Apple earns 'huge win' against Samsung on rubber banding patent
Key aspects of Apple's so-called "rubber banding" patent related to scrolling in iOS have been validated by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, marking a major victory for the company in its ongoing patent dispute against Samsung.
Illustration of Apple's "rubber-banding" patent. | Source: USPTO
Apple informed U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh on Thursday that the USPTO will issue a reexamination certificate confirming four key claims of the patent in question, according to intellectual property expert Florian Mueller of FOSS Patents. The certificate will validate significant portions of U.S. Patent No. 7,469,381.
Among the portions confirmed by the USPTO is "claim 19," which Apple successfully leveraged against a number of Samsung products in the two companies' high-profile California trial last year. In that case, the jury sided with Apple and found that Samsung had infringed on its patented inventions.
"As a result of this new reexamination certificate, claim 19 will enjoy an enhanced presumption of validity against the invalidity theories the patent office evaluated," Mueller wrote. "Instead of invalidation in mid-2017 or later, this patent has now been confirmed in mid-2013."
The USPTO had previously tentatively rejected all claims in the patent, including claim 19, but Apple cautioned the court to wait for the process to unfold. The latest USPTO decision was portrayed by Mueller as a "huge win" for Apple, potentially giving the iPhone maker "the upper hand with other key patents it's asserting against Samsung" in both California and at the International Trade Commission.
Apple's so-called "rubber-banding" or scroll bounce-back patent deals with the iOS user interface feature that lets users know when they have reached the bottom of a scrollable page. It has been a key user interface element of Apple's mobile operating system since the launch of the first iPhone in 2007.
Illustration of Apple's "rubber-banding" patent. | Source: USPTO
Apple informed U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh on Thursday that the USPTO will issue a reexamination certificate confirming four key claims of the patent in question, according to intellectual property expert Florian Mueller of FOSS Patents. The certificate will validate significant portions of U.S. Patent No. 7,469,381.
Among the portions confirmed by the USPTO is "claim 19," which Apple successfully leveraged against a number of Samsung products in the two companies' high-profile California trial last year. In that case, the jury sided with Apple and found that Samsung had infringed on its patented inventions.
"As a result of this new reexamination certificate, claim 19 will enjoy an enhanced presumption of validity against the invalidity theories the patent office evaluated," Mueller wrote. "Instead of invalidation in mid-2017 or later, this patent has now been confirmed in mid-2013."
The USPTO had previously tentatively rejected all claims in the patent, including claim 19, but Apple cautioned the court to wait for the process to unfold. The latest USPTO decision was portrayed by Mueller as a "huge win" for Apple, potentially giving the iPhone maker "the upper hand with other key patents it's asserting against Samsung" in both California and at the International Trade Commission.
Apple's so-called "rubber-banding" or scroll bounce-back patent deals with the iOS user interface feature that lets users know when they have reached the bottom of a scrollable page. It has been a key user interface element of Apple's mobile operating system since the launch of the first iPhone in 2007.
Comments
If they are going to enforce these things, which they obviously are, then good for Apple. From my limited understanding of the case, it seems like they should have won.
But the world would be a much easier place if you couldn't patent stuff like this.
As far as patents go, this seems pretty innocuous. Apple did this in a particular way, and there are many good alternatives: no one else needs to do it in exactly the same way. If they do, they're just copying Apple's painting and signing their own name.
You should have just written "What is a patent?" for your post. You'd be saying the same thing.
I'm a happy camper knowing Samsung is getting each finger cut off Yakuza style...
Fandroids take notice. STEALING others' ideas and justifying it makes you just as sad. I'm hoping for a sledgehammer to Samsung's skull next.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wakefinance
I don't understand how this can be patentable. It's a virtual imitation of physics that humans discovered, not invented.
Samsung didn't discover anything and Samsung didn't just accidentally stumble upon rubber banding one day, they stole the idea from Apple.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
You should have just written "What is a patent?" for your post. You'd be saying the same thing.
Quite right. And if you really want a dumpster load of uninformed anti-Apple troll comments, just go to any Apple story on The Verge. Nilay Patel leads the parade of Apple bashers... and he's one of the site's founders!
In fact, on Twitter Jim Dalrymple just retweeted a criticism of Patel's article ("'Can't innovate anymore, my ass': Apple's bravado clouds the company's real challenges") by a guy named @HugoKessler, who said "Wow. The Verge is on fire. Like actually on fire--burning away any last remainder of their reputation away."
