Apple levels its latest patent complaints at Samsung’s Galaxy S4

New motion suggests Samsung's version of Google Now is a Siri impostor.

Read the whole story

 

[SgtCupCake]

And the Tim Cook Apple trend continues. Why innovate when you can litigate!

 

[John Is My Name]

brazuca[/url]":1nxf66vr]

john82[/url]":1nxf66vr]I feel like the general reader opinion has shifted from apple fanboyism to reason, based on most of these comments. Maybe I'm remembering wrong, but I think when apple vs samsung law suite first reared its ugly head more people were saying shame on samsung for copying apple.

Yeah. And Samsung were convicted and will have to pay a large sum.

Samsung and Google sue Apple using SEPs. Get smacked down at every turn, investigated for antitrust, etc.

The result of all that: Apple is the bad guy.

The Apple hate is really strong these days. Familiar territory for Apple, who enjoyed a few years of respite after the PC/Mac days.

Sucks being a victim, eh?

 

[SgtCupCake]

brazuca[/url]":37d9runp]

bettercitizens[/url]":37d9runp]

john82[/url]":37d9runp]I feel like the general reader opinion has shifted from apple fanboyism to reason, based on most of these comments. Maybe I'm remembering wrong, but I think when apple vs samsung law suite first reared its ugly head more people were saying shame on samsung for copying apple.

All of the comments that have been generated since Steve Jobs stated that he was going thermonuclear on the patents are meaningless. What matters is the basis of the arguments of Apple Inc. and Samsung in court. Apple did win the recent lawsuit and initially $1.05 Billion. However that was later reduced.

Quick correction: it was not reduced. Some part of it was remanded for a new damages trial. The outcome will determine if the amount is reduced, maintained, or increased.

Regardless of the amount, the trial proved that Samsung infringed. That is beyond dispute.

Trials prove that juries are dumb and easily manipulated.

 

[bettercitizens]

Magic Man[/url]":2foqc8jv]

infernallexicon[/url]":2foqc8jv]
I was even initially disappointed with my Samsung device because it lacks a search button, as I was a former Motorola user.

Press and hold the menu button (left button) or press and hold the main button and then use the Google now shortcut.

I have the grey Galaxy Note II from Sprint and when I opened the box and saw a white charging cable and white headphones with remote and mic, I thought, "Really, Samsung?" I don't know why they're trying to emulate Apple so much. They have so much more going for them.

They do make a white Note II as well - they just decided to do the cables in only one colour - and Apple doesn't own nor did it invent 'white'...

But I thought that Apple, Inc. owned and patented every shade of WHITE under the sun and that when you look at clouds in the sky you have to pay a licensing fee to Apple, Inc. for the white photons that are impinging upon your retina and being intrepreted in your brain as white. Now if you can teach your brain to change the interpretation of white to say black, which I have been able to do, you do not have to pay the licensing fee to Apple. ;-P

 

[WaltC]

...$1.05 billion verdict in favor of Apple.

No matter how many times you say this, it won't change the fact that the above award was vacated... That's a fact worth checking, wouldn't you say?

 

[WaltC]

What's that Ross-perot "sucking sound" you're hearing? It's Apple's billions flowing down the legal-fee drain.

 

[ateeluck]

nibb[/url]":bhimdz6f]The problem is not Apple or Samsung. Its the patent system.

Has someone read this patents?

This is so broad that it applies to everything. TV, Radio, Every Single computer or Internet services, you name it. Even Google can be sued for this patent. Apple can sue the entire computer industry and planet earth with something like this. This is just plain ridiculous, that this patents are approved.

Lets paste it here:
The present invention provides convenient access to items of information that are related to various descriptors input by a user, by means of a unitary interface which is capable of accessing information in a variety of locations, through a number of different techniques. Using a plurality of heuristic algorithms to operate upon information descriptors input by the user, the present invention locates and displays candidate items of information for selection and/or retrieval. Thus, the advantages of a search engine can be exploited, while listing only relevant object candidate items of information.

