Apple files countersuit against Nokia - Page 2

Very. Now that a bunch of patents are all are down on the table Nokia can see Apple may be able to make it very difficult to do a smartphone, something I believe they thought was unlikely originally. Apple has already seen Nokia can try to make it very difficult to make a phone at all. For either company to be successful it will cost A LOT, probably more than licensing given the suit-countersuit.

It's all a dance done with lawyers as the instruments and if both sides can play a meaningful tune to the others ears, cross-licensing is the settlement of least risk.

because apple has never given YOU anything for me, means the same as Apple never gives anything for free...more hyperbolic rhetoric.

The artists are from multiple studios: American Gramaphone, Sony/BMG, Universal… that's just the first three tracks I bothered to check. And the album is copyrighted by Apple, meaning they compiled the sampler.

Whether or not they were given permission to give away the tracks by each of the studios, labels, or artists, Apple created the sampler and is distributing it, therefore Apple is giving it away for free.

Explain the article on CNN on the beginnings of multi touch and the final product used by CNN everday?

The Inventor Behind CNN's Magic Wall
http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/11/04/magic.wall/

Why has Apple not sued Microsoft for Surface which pre-dates the Magic Wall Concept by a decade?

Quote from Wikipedia
"The technology behind Surface is called multi-touch and has at least a 25-year history,[7] beginning in 1982, with pioneering work being done at the University of Toronto (multi-touch tablets) and Bell Labs (multi-touch screens). The product idea for Surface was initially conceptualized in 2001 by Steven Bathiche of Microsoft Hardware and Andy Wilson of Microsoft Research.[8]

In October 2001, a virtual team was formed with Bathiche and Wilson as key members, to bring the idea to the next stage of development."

Link
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Surface

Yeah, that's a real puzzler. Hundreds of thousands of dollars of inventory in a busy retail environment with a wide open exit (without even a door at most Apple stores). Hmm, why would they be interested in monitoring what people are doing.

Dude- I never said that wasn't the FIRST item free from Apple- can't you read????? I said it was the only free item from Apple.
How many times do you need to be corrected? Jeeesh!! And I'm an idiot- HA!

for a product that is no way mobile and requires a "XGA DLP projector underneath the surface which projects an image onto its underside, while four cameras in the machine's housing record reflections of infrared light from objects and human fingertips on the surface".....

might as well have called it the Microsoft Brick Wall, Microsoft Stationary Kiosk.. its great if you want to wheel around a large table with a generator in tow. it does not surprise me this is the smallest form factor multi touch device they can build... Whats the cost 10K....you will sell a lot of those...maybe in twenty years, when microsoft can build an xbox without a 60% failure rate they will be able to shrink their products into a usable device that does not require heavy metal brackets and solid oak furniture to be used....

Stay with me here:

Apple sells music and video material at their iTunes store. Apple gets a cut of the sale, and the label/artist gets a cut. Apple provides the software, tech support, advertising, storage, electricity, and network bandwidth required to fulfill the purchase. Those components all cost money.

If Apple then offers material for people to download for free, they are assuming all the associated costs necessary to do so. Apple is GIVING YOU ALL OF THAT, FOR FREE.

You continue to waste everyone's time with your willful stupidity. Either that or you are simply a forum troll, and seek some perverse pleasure with your incessant mosquito bites attempting to point out some pedantic technicality or a trivial weakness of Apple and their products. You are the noise to everyone else's signal. You now have a post count exceeding 6400, of which the vast majority are childish one-liners seeking a response just for the sake of provocation. There are many people who have expressed exasperation or outright disgust with your antics. It's not just me.

Don't you think it's time for a little introspection?

Mulit Touch is Multi Touch. Answer the question without pulling the norm on this forum and bashing Microsoft.

If these articles are true and I have no reason to believe they are not then Apple Did Not invent Multi Touch.

They copied Microsoft. What's Quadra's favorite saying. Start the copiers.

Thank you for that, Angus

most things are invented at universities and licensed out to corporations. very few companies do any kind of real research anymore and Apple is not one of them

most patents don't mean anything these days and are used for defensive litigation

Here is the problem I see, yes Apple is using GSM technology in the iphone, they have to if they want to work on the world GSM networks. Maybe Nokia in fact has patents on that technology, but those patent most likely would only apply to the chip sets Apples is using since apple did not develop the chip set. That means the company who is infringing is the chip set manufactures. I would also assume that since GSM is a standard all the company to help developed the technology had cross licenses all their IP so all the network equipment and phones will work together, otherwise it is not a standard.

