or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › ITC reviewing Apple patent victory over HTC
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

ITC reviewing Apple patent victory over HTC

post #1 of 101
Thread Starter 
The U.S. International Trade Commission announced this week its intention to review a judge's ruling that Taiwanese handset maker HTC had infringed on two of Apple's patents, with a final decision scheduled to arrive by Dec. 6.

The decision comes after both Apple and HTC petitioned for a review of the July 15 ruling from an administrative law judge. HTC asked the commission to review the two patents that it had been found to have violated, while Apple requested that two other patents be reexamined.

The ITC agreed to review 16 issues across the four patents in question, requesting additional information on five questions from both companies. Though the review could put HTC at greater risk, since the final result could side even more with Apple, patent expert Florian Mueller believes the likelihood of that happening is less than 20 percent.

Mueller went on to state his position that HTC stands a 50 percent chance of overturning the infringement ruling on U.S. Patent No. 6,343,263, entitled "Real-time signal processing system for serially transmitted data." He also reiterated that a successful defense from Apple would be a "huge win" because workarounds for the '263 patent would require significant architectural changes to Google's Android.

For its part, Apple has said in its court filings that Google executive Andy Rubin worked under the inventors of the '263 patent during his time as a low-level engineer at Apple and may have drawn inspiration for the Android framework then.

Mueller also went on to say that Apple has a 75 percent chance of winning the final decision on the second patent HTC has been found to have infringed. But, according to him, U.S. Patent No. 5,946,647, entitled "System and method for performing an action on a structure in computer-generated data," is mostly a "convenience" feature and could be removed from Android, though it would slightly degrade the user experience.

The commission expects to reach a final decision by Dec. 6, at which point the federal agency could issue an import ban on infringing HTC devices. Bloomberg reports that court filings show HTC is fighting any possible ban by arguing that its smartphones have special features for the hearing impaired and "enhanced 911" location services that contribute to public safety.

The exclusion of HTC accused devices from the U.S. market would not only eliminate the most popular brand of smartphones using Android, the fastest-growing mobile operating system, but would also impact the public health, safety, and welfare concerns of individual U.S. consumers, the company said, noting that its devices comprise 36 percent of Android smartphones in the U.S.

But, Apple has responded with its own filing asserting that there are plenty of other smartphones on the market and HTC can replace its Android handsets with smartphones running Microsoft's Windows Phone operating system.

Analysts have suggested that Apple's victory in its ITC suit against HTC could set a high royalty precedent for Android devices. Some Chinese Android vendors are said to be considering dropping the platform because of fears of infringement liability.

Meanwhile, HTC Chief Executive Peter Chou has sought to assuage investors' fears by calling the lawsuit a "distraction," expressing confidence that the company would be unaffected by the suit.
post #2 of 101
though I'm sure some here will disagree...the second patent (that Apple stands an apparent 75% chance on) is utterly ridiculous.

I don't really know what the first patent means so I won't pretend to.
post #3 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post

I don't really know what the first patent means so I won't pretend to.

only a handful of people fully understand all the patents that make an OS. Its ridiculous to believe that any judge has the understanding needed to judge in such a dispute.

Patents should expire at the speed at which an industry moves. That way 99% of all these tech legal disputes involving apple would disappear!
post #4 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


For its part, Apple has said in its court filings that Google executive Andy Rubin worked under the inventors of the '263 patent during his time as a low-level engineer at Apple and may have drawn inspiration for the Android framework then.

I hope they are able to make the "Andy Rubin inspiration" connection with that patent. There's nothing sweeter than nailing an ex-employee for stealing such an important aspect of a device and willfully using that "inspired" idea to compete against his old employer. I'm all for competition but I hope Android gets kicked down a few notches by being forced to go back to the drawing board to rework the architecture for knowingly infringing on the patent and going ahead with it anyway. Just like Oracle and Java. Cocky and ballsy.
You talkin' to me?
Reply
You talkin' to me?
Reply
post #5 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by bonklers View Post

only a handful of people fully understand all the patents that make an OS. Its ridiculous to believe that any judge has the understanding needed to judge in such a dispute.

Patents should expire at the speed at which an industry moves. That way 99% of all these tech legal disputes involving apple would disappear!

and patent trolls would be non-existent.
post #6 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dickprinter View Post

I hope they are able to make the "Andy Rubin inspiration" connection with that patent. There's nothing sweeter than nailing an ex-employee for stealing such an important aspect of a device and willfully using that "inspired" idea to compete against his old employer. I'm all for competition but I hope Android gets kicked down a few notches by being forced to go back to the drawing board to rework the architecture for knowingly infringing on the patent and going ahead with it anyway. Just like Oracle and Java. Cocky and ballsy.

question...do you actually even know what the patent in question is or are you being guided by blind hatred of anything not Apple?