Yeah, just look at iOS 7!
- control centre from Android
- task switching from WebOS
- email from BB10
http://blog.inner-active.com/2013/06/here-are-the-things-apple-totally-ripped-off-from-competitors-for-ios-7/
So before you berate Android for copying, your precious Apple is doing the same thing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnbiasedDave
...
So before you berate Android for copying, your precious Apple is doing the same thing.
Thought experiments:
• iOS 7 today if Android didn't exist. What would it look like? How would it work? How good would it be? How quickly would it have advanced?
• And Android today if iOS didn't exist. What would it look like? How would it work? How good would it be? How quickly would it have advanced?
• Is all "copying" the same? Is copying a lot the same as copying a little? Is doing something second, the same as illegal patent? Are all patent suits the same?
• Control Center. Seems a lot like 1984 Mac OS. Did Android steal it?
• Trolling. Does it somehow affect sales? Does it somehow affect users?
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnbiasedDave
"Fandroids take notice. STEALING others' ideas and justifying it makes you just as sad. I'm hoping for a sledgehammer to Samsung's skull next."
Yeah, just look at iOS 7!
- control centre from Android
- task switching from WebOS
- email from BB10
http://blog.inner-active.com/2013/06/here-are-the-things-apple-totally-ripped-off-from-competitors-for-ios-7/
So before you berate Android for copying, your precious Apple is doing the same thing.
Dave, you're biased.
Besides, although you were responding to an inaccurate claim neither Apple, nor Samsung can be penalized for "stealing ideas". Samsung is and was infringing on Apple's patents.
To be clear... "IDEAS" ARE NOT PATENTS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nagromme
Thought experiments:
• iOS 7 today if Android didn't exist. What would it look like? How would it work? How good would it be? How quickly would it have advanced?
• And Android today if iOS didn't exist. What would it look like? How would it work? How good would it be? How quickly would it have advanced?
• Is all "copying" the same? Is copying a lot the same as copying a little? Is doing something second, the same as illegal patent? Are all patent suits the same?
• Control Center. Seems a lot like 1984 Mac OS. Did Android steal it?
• Trolling. Does it somehow affect sales? Does it somehow affect users?
Android would not even exist if it weren't for the iPhone.
I don't mind the biased accusation, I own an iPhone 5, a Android HTC One, A BB Q10 and a Lumia 920 (benefits of writing software for multiple platforms).
They all have good points, and bad points. They have ideas from other platforms, and some are original.
My response was based on the statement that a sizeable set of Apple fans seem to think Samsung/Android have stolen *everything* from iOS. While there's certainly some truth in that accusation, it's also true that in technology everyone's as bad as each other.
iOS just shows that Apple aren't above using other ideas and making them better. It's just hypocritical to complain and sue on one side, but also take good ideas and pass them as yours on the other.
Apple bought a boatload of PalmOS patents in April. I wonder if they included the task switcher.
No one gives a frick.
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnbiasedDave
I don't mind the biased accusation, I own an iPhone 5, a Android HTC One, A BB Q10 and a Lumia 920 (benefits of writing software for multiple platforms).
They all have good points, and bad points. They have ideas from other platforms, and some are original.
My response was based on the statement that a sizeable set of Apple fans seem to think Samsung/Android have stolen *everything* from iOS. While there's certainly some truth in that accusation, it's also true that in technology everyone's as bad as each other.
iOS just shows that Apple aren't above using other ideas and making them better. It's just hypocritical to complain and sue on one side, but also take good ideas and pass them as yours on the other.
Once more, all together now... "IDEAS" ARE NOT PATENTS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rayz
Apple bought a boatload of PalmOS patents in April. I wonder if they included the task switcher.
I missed that story! Apparently critics of iOS 7 functionality must've missed it also.
http://japandailypress.com/apple-acquires-palm-patents-from-japans-access-co-for-10m-1126778
So where are those patents...
http://entertainment.slashdot.org/story/13/02/25/1747201/lg-acquires-webos-source-code-and-patents-from-hp
I would imagine HP held onto them and only recently sold them to LG.
Anyway, the task switching system is the same as Windows Phone 8, just with the additional ability to close apps. What'll be interesting to see is if in iOS 7 apps can still run in the background, or whether or not they'll be tombstoned.
Appreciate the link. I missed it too. As the article said, no way this would have happened a couple years ago.