This broadness can work the other way. Being so broad that it covers technologies existing long before Apple came up with any of these patents expose it to multitudes of prior art. It's just a matter of time before that broadness leads to invalidation.

 

[pappypappy]

ateeluck[/url]":l0ckctth]

nibb[/url]":l0ckctth]The problem is not Apple or Samsung. Its the patent system.

Has someone read this patents?

This is so broad that it applies to everything. TV, Radio, Every Single computer or Internet services, you name it. Even Google can be sued for this patent. Apple can sue the entire computer industry and planet earth with something like this. This is just plain ridiculous, that this patents are approved.

Lets paste it here:
The present invention provides convenient access to items of information that are related to various descriptors input by a user, by means of a unitary interface which is capable of accessing information in a variety of locations, through a number of different techniques. Using a plurality of heuristic algorithms to operate upon information descriptors input by the user, the present invention locates and displays candidate items of information for selection and/or retrieval. Thus, the advantages of a search engine can be exploited, while listing only relevant object candidate items of information.

This broadness can work the other way. Being so broad that it covers technologies existing long before Apple came up with any of these patents expose it to multitudes of prior art. It's just a matter of time before that broadness leads to invalidation.

Except that hasn't happened yet. The patent laws make it very hard to invalidate them once granted - giving defacto validity to the broadness. It certainly should be the case that SCOTUS or someone else should have smacked down the absurd broadness (hell, intentional vagueness) of many many patents, but they haven't.

 

[ateeluck]

WaltC[/url]":28ll9pe5]

...$1.05 billion verdict in favor of Apple.

No matter how many times you say this, it won't change the fact that the above award was vacated... That's a fact worth checking, wouldn't you say?

Shhhh, gotta keep that quiet. Don't want any investors to hear. Apple's stock can't take much more bad news.

 

[ateeluck]

pappypappy[/url]":2tkbtthd]

ateeluck[/url]":2tkbtthd]

nibb[/url]":2tkbtthd]The problem is not Apple or Samsung. Its the patent system.

Has someone read this patents?

This is so broad that it applies to everything. TV, Radio, Every Single computer or Internet services, you name it. Even Google can be sued for this patent. Apple can sue the entire computer industry and planet earth with something like this. This is just plain ridiculous, that this patents are approved.

Lets paste it here:
The present invention provides convenient access to items of information that are related to various descriptors input by a user, by means of a unitary interface which is capable of accessing information in a variety of locations, through a number of different techniques. Using a plurality of heuristic algorithms to operate upon information descriptors input by the user, the present invention locates and displays candidate items of information for selection and/or retrieval. Thus, the advantages of a search engine can be exploited, while listing only relevant object candidate items of information.

This broadness can work the other way. Being so broad that it covers technologies existing long before Apple came up with any of these patents expose it to multitudes of prior art. It's just a matter of time before that broadness leads to invalidation.

Except that hasn't happened yet. The patent laws make it very hard to invalidate them once granted - giving defacto validity to the broadness. It certainly should be the case that SCOTUS or someone else should have smacked down the absurd broadness (hell, intentional vagueness) of many many patents, but they haven't.

The fact that two of Apple's patents have been preliminarily invalidated is a good sign. The key word is "preliminarily "... they might still be given a validated status back, or Apple could appeal an "official" invalidation decision by USPTO. But there's hope.

 

[T3hN00bSux0rs]

rmm200[/url]":2chfto1a]Companies abusing the patent system should have ALL of their patents invalidated. Yes Apple, I am looking at you!

I don't think all, I think they should just pick the patents in the suit, and 3 random others per patent in their suit to invalidate. That way if you lose a patent case, you have no idea what other patents you might lose. They could be vital, or they could be trivial.