---------


hmmm, from what I can gather about U.S. Patent No. 6,343,263 pretty much EVERY modern smartphone uses it and it was likely in use in smartphones before Apple created the iPhone. 17 years ago (1994, when the patent was filed) the mobile tech industry was insanely young and any judge likely ignorant of the implications of this.
post #7 of 101
Wouldn't it be more accurate to describe this as a review of a "patent ruling" rather than a "patent victory"?

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #8 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post

question...do you actually even know what the patent in question is or are you being guided by blind hatred of anything not Apple?

I know nothing about the patent, what exactly it covers as far as functionality or when it came about, I'm just commenting about what the article implies and that the move by Andy Rubin, if true, shows lack of principle and ethics. One doesn't have to be an Apple fanatic to comment about lack of ethics.

edit:
http://www.ipwatchdog.com/patents/us...t_6343263.html

It may have been filed in 1994 but it seems to have been granted in 2002, probably when the iPhone was in the early stages of concept and development.
You talkin' to me?
Reply
You talkin' to me?
Reply
post #9 of 101
If patent 6,343,263 was filed in 1994 doesn't it expire in 3 years from now? If the Android industry can just appeal and stall for 3 years they are home free.

Please update the AppleInsider app to function in landscape mode.

Reply

Please update the AppleInsider app to function in landscape mode.

Reply
post #10 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dickprinter View Post

I know nothing about the patent, what exactly it covers as far as functionality or when it came about, I'm just commenting about what the article implies and that the move by Andy Rubin, if true, shows lack of principle and ethics. One doesn't have to be an Apple fanatic to comment about lack of ethics.

edit:
http://www.ipwatchdog.com/patents/us...t_6343263.html

It may have been filed in 1994 but it seems to have been granted in 2002, probably when the iPhone was in the early stages of concept and development.

you are basing your opinion of a man on your desire for him to be unethical...besides if he worked to produce it, left before in 92 it was filed, of course the idea is in his head....it doesn't indicate any malice on his part.

Almost as bad as the people who say Schmidt was a double agent on the Apple board.
post #11 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by jd_in_sb View Post

If patent 6,343,263 was filed in 1994 doesn't it expire in 3 years from now? If the Android industry can just appeal and stall for 3 years they are home free.

I'm not sure if it's 20, or 25 years...but the patent was filed in 94 and granted in 2002.
post #12 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post

I'm not sure if it's 20, or 25 years...but the patent was filed in 94 and granted in 2002.

I believe it is 20 years from the date granted so that would make the expiration date ... a problem for Android.

Please update the AppleInsider app to function in landscape mode.

Reply

Please update the AppleInsider app to function in landscape mode.

Reply
post #13 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

The exclusion of HTC accused devices from the U.S. market would not only eliminate the most popular brand of smartphones using Android, the fastest-growing mobile operating system, but would also impact the public health, safety, and welfare concerns of individual U.S. consumers, the company said, noting that its devices comprise 36 percent of Android smartphones in the U.S.

How does upholding an Apple patent endanger the public health, safety, and welfare of individual US consumers? Wouldn't upholding a US company's patent actually do more good for the American population rather than allowing foreign interests to infringe on a US corporation's intellectual properties?
post #14 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post

you are basing your opinion of a man on your desire for him to be unethical...besides if he worked to produce it, left before in 92 it was filed, of course the idea is in his head....it doesn't indicate any malice on his part.

Almost as bad as the people who say Schmidt was a double agent on the Apple board.

I have to agree with this. Unless there are emails or something concrete where Rubin stated, "Hey, I remember this function I worked on at Apple that would be perfect for this." I wouldn't attribute it to malice or unethical behavior. Still doesn't hold sway either way from a legal standpoint though.
2010 mac mini/iPad OG/iPhone 4/appletv OG/appletv 2/ BT trackpad and keyboard/time capsule/ Wii
Reply
2010 mac mini/iPad OG/iPhone 4/appletv OG/appletv 2/ BT trackpad and keyboard/time capsule/ Wii
Reply
post #15 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by F1Ferrari View Post

How does upholding an Apple patent endanger the public health, safety, and welfare of individual US consumers? Wouldn't upholding a US company's patent actually do more good for the American population rather than allowing foreign interests to infringe on a US corporation's intellectual properties?