The only thing I could image where Apple might have infringed on the standard technology is their software stack that interfaces with the chip set, Nokia my have come up with unique ways to make their phones work better with the chip sets. Or that as part of buying the chip set they are required to license various technologies form other companies to make it work. Again the chip set manufacture has the responsibility to let Apple know this and they are usually pretty good doing the right things.

If Apple used a software stack that Nokie patented, Nokia would have to show it was the exact code or method they developed and patented which means they somehow got hold of apples software and was able to back it down.

It will be interesting to see how it all fall out, right now you have 13 patents to 10 so Apple is winning in that sense. An most likely they have a stronger case since their patents are on the UI and implementation of their technology not a standard, so it proprietary and they do not license their patents. This the reason apple these days it patenting everything, the more patents they walk into court with the stronger their case becomes.

Most like this will be settle behind close doors since neither side wants to loose in court.

Generally speaking big company do not sue other big companies since there is too much to loose by both, since the last thing you want to do is have the court decide your patents are not valid due to prior artwork or that it did not meet the requirement of being unique and any engineer with the same knowledge and experience would have come to the same solutions.

Most Patent lawsuits are filled by companies which have nothing to loose like these no name companies who do not make a product. This is why big companies usually do not win since the no name company does not make anything and the larger company can not use their patents against them like apple is doing here.

Much like every other company in the world - buy up the small guy and extend the use of what you bought.

Not a problem.

Right and when an label wants to give a new artist for free they pay Apple for it not the other way around. Dude - you need to diagnose your own lack of comprehension. Really, Seriously. Unless you're just daft.
You still fail to prove your claims.

This post is the source of the problem. Jerseymac, please provide a citation where Apple 'claimed to have invented' multi-touch.

All rebuttals are irrelevant until that claim can be verified.

Microsoft doesn't sell a lot of things to end users. most of their customers are large companies. Microsoft invents a lot of things and licenses them out to other companies. Apple and Google pay a lot of licensing fees to Microsoft

I can only assume they are. I think someone mentioned above that Apple bought the company that owned the patents for it.

exactly how did apple copy a XGA DLP projector underneath the surface which projects an image onto its underside, while four cameras in the machine's housing record reflections of infrared light from objects and human fingertips on the surface...?

and put it into a tiny little thing like the Iphone...its not even close to the same...Microsoft's Surface is equivalent to those DIY touch surfaces you can find on youtube....LOL

http://www.slashgear.com/diy-multito...orial-0740400/ which you can really build yourself.. i would like to see someone DIY a multi-touch iphone that is not the size of a shoebox...don't get me wrong...its not impossible...but not as nearly as plausible as building a DIY surface...so 25 years and its 4x the size of modern TV...

hmmm, wanna try another comparison?

Provide proof for that assertion.

And Apple still provides at their own cost software, tech support, advertising, storage, electricity, and network bandwidth. For FREE to you.

Do you really want to keep this going? Is nothing sinking in?

yea expensive and pointless piece of tech that would have been better suited to vaporware. once again what's it good for...

a showpiece in the middle of large corporate office to show they support over-priced unpractical technology practices, instead of investing their money and effort to wiser endeavors?

Does the D in Dlux stand for Desperation?
You're grasping at straws now, you've sunk to an even lower level than I could ever imagine! I feel so bad you've come to this!

I really do. Take a deep breath - it will pass

Go troll somewhere else, we are getting quite bored of your stupid posts.

... just consider the possible outcome of this.

Multi-touch vs GSM? Both seem like bargaining tools from either side to be honest. Apple's issues with Nokia/GSM get resolved quite nicely, and Nokia gets to use multi-touch on its phones (arguably, the "rotate to zoom" on the N900 is already in violation of the patent). I wonder how long these proceedings will drag out for?

Now, more witty slurs towards our least favourite companies?

Take a deep breath and step away from the keyoard. You will do yourself a big favour, because you look like a complete ass with your brainless posts.

Reported as trolling.

you really are a glutton for punishment...

Trolling? Don't read them. Apple hasn't denied they stole from Noklia -they just countered with their own claim. And stating that is trolling?

Apple's implementation of multi-touch . . . is Apple's implementation of multi-touch. Apple didn't patent multi-touch, but only an implementation of it. It is Apple's right bring a claim against anyone who uses that same implementation.