 

[brazuca]

John Is My Name[/url]":3982ffv3]

brazuca[/url]":3982ffv3]

john82[/url]":3982ffv3]I feel like the general reader opinion has shifted from apple fanboyism to reason, based on most of these comments. Maybe I'm remembering wrong, but I think when apple vs samsung law suite first reared its ugly head more people were saying shame on samsung for copying apple.

Yeah. And Samsung were convicted and will have to pay a large sum.

Samsung and Google sue Apple using SEPs. Get smacked down at every turn, investigated for antitrust, etc.

The result of all that: Apple is the bad guy.

The Apple hate is really strong these days. Familiar territory for Apple, who enjoyed a few years of respite after the PC/Mac days.

Sucks being a victim, eh?

They only victim here are the samsung (crazed?) fans who are acting like martyrs. Or maybe this is a defense of Google by proxy?

Poor, poor samsung and google...being accused by bully Apple of continued to do what they were found to have done by a court of law.....waaaaah

 

[brazuca]

SgtCupCake[/url]":c7cwpi32]

brazuca[/url]":c7cwpi32]

bettercitizens[/url]":c7cwpi32]

john82[/url]":c7cwpi32]I feel like the general reader opinion has shifted from apple fanboyism to reason, based on most of these comments. Maybe I'm remembering wrong, but I think when apple vs samsung law suite first reared its ugly head more people were saying shame on samsung for copying apple.

All of the comments that have been generated since Steve Jobs stated that he was going thermonuclear on the patents are meaningless. What matters is the basis of the arguments of Apple Inc. and Samsung in court. Apple did win the recent lawsuit and initially $1.05 Billion. However that was later reduced.

Quick correction: it was not reduced. Some part of it was remanded for a new damages trial. The outcome will determine if the amount is reduced, maintained, or increased.

Regardless of the amount, the trial proved that Samsung infringed. That is beyond dispute.

Trials prove that juries are dumb and easily manipulated.

As opposed to the vast wisdom of this forum....

Even witch hunts had some rules. I mean, you had to prove that the woman weighted as much as a duck before you could burn her....

 

[DannyB]

ws3[/url]":3r9y7s3d]

rmm200[/url]":3r9y7s3d]Companies abusing the patent system should have ALL of their patents invalidated. Yes Apple, I am looking at you!

Suing over a granted patent is not abusing the patent system.
The problem is that the patents in question never should have been granted in the first place.

Filing for a patent that should never have been granted is abusing the patent system.

 

[brazuca]

WaltC[/url]":24k3vxd9]

...$1.05 billion verdict in favor of Apple.

No matter how many times you say this, it won't change the fact that the above award was vacated... That's a fact worth checking, wouldn't you say?

Just part of it, and the new damages trial *on that portion* could result on *higher* damages (as well as lower).

But the verdict stands: Samsung was found to infringe.

 

[SgtCupCake]

brazuca[/url]":1yp61guk]

SgtCupCake[/url]":1yp61guk]

brazuca[/url]":1yp61guk]

bettercitizens[/url]":1yp61guk]

john82[/url]":1yp61guk]I feel like the general reader opinion has shifted from apple fanboyism to reason, based on most of these comments. Maybe I'm remembering wrong, but I think when apple vs samsung law suite first reared its ugly head more people were saying shame on samsung for copying apple.

All of the comments that have been generated since Steve Jobs stated that he was going thermonuclear on the patents are meaningless. What matters is the basis of the arguments of Apple Inc. and Samsung in court. Apple did win the recent lawsuit and initially $1.05 Billion. However that was later reduced.

Quick correction: it was not reduced. Some part of it was remanded for a new damages trial. The outcome will determine if the amount is reduced, maintained, or increased.

Regardless of the amount, the trial proved that Samsung infringed. That is beyond dispute.

Trials prove that juries are dumb and easily manipulated.

As opposed to the vast wisdom of this forum....

