sent from my LG P920 using Tapatalk 2

DomingoZuniga said:
Apple is a US company in name only: All the employment is in China, and all the money is in offshore banks out of the IRS's reach. They don't really benefit people in the US so there is no point in favoring them.
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But they bring the us economy, which is trillions of dollars in debt, a lot of much needed money so it makes sense they may have a vested interest in helping that revenue continue.
Dave
( http://www.google.com/producer/editions/CAownKXmAQ/bigfatuniverse )
Sent from my LG P920 using Tapatalk 2

Deleted

No offense but the lot of you come off as rabid android fanboys. I was expecting a discussion about the evidence: not a circlejerk about how much you guys hate Apple and why Apple is bad for the world. Can we get back on topic please?
Now as I figure: Samsung is the one with the burden of proof, so it wouldn't make sense for Samsung to put up the Sony early designs to try and descredit Apple's position. If I was the judge: I would see that evidence as "unimportant" as to whether Samsung can be charged with copying Apple's designs (rectangle lol). It's not what you want to read, but it's a lot better than posting over and over: APPLE IS TEH EVILZ, PROFITPROFITPROFITCHINESELABORCORRUPTAMERICA...etc.
Ask yourselves. What is the importance of the excluded evidence to disproving Apple's claims?

Apple's claims are based on patents that they received, patents which Samsung is saying are invalid because they should not have been granted when there was already a chain of prior art. Not to knock you off your high horse, but you clearly don't understand what the basis of these proceedings are to begin with so why don't you start with that before you come in here tooling around?

Deleted

MissionImprobable said:
Apple's claims are based on patents that they received, patents which Samsung is saying are invalid because they should not have been granted when there was already a chain of prior art. Not to knock you off your high horse, but you clearly don't understand what the basis of these proceedings are to begin with so why don't you start with that before you come in here tooling around?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1 What he said!
I think the Judge's decision on this created a valid reason for an appeal.

Apple is just trying to get rid of competition legally because they realize they can't beat them in the actual phone wars. To me every lawsuit shows how much they are scrambling to try and stay in the running. Which is more pathetic every time and I will never buy one for the pure fact of these childish and desperate actions.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda app-developers app

alpha-niner64 said:
No offense but the lot of you come off as rabid android fanboys. I was expecting a discussion about the evidence: not a circlejerk about how much you guys hate Apple and why Apple is bad for the world. Can we get back on topic please?
Now as I figure: Samsung is the one with the burden of proof, so it wouldn't make sense for Samsung to put up the Sony early designs to try and descredit Apple's position. If I was the judge: I would see that evidence as "unimportant" as to whether Samsung can be charged with copying Apple's designs (rectangle lol). It's not what you want to read, but it's a lot better than posting over and over: APPLE IS TEH EVILZ, PROFITPROFITPROFITCHINESELABORCORRUPTAMERICA...etc.
Ask yourselves. What is the importance of the excluded evidence to disproving Apple's claims?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't take this the wrong way but what have the sony designs to do with this? I was specifically referring to the 2006 Samsung designs that are shown in the linked to article and not apples sony ones.
I can see your point regarding apples sony designs but we are on about pre iphone designs from samsung.
As you say samsung has burden of proof so by not allowing them to show that they had an iphone like design a year before the iphone was made public Judge Koh is dismissing their best evidence unfairly.
Please remember that this is not about the sony designs you seem to think it is but actual samsung designs. I think you assumed it was about sony ones which suggests you didn't read any of the article.
Dave
( http://www.google.com/producer/editions/CAownKXmAQ/bigfatuniverse )
Sent from my LG P920 using Tapatalk 2

alpha-niner64 said:
No offense but the lot of you come off as rabid android fanboys. I was expecting a discussion about the evidence: not a circlejerk about how much you guys hate Apple and why Apple is bad for the world. Can we get back on topic please?
Now as I figure: Samsung is the one with the burden of proof, so it wouldn't make sense for Samsung to put up the Sony early designs to try and descredit Apple's position. If I was the judge: I would see that evidence as "unimportant" as to whether Samsung can be charged with copying Apple's designs (rectangle lol). It's not what you want to read, but it's a lot better than posting over and over: APPLE IS TEH EVILZ, PROFITPROFITPROFITCHINESELABORCORRUPTAMERICA...etc.
Ask yourselves. What is the importance of the excluded evidence to disproving Apple's claims?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed, I use a Mac, an iPad and an android phone. And yes, Im pretty annoyed by these lawsuits as well;