As for who invented multi-touch . . . who gives a sweet damn?? All I care about is that I have an impementation of it that works beautifully. Apple pioneered multi-touch on a smartphone. Their specific implementation of it, which happens to be what everyone else wants to emulate (or steal.) If it's patented by Apple then that's all that really matters.

I was point blank called "an idiot" and I should be banned? Not cool and bad logic.

Teckstud simply wants attention, hence his high post count. It's an unfortunately common behavior:

Troll
(Internet) A person who posts to a newsgroup, bulletin board, etc., in a way intended to anger other posters and to cause drama, or otherwise disrupt the group's intended purpose.

Attention whore
(Internet) Someone who craves attention and is not above soliciting it via deliberately meaningless or provocative tactics.



Since he makes it extremely difficult to ignore his posts, our only recourse is to report him to AppleInsider. It is in their interests to keep these forums informative, pleasant, and useful, and teckstud's behavior works against that.

To report his posts simply click the red exclamation mark under his name and then enter 'Trolling' as the reason. Do that as often as required. He's dragging everyone else down with his selfish antics.

This is the patent version of Mutually Assured Destruction. It's why companies like Apple file for so many patents. Just like the US/USSR built far more nuclear weapons than they ever really needed. Just view this like the Cuban missile crisis. Both sides likely have far more to lose if someone pulls the trigger. In the end, they will likely find a compromise that avoids an all-out courtroom battle. The Soviet Union removes their missiles from Cuba, and the US removes their missles from Italy and Turkey (a fact most Americans aren't aware of because we like to think that Khrushchev blinked and went running home with his tale between his legs).


It depends if you are saying "multi-touch" in the generic sense or in reference to a specific implementation of it. You can't patent the idea of using multiple points of contact to manipulate items on the screen (or should shouldn't be able to). You CAN patent the implementation of HOW you do that. There are multiple ways of accomplishing it, and each could be an independently patentable technology.

http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost...1&postcount=48


Quote:
Through the present suit, Nokia has asserted unfounded claims of infringement and breached licensing commitments it made to license on F/RAND [Fair, Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory] terms all patents that it claimed were necessary for a party to practice standards. Nokia has also violated those licensing commitments by demanding unjustifiable royalties and reciprocal licenses to Apple's patents covering Apple's pioneering technology -- patents unrelated to any industry standard. This attempt by Nokia to leverage patents previously pledged to industry standards is an effort to free ride on the commercial success of Apple's innovative iPhone while avoiding liability for copying the iPhone and infringing Apple's patents.

Apple denies that any of Nokia's patents cited in its own lawsuit are "essential" to standards, but even if a court should rule any of the contested claims valid, Apple should be granted F/RAND licensing terms, which Nokia has refused to offer.

In support of its claims that Nokia has already copied iPhone intellectual property, Apple points to comments made by a Nokia executive soon after the launch of the original iPhone highlighting Nokia's interest in copying Apple's inventions.

The above is the most crucial bit about this report. Basically, if a company invents and patents technology which is essential to establishing a standard (such as GSM), then that company is obliged to offer it on F/RAND [Fair, Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory] terms.

Apple is saying that Nokia is going beyond the commitment it gave and wants to charge Apple more than it charges others who make use of the same technology. In addition, Nokia is also asking for "unjustifiable royalties and reciprocal licenses to Apple's patents covering Apple's pioneering technology".

So Apple is quite right to not only defend itself but also go on a counter-attack because Nokia has violated Apple's IP.

it was already used to provide security for the last superbowl

I don't care the means in which it is accomplished. The posters were claiming that Apple invented mult touch gesture related input to a computer devise.

They did not.

Android has multi touch without Pinch and Zoom
Palm Pre has multi thouch with Pinch and Zoom. Whey haven't they been sued?

I was referring to the keynote speech where Jobs introduced the iPhone. I think the quote went something like this:

"We've invented a new technology called multi touch that works like magic. And boy, have we patented it."

No he's saying ATM screens aren't multi-touch.

And then haven't (yet) supplied a source or citation.

EDIT: (Jerseymac's post slipped in while I was composing that)


I haven't reviewed the video itself, but did Jobs explicitly state that Apple 'invented multitouch'? As I recall, he showed off the overall capabilities of the device, and then quipped, "And boy, have we patented it." That statement could refer to any number of underlying technologies, not necessarily 'multi-touch' itself (however it might be defined).

Can you pinch/zoom on an ATM screen, anywhere on the screen?

I admit, I haven't tried that yet.

It seems to me many of these infringements apply to every iPhone wannabe out there from Pre to Blackberry.