Even witch hunts had some rules. I mean, you had to prove that the woman weighted as much as a duck before you could burn her....

Lol, defending juries are we? So you think OJ was innocent? Perhaps you can dial down the Apple fanboism and recognize the frivolity of these types of lawsuits.

 

[h4ng0ver]

Apple exploits tax loopholes to save billions in tax.
Apple exploits the US patent system to hamstring competitions.
Apple exploits cheap labor in China.
Apple exploits iSheeps to pay overpriced shiny gadgets.

What else is new?

 

[bettercitizens]

WaltC[/url]":29hroisj]

...$1.05 billion verdict in favor of Apple.

No matter how many times you say this, it won't change the fact that the above award was vacated... That's a fact worth checking, wouldn't you say?

The total amount was not vacated, see: http://www.scribd.com/doc/128026314/App ... Re-Damages

Next time add citations to your statements!

 

[fishburn]

It might help if the patent-approval process didn't involve a room full of cats with rubber stamps tied to their feet.

 

[jimjimjimjimjim]

John Is My Name[/url]":3o0whby9]
Sucks being a victim, eh?

Someone please victimize me with a $100B of tax free money in an Irish bank.

/sigh. I wasn't going to to there but the set up was oh so good.

 

[bettercitizens]

h4ng0ver[/url]":2ghmizpv]Apple exploits tax loopholes to save billions in tax.
Apple exploits the US patent system to hamstring competitions.
Apple exploits cheap labor in China.
Apple exploits iSheeps to pay overpriced shiny gadgets.

What else is new?

Apple pays their legally required taxes and no more in each country in which they operate per their ethical and fiduciary duty.
Apple protects its own Intellectual Property (IP) per their ethical and fiduciary duty.
Apple provides vast opportunity for hundres of thousands of workers in China (and in the US).
Apple designs, manufactures, & markets hardware and software that people are free to buy or not. Apple has to compete with other hardware manufacturers and software developers for the dollars that people spend on computing devices.

See how easy the counter-arguments are to develop.

 

[DannyB]

WaltC[/url]":1zrk7zl6]

...$1.05 billion verdict in favor of Apple.

No matter how many times you say this, it won't change the fact that the above award was vacated... That's a fact worth checking, wouldn't you say?

Also several of those "infringed" patents were invalidated. The patent was invalid and should never have been granted.

But it's like talking to a stone wall.

I find it ironic that Apple's 1985 Lemmings commercial with the lemmings all marching single file and falling over the cliff now perfectly describes Apple fanboys.

Also Apple's 1984 commercial is now ironic. Apple has become the very thing it hated thirty years ago.

 

[brazuca]

SgtCupCake[/url]":233wa8bd]

brazuca[/url]":233wa8bd]

SgtCupCake[/url]":233wa8bd]

brazuca[/url]":233wa8bd]

bettercitizens[/url]":233wa8bd]

john82[/url]":233wa8bd]I feel like the general reader opinion has shifted from apple fanboyism to reason, based on most of these comments. Maybe I'm remembering wrong, but I think when apple vs samsung law suite first reared its ugly head more people were saying shame on samsung for copying apple.

All of the comments that have been generated since Steve Jobs stated that he was going thermonuclear on the patents are meaningless. What matters is the basis of the arguments of Apple Inc. and Samsung in court. Apple did win the recent lawsuit and initially $1.05 Billion. However that was later reduced.

Quick correction: it was not reduced. Some part of it was remanded for a new damages trial. The outcome will determine if the amount is reduced, maintained, or increased.

Regardless of the amount, the trial proved that Samsung infringed. That is beyond dispute.

Trials prove that juries are dumb and easily manipulated.

As opposed to the vast wisdom of this forum....

Even witch hunts had some rules. I mean, you had to prove that the woman weighted as much as a duck before you could burn her....

Lol, defending juries are we? So you think OJ was innocent? Perhaps you can dial down the Apple fanboism and recognize the frivolity of these types of lawsuits.