Well, the previous paragraph said:

Quote:
... Bloomberg reports that court filings show HTC is fighting any possible ban by arguing that its smartphones have special features for the hearing impaired and "enhanced 911" location services that contribute to public safety.

The phrase, "grasping at straws," comes to mind.
post #16 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post

... Almost as bad as the people who say Schmidt was a double agent on the Apple board.

I guess English is not your primary language? For Schmidt to have been a "double agent", he would have had to be passing Google secrets to Apple as well as taking Apple plans back to Google. No one that I'm aware of has ever alleged that.
post #17 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dickprinter View Post

I hope they are able to make the "Andy Rubin inspiration" connection with that patent. There's nothing sweeter than nailing an ex-employee for stealing such an important aspect of a device and willfully using that "inspired" idea to compete against his old employer. I'm all for competition but I hope Android gets kicked down a few notches by being forced to go back to the drawing board to rework the architecture for knowingly infringing on the patent and going ahead with it anyway. Just like Oracle and Java. Cocky and ballsy.

Andy Rubin stopped working for Apple in the early 90s. Back then, even Linux (the foundation of Android) was just being birthed. If Rubin was inspired by what he saw then to design the Android framework, then he was and is frigging brilliant (which he may already be). So, accusing him of stealing (at least back then) would be, to quote someone else here, grasping at straws.
post #18 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by jd_in_sb View Post

I believe it is 20 years from the date granted so that would make the expiration date ... a problem for Android.

The priority date is date of filing, not date granted.
post #19 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by F1Ferrari View Post

How does upholding an Apple patent endanger the public health, safety, and welfare of individual US consumers? Wouldn't upholding a US company's patent actually do more good for the American population rather than allowing foreign interests to infringe on a US corporation's intellectual properties?

Millions of Americans have Samsung, HTC and Motorola phones. If Apple wins all patent cases and all companies mentioned as well as Google are forced to shut down operations, these Americans would lose their phones. Before they can afford to get a replacement, grievous bodily harms could come to them and they would not be able to text or phone a friend for help.

Apple must be stopped.
post #20 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

I guess English is not your primary language? For Schmidt to have been a "double agent", he would have had to be passing Google secrets to Apple as well as taking Apple plans back to Google. No one that I'm aware of has ever alleged that.

According to Wikipedia,

"A double agent, commonly abbreviated referral of double secret agent, is a counterintelligence term used to designate an employee of a secret service or organization, whose primary aim is to spy on the target organization, but who in fact is a member of that same target organization oneself."

Schmidt, according to idiots, primarily aimed to spy on Apple (aka target organization). But he was indeed a *board* member of the target organization. Ergo, double agent! POW! Is English not your primary language?

But seriously, methinks that Wikipedia entry needs editing.
post #21 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post

Millions of Americans have Samsung, HTC and Motorola phones. If Apple wins all patent cases and all companies mentioned as well as Google are forced to shut down operations, these Americans would lose their phones. Before they can afford to get a replacement, grievous bodily harms could come to them and they would not be able to text or phone a friend for help.

Apple must be stopped.

Um why? Android OEMs rarely update their phones (HTC is an exception although the updates are few and far between) so whatever phones that have been purchased prior to the decision aren't going to stop functioning so they wouldn't be losing their phones.
2010 mac mini/iPad OG/iPhone 4/appletv OG/appletv 2/ BT trackpad and keyboard/time capsule/ Wii
Reply
2010 mac mini/iPad OG/iPhone 4/appletv OG/appletv 2/ BT trackpad and keyboard/time capsule/ Wii
Reply
post #22 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by jd_in_sb View Post

I believe it is 20 years from the date granted so that would make the expiration date ... a problem for Android.

No need to rely on faith or hope or belief or memory:

In the United States, under current patent law, the term of patent, provided that maintenance fees are paid on time, are:

For applications filed on or after June 8, 1995,[1] the patent term is 20 years from the filing date of the earliest U.S. application to which priority is claimed (excluding provisional applications).[2]

For applications that were pending on and for patents that were still in force on June 8, 1995, the patent term is either 17 years from the issue date or 20 years from the filing date of the earliest U.S. or international (PCT) application to which priority is claimed (excluding provisional applications), the longer term applying.[3][4]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Term_of..._United_States
post #23 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post

According to Wikipedia,

"