alpha-niner64 said:
No offense but the lot of you come off as rabid android fanboys. I was expecting a discussion about the evidence: not a circlejerk about how much you guys hate Apple and why Apple is bad for the world. Can we get back on topic please?
Now as I figure: Samsung is the one with the burden of proof, so it wouldn't make sense for Samsung to put up the Sony early designs to try and descredit Apple's position. If I was the judge: I would see that evidence as "unimportant" as to whether Samsung can be charged with copying Apple's designs (rectangle lol). It's not what you want to read, but it's a lot better than posting over and over: APPLE IS TEH EVILZ, PROFITPROFITPROFITCHINESELABORCORRUPTAMERICA...etc.
Ask yourselves. What is the importance of the excluded evidence to disproving Apple's claims?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Apart from the fact you didn't pay much attention at what we're talking about in this thread, i can't find many of these "APPLE IS TEH EVILZ, PROFITPROFITPROFITCHINESELABORCORRUPTAMERICA"-like comments here around.
OptimusLove said:
Agreed, I use a Mac, an iPad and an android phone. And yes, Im pretty annoyed by these lawsuits as well;
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's right, pretty annoying. The "patent war" is actually apple which is attacking each other.
So, which is the way to stop this "war"?
1) apple stops with ridiculous lawsuits
or
2) everyone accepts apple's conditions and then no more android, no more smartphones (at least until someone comes up with a triangular device), no more tablets (btw, 1st tablet was from MS in 2002). As a result we'll have a total monopoly... great!

xdaid said:
Apart from the fact you didn't pay much attention at what we're talking about in this thread, i can't find many of these "APPLE IS TEH EVILZ, PROFITPROFITPROFITCHINESELABORCORRUPTAMERICA"-like comments here around.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So in all the time you've been here on XDA: you never saw any thread that mentions Apple degrade into a pissing match. Consider yourself lucky then.
That's right, pretty annoying. But the "patent war" is actually apple which is attacking each other.
So, which is the way to stop this "war"?
1) apple stops with ridicolous lawsuits
or
2) everyone accepts apple's conditions and then no more android, no more smartphones (at least until someone comes up with a triangular device), no more tablets (btw, 1st tablet was from MS in 2002). As a result we'll have a total monopoly... great!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think we both know the answer to this already. Total reform of the patent system. Don't hate the player, hate the game and Apple's playing the game brilliantly. I've been saying this since 2002. Maybe with on-going revolutionaries in social-networking as well as continued popularization of media access through mobile devices will people finally get off their nut and make our government do something. Maybe enough of us will get together to start our own Pirate Party.
---------- Post added at 08:41 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:35 AM ----------
MissionImprobable said:
Apple's claims are based on patents that they received, patents which Samsung is saying are invalid because they should not have been granted when there was already a chain of prior art. Not to knock you off your high horse, but you clearly don't understand what the basis of these proceedings are to begin with so why don't you start with that before you come in here tooling around?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm thankful for the information. I'll take this over the usual "I hate Apple" posts. Since you seem sure of yourself, how can invalidating Apple's patents help Samsung? Does a judge really have the authority to invalidate a company's existing patent portfolio?

xdaid said:
btw, 1st tablet was from MS in 2002
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not quite, first tablet pc concept was described in sixties and called the dynabook but not made, just described in detail even referring to use of a stylus and multitouch.
Apples newton tablet came out almost ten years before microsofts so ms were not first, although microsofts was the first tablet as we know them today.
Dave
( http://www.google.com/producer/editions/CAownKXmAQ/bigfatuniverse )
Sent from my LG P920 using Tapatalk 2

alpha-niner64 said:
I'm thankful for the information. I'll take this over the usual "I hate Apple" posts. Since you seem sure of yourself, how can invalidating Apple's patents help Samsung? Does a judge really have the authority to invalidate a company's existing patent portfolio?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It helps Samsung and every other manufacturer because it will show that the U.S. courts have sense when dealing with what is and isn't a valid, patentable idea. These patents are the means by which Apple has gotten each and every one of its injunctions and it will certainly seek more injunctions with its new patents.
Yes, it is judges and only judges who decide the validity or lack there of when it comes to patents. The patent office passes almost anything that comes across its purview. It is then up to companies to raise the issue when they believe their patent has been violated and up to the courts to decide which side has the right of things in the situation.

Apple have asked the judge to automatically rule in its favour based on what it says is misconduct on Samsungs part by their leaking excluded evidence.
Call me skeptical but would it surprise anyone if the judge agrees?
Could give a valid excuse to the judge to make a favourable decision.
Dave
( http://www.google.com/producer/editions/CAownKXmAQ/bigfatuniverse )
Sent from my LG P920 using Tapatalk 2

I would be surprised. There's far too much precedence being set here that allowing the judge to supersede the jury would be....weird. I wouldn't be too worried about an automatic ruling because John Quinn is on the case. I would think it'd be in Apple's favor to draw out this case and let all the evidence and trump cards come out, so that if the ruling is made in their favor: Samsung would have a difficult time appealing the decision. Unless of course: Apple isn't as confident as it seems.