So, Samsung is innocent just as OJ is guilty? All juries are incompetent? Trials are a waste of time?

What exactly is your complaint? That the jury got it wrong? Fine, there are appeals to be had and Samsung will avail itself of all of them. But so far all you have is your opinion that the jury was wrong, without any evidence. Well, you did cite the OJ precedent, so there is something...

Funny that you mention fanboism. Most comments are blind defense of Samsung. All Apple is doing is asking for its day in court to prove a *claim*. All the commenter want Apple to leave poor little Samsung alone, because....GOOGLE!

Take your own advice.

 

[brazuca]

h4ng0ver[/url]":37op58a4]Apple exploits tax loopholes to save billions in tax.
Apple, Samsung, Google, Microsoft, etc. exploits the US patent system to hamstring competitions.
Apple, Samsung, Google, Microsoft, etc. exploits cheap labor in China.
Apple, Samsung, Google, Microsoft, etc. exploits iSheeps to pay overpriced shiny gadgets.

What else is new?

FTFY

The difference between Apple's patent assertions are that they are basic patents (and trade dress). Google and Samsung are using Standard Essential Patents that they are required to offer a license for, to drive a competitor out of business.

But it's ok, right? It's Google and Samsung. They are the good guys!!

Any holder of a non-SEP has no obligation to license. None. It's their own government granted monopoly for having invented the thing/method/crap. All one can do it work around, prove non-infringement, or invalidity.

edit: clarification

 

[brazuca]

DannyB[/url]":3edxohz7]

WaltC[/url]":3edxohz7]

...$1.05 billion verdict in favor of Apple.

No matter how many times you say this, it won't change the fact that the above award was vacated... That's a fact worth checking, wouldn't you say?

Also several of those "infringed" patents were invalidated. The patent was invalid and should never have been granted.

But it's like talking to a stone wall.

I find it ironic that Apple's 1985 Lemmings commercial with the lemmings all marching single file and falling over the cliff now perfectly describes Apple fanboys.

Also Apple's 1984 commercial is now ironic. Apple has become the very thing it hated thirty years ago.

Which is why there are appeals to the process. What is your complaint again?

Apple held a *then valid* patent. Sued for infringment. Won.

If the patent is after the fact declared invalid, then appeals can reverse this.

Is your point that Apple should never assert its patents because maybe they might be declared invalid sometime? Should they just assume that all its patents are invalid.

And what about trade dress? Can they defend that? Or should Apple not be allowed to have that in your non-1984 world or immense justice?

ps: Android is the new windows. Google is the new MS. The lemmings are all going in that direction.

 

[GenocideOwl]

Could you imagine this type of litigation and patent environment when other industries started up big?
Like imagine how drastically different the motor vehicle revolution would have been if 4 wheels was patented. Or having a windshield.... seat belts....a circular driving mechanism....ability to shift up!
this stuff is just ridiculous.

 

[bettercitizens]

DannyB[/url]":15pj1wh7]

WaltC[/url]":15pj1wh7]

...$1.05 billion verdict in favor of Apple.

No matter how many times you say this, it won't change the fact that the above award was vacated... That's a fact worth checking, wouldn't you say?

Also several of those "infringed" patents were invalidated. The patent was invalid and should never have been granted.

But it's like talking to a stone wall.

I find it ironic that Apple's 1985 Lemmings commercial with the lemmings all marching single file and falling over the cliff now perfectly describes Apple fanboys.

Also Apple's 1984 commercial is now ironic. Apple has become the very thing it hated thirty years ago.

There are no "Apple fanboys". There are people who use tools that are bought from Apple and people who use tools that are bought from other companies like Samsung. As the old adage goes, modified somewhat - "it's not the tool, but how you use it".

How do you know that Apple hates itself. Apple wanted to bring computing to the masses with the Mac - they did not. They have done that to a large degree with iOS devices and the backend services like iTunes and the App store that are the real power behind those devices.

