Apple wins injunction against Motorola in Germany over photo gallery patent

2»

Comments

  • tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 40,863member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sranger View Post


    Google has already fixed this in the latest OS....



    Shame that brand new Android devices don't run the latest OS, then, isn't it?
  • Quote:
    Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post


    Wake me when there's a knockout blow against Motorola.



    Wake me up when a Thermonuclear Bomb is used against Android.
  • hill60hill60 Posts: 6,974member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    There was more involved than just the patents.



    - Google would get $3 B in accumulated losses, reducing the purchase price by that amount

    - Access to the set top box market. Google was not particularly successful with the Google TV, so this gets them access to the entire TV market

    - Other electronic devices. I could picture Android on your home phone or electronic home control devices and a small touch screen.



    Granted, I don't think it was a great idea (with the main problem being that Google would be competing with its customers and customers would have every reason to find an alternative, including branching Android), but there are plausible explanations.



    Don't forget Motorola was also threatening to sue other Android OEM's, leaving Google no real choice.
  • srangersranger Posts: 469member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    Shame that brand new Android devices don't run the latest OS, then, isn't it?



    It has already been fixed in previous versions as well.... They will need to be pushed out by the carriers however, to get around the ruling...
  • tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 40,863member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sranger View Post


    It has already been fixed in previous versions as well....



    Then how could this suit possibly have been valid?
  • jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    Then how could this suit possibly have been valid?



    Because:



    1. Apple can still sue for past infringement.

    2. Fixing it in the latest OS isn't that helpful when the vast majority of Android devices on the market still run the older version.
  • macky the mackymacky the macky Posts: 4,623member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post


    Wake me when there's a knockout blow against Motorola.



    It seems like Apple is beating Android manufacturers with Nerf bats until they just holler "Uncle!" Same end result.
  • macky the mackymacky the macky Posts: 4,623member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hill60 View Post


    Don't forget Motorola was also threatening to sue other Android OEM's, leaving Google no real choice.



    The whole story of why Google overpaid for Motorola may be complex, or Google just may have "dun goofed" and overpaid. Either way, they broke their piggy bank and gained a lot of stuff not central to their core business. The more Google defocuses the more they will miss their earnings goals.



    Unlike Apple, HP and Google went shopping to cut a fat hog and ended up being the fat hog themselves. If the ITC would allow it, Google itself could be an Apple acquisition target. That way Apple can have the search and mapping programs they have wanted, and get the satisfaction of burying Andriod alive.
  • srangersranger Posts: 469member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    Then how could this suit possibly have been valid?



    It has been fixed in current Google Android source for older platforms like Gingerbread. However this version has not been officially released by Motorola. So even though there is a work around in the latest source for that platform, it has not been applied to current stock....
  • powermachpowermach Posts: 90member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sranger View Post


    It has already been fixed in previous versions as well.... They will need to be pushed out by the carriers however, to get around the ruling...



    As I recall, in the Samsung lawsuit last year the judge found that 3.0 Honeycomb was not infringing. (2.3 was) Now...which phones run 3.0 or 4.0? Not which phones technically could run 3 or 4...which ones on which carriers actually are running official releases?



    edit: Android 2.3.6: the Pinch & Zoom feature is gone from the Gallery, but that feature was a precursor to the patent above
  • wakefinancewakefinance Posts: 855member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by PowerMach View Post


    As I recall, in the Samsung lawsuit last year the judge found that 3.0 Honeycomb was not infringing. (2.3 was) Now...which phones run 3.0 or 4.0? Not which phones technically could run 3 or 4...which ones on which carriers actually are running official releases?



    edit: Android 2.3.6: the Pinch & Zoom feature is gone from the Gallery, but that feature was a precursor to the patent above



    The only phones currently running 4.0.x are Nexus phones; most recent tablets are on ICS as well.



    Pinch to zoom has not been removed from the gallery.
  • tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 40,863member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wakefinance View Post


    Pinch to zoom has not been removed from the gallery.



    That's not the patent, as far as we can tell. It's the ability to go to the next image in a gallery while being zoomed in on the current one.
  • absolutedesignzabsolutedesignz Posts: 1,930member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    That's not the patent, as far as we can tell. It's the ability to go to the next image in a gallery while being zoomed in on the current one.



    if that's the case that explains why other tech sites have headlines like:



    "APPLE WINS INJUNCTION AGAINST MOTOROLA DEVICES IN GERMANY!!!...Motrola sighs nonchalantly."
  • mechanicmechanic Posts: 803member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    I? think we're talking about an implementation thereof and not the concept itself. I'm not sure, though. Patentese is, by design, difficult to read.



    Oh, wait, no, it's gallery, so I think it's the means by which gallery navigation is undertaken, not pinch to zoom at all.



    Here's the relevant part, I think.







    If i understand what mueller said it is the way you can flip thru pictures by swiping your finger that is what this patent is.

    The apple patent he is talking about on his own phone that was won against samsung is the bounce at the end of the list feature.
  • hmmhmm Posts: 3,387member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by monstrosity View Post


    Hooray!



    Does this site really need more biased trolling (I don't care who it favors).



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    No, of course not. It's just the means by which it's done.



    the article doesn't explain much on that.

    ------------ end comment response----------





    This article is once again trash . The link references recall or destruction, which is pretty excessive. It does not in any way suggest that they could force destruction of something that could be worked around in software. Some of you just get excited way too easily over idiotic corporate litigation (again speaking of all parties here.
  • jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Goodbye, Moto.
  • wakefinancewakefinance Posts: 855member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    That's not the patent, as far as we can tell. It's the ability to go to the next image in a gallery while being zoomed in on the current one.



    I'm well aware of that. I explained the patent in my first post in the thread. I was responding to the poster who claimed that pinch to zoom had been removed as of 2.3.6.
  • powermachpowermach Posts: 90member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wakefinance View Post


    I'm well aware of that. I explained the patent in my first post in the thread. I was responding to the poster who claimed that pinch to zoom had been removed as of 2.3.6.



    Yes, I know what this dispute was about (method of displaying/navigating the photo gallery and the actions thereof).



    I guess I mistook the issues with the 2.3.6 update disabling pinch to zoom for Nexus One phones as not a bug, but a planned event. Google (or Bing if you like): 2.3.6 pinch to zoom. Apparently it was a bug.
Sign In or Register to comment.