Many of the attributes that Jef Raskin envisioned the original Mac, such as low cost, ease of use, etc. have been brought to iOS and also to Android devices.

Regardless of your tool of choice we should all be rejoicing that many of the concepts that go back to Vannevar Bush in his article "As We May Think" (see: http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/arc ... nk/303881/ ) and Xerox PARC, etc. can now be held in the palm of your hand! To me that is amazing!

 

[brazuca]

GenocideOwl[/url]":2p0p9jin]Could you imagine this type of litigation and patent environment when other industries started up big?
Like imagine how drastically different the motor vehicle revolution would have been if 4 wheels was patented. Or having a windshield.... seat belts....a circular driving mechanism....ability to shift up!
this stuff is just ridiculous.

At the onset of the PC "revolution", patents played a big role. Apple sued MS and lost because, IIRC, the judge found that a previous agreement gave MS the right to use Apple IP.

This is nothing new and the industry has been thriving ever since.

 

[GenocideOwl]

There are no "Apple fanboys".

 

[bettercitizens]

brazuca[/url]":13w7vmv0]

h4ng0ver[/url]":13w7vmv0]Apple exploits tax loopholes to save billions in tax.
Apple, Samsung, Google, Microsoft, etc. exploits the US patent system to hamstring competitions.
Apple, Samsung, Google, Microsoft, etc. exploits cheap labor in China.
Apple, Samsung, Google, Microsoft, etc. exploits iSheeps to pay overpriced shiny gadgets.

What else is new?

FTFY

The difference between Apple's patent assertions are that they are basic patents (and trade dress). Google and Samsung are using Standard Essential Patents that they are required to offer a license for, to drive a competitor out of business.

But it's ok, right? It's Google and Samsung. They are the good guys!!

Any holder of a non-SEP has no obligation to license. None. It's their own government granted monopoly for having invented the thing/method/crap. All one can do it work around, prove non-infringement, or invalidity.

edit: clarification

Standards essential patents have to be offered under FRAND terms. Samsung tried to use some standard essential patents in an Apple suit in Europe and it was tossed out.

Yes non SEP patents do not have to be licensed out. It is up to the patent holder, and remember the patent was not free - the patent holder had to invest capital to create the patent, to license or not. These are the terms granted for non-SEP patents.

 

[samuraidrive]

Is your point that Apple should never assert its patents because maybe they might be declared invalid sometime? Should they just assume that all its patents are invalid.

They could spend all that money on innovating the next big thing, but I guess that's too simple. Remember when Apple was different? Remember when they were the best smartphone manufacturer?

Long gone are the days of the "Gotta have an Apple" mentality.

 

[JamesKPolkEsq]

Apple is trying to get the trial appeals process over and done with before the patent reexamination appeals are finalized. One set of patents, the so called "Steve Jobs Patents" concerning multitouch, were declared invalid in a final USPTO office action. Another patent set was ruled preliminarily invalid by the USPTO.

The real game is to get the trial appeals over with before the patent reexaminations plus all its appeals are finished, because, as Apple itself states, if a final invalidity ruling arrives after the appeals process is over, it doesn't "disturb an earlier final court judgment awarding damages for past infringement of those claims."

It wants the damages trial to happen right away, so that the appeals process can get going quickly, to try to beat the timeline on the USPTO findings of invalidity. That way, even if the patents are ultimately found to be indeed invalid, Samsung will still have to pay the damages the deluded earlier jury set.

This is not Apple trying to "protect its IP". This is patent troll behavior at its absolute worst.

 

[bettercitizens]

SgtCupCake[/url]":2ihfegia]

brazuca[/url]":2ihfegia]

SgtCupCake[/url]":2ihfegia]

brazuca[/url]":2ihfegia]

bettercitizens[/url]":2ihfegia]

john82[/url]":2ihfegia]I feel like the general reader opinion has shifted from apple fanboyism to reason, based on most of these comments. Maybe I'm remembering wrong, but I think when apple vs samsung law suite first reared its ugly head more people were saying shame on samsung for copying apple.

All of the comments that have been generated since Steve Jobs stated that he was going thermonuclear on the patents are meaningless. What matters is the basis of the arguments of Apple Inc. and Samsung in court. Apple did win the recent lawsuit and initially $1.05 Billion. However that was later reduced.

Quick correction: it was not reduced. Some part of it was remanded for a new damages trial. The outcome will determine if the amount is reduced, maintained, or increased.

Regardless of the amount, the trial proved that Samsung infringed. That is beyond dispute.

Trials prove that juries are dumb and easily manipulated.

As opposed to the vast wisdom of this forum....

Even witch hunts had some rules. I mean, you had to prove that the woman weighted as much as a duck before you could burn her....

Lol, defending juries are we? So you think OJ was innocent? Perhaps you can dial down the Apple fanboism and recognize the frivolity of these types of lawsuits.

It does not matter if we think OJ was innocent in the "trial of the century" or not. He was acquitted by a jury of his "peers" and due to double jeopardy cannot be tried again. Closed and shut. Of course the subsequent robbery and kidnapping conviction in Vegas was hilarious.

Finally it does not matter if we think these lawsuits are frivolous or not. Apple, Inc. has basis or they think they have basis to sue and they lay out the arguments and thats it.

 

[bettercitizens]

JamesKPolkEsq[/url]":3odzo699]Apple is trying to get the trial appeals process over and done with before the patent reexamination appeals are finalized. One set of patents, the so called "Steve Jobs Patents" concerning multitouch, were declared invalid in a final USPTO office action. Another patent set was ruled preliminarily invalid by the USPTO.

The real game is to get the trial appeals over with before the patent reexaminations plus all its appeals are finished, because, as Apple itself states, if a final invalidity ruling arrives after the appeals process is over, it doesn't "disturb an earlier final court judgment awarding damages for past infringement of those claims."

It wants the damages trial to happen right away, so that the appeals process can get going quickly, to try to beat the timeline on the USPTO findings of invalidity. That way, even if the patents are ultimately found to be indeed invalid, Samsung will still have to pay the damages the deluded earlier jury set.

This is not Apple trying to "protect its IP". This is patent troll behavior at its absolute worst.

Interesting thesis, can you add some links that provide supporting evidence? What if the asserted Apple patents are held to be valid?

If this is patent troll behaviour at its worst what about Samsung trying to assert standards essential patents (SEP) that HAVE to be licensed under FRAND terms in a case in Europe against Apple. The case was tossed. It seems like that is worse patent trollery. See: http://www.fosspatents.com/2011/10/sams ... apple.html

 

[The Tick077]

bettercitizens[/url]":v77x7w9z]

JamesKPolkEsq[/url]":v77x7w9z]Apple is trying to get the trial appeals process over and done with before the patent reexamination appeals are finalized. One set of patents, the so called "Steve Jobs Patents" concerning multitouch, were declared invalid in a final USPTO office action. Another patent set was ruled preliminarily invalid by the USPTO.

The real game is to get the trial appeals over with before the patent reexaminations plus all its appeals are finished, because, as Apple itself states, if a final invalidity ruling arrives after the appeals process is over, it doesn't "disturb an earlier final court judgment awarding damages for past infringement of those claims."

It wants the damages trial to happen right away, so that the appeals process can get going quickly, to try to beat the timeline on the USPTO findings of invalidity. That way, even if the patents are ultimately found to be indeed invalid, Samsung will still have to pay the damages the deluded earlier jury set.

This is not Apple trying to "protect its IP". This is patent troll behavior at its absolute worst.

Interesting thesis, can you add some links that provide supporting evidence? What if the asserted Apple patents are held to be valid?

If this is patent troll behaviour at its worst what about Samsung trying to assert standards essential patents (SEP) that HAVE to be licensed under FRAND terms in a case in Europe against Apple. The case was tossed. It seems like that is worse patent trollery. See: http://www.fosspatents.com/2011/10/sams ... apple.html

Now, I can't remember if it was this case (and my work blocks your link) or a Moto vs APPL or Moto vs MS case or what, but didn't the company holding the SEP patent's offer to license it to APPL and they refused to pay? What recourse does the company holding the SEP have at that point other than to sue? If the other company refuses to license the patent at the rate that is standard, how can you enforce your patent if you can't sue them?

What is crazy to me is that a rubber band effect is worth more than an essential technology used to make the phone work in the first place - especially if it is worth $0 since there is no way to get $ out of a company that doesn't want to pay.

 

[JamesKPolkEsq]

bettercitizens[/url

Interesting thesis, can you add some links that provide supporting evidence? What if the asserted Apple patents are held to be valid?

http://www.groklaw.net/pdf4/ApplevSamsung-2291-1.pdf

The '381 patent in question's invalidation documentation. Claim 19 was the "rubber-banding" patent. Claims 14, 17, and 18 survived, but none of those claims are germaine to the suit against Samsung.

http://www.groklaw.net/pdf4/ApplevSamsung-2308.pdf

From the Apple's response to Samsung's statement regarding patents in reexamination: "The Federal Circuit has indicated that, under its precedent, subsequent cancellation of claims in a reexamination does not disturb an earlier final court judgment awarding damages for past infringement of those claims". Apple's own lawyer's words.

 

[tetracycloide]

brazuca[/url]":2uzx5gkw]
But the verdict stands: Samsung was found to infringe.

Not exactly:

This award cannot stand.

That's sort of the opposite of 'the verdict stands' really.

 

[Satori]

I put it to you that there is something worse than a patent-troll, a patent-abuser.

On the bright side, if the courts find in favor of Apple, damages will be paid in the US which will finally result in some tax from Apple.

What a bunch of prats.

 

[carldjennings]

nibb[/url]":1ftivi3b]The problem is not Apple or Samsung. Its the patent system.

Has someone read this patents?

This is so broad that it applies to everything. TV, Radio, Every Single computer or Internet services, you name it. Even Google can be sued for this patent. Apple can sue the entire computer industry and planet earth with something like this. This is just plain ridiculous, that this patents are approved.

Lets paste it here:
The present invention provides convenient access to items of information that are related to various descriptors input by a user, by means of a unitary interface which is capable of accessing information in a variety of locations, through a number of different techniques. Using a plurality of heuristic algorithms to operate upon information descriptors input by the user, the present invention locates and displays candidate items of information for selection and/or retrieval. Thus, the advantages of a search engine can be exploited, while listing only relevant object candidate items of information.

So all Google Now has to do is throw in something irrelevant, and it's off the hook?

 

[carldjennings]

mrscrib[/url]":368vkme6]

Shudder[/url]":368vkme6]

nibb[/url]":368vkme6]

The present invention provides convenient access to items of information that are related to various descriptors input by a user, by means of a unitary interface which is capable of accessing information in a variety of locations, through a number of different techniques. Using a plurality of heuristic algorithms to operate upon information descriptors input by the user, the present invention locates and displays candidate items of information for selection and/or retrieval. Thus, the advantages of a search engine can be exploited, while listing only relevant object candidate items of information.

they basically tried to patent thinking. There goes any chance of robots

Thing is, if you squint just right their patent application resembles what happens when a teacher asks his students to do research. Thinking and learning as it's done by humans. So they've patented basic human thought.

First they win against Samsung, setting a precedent, then they take every man, woman and child in America to court. After all, Americans are so special that they can afford to pay a company for the privilege to think.

No, they'll just claim ownership of every idea from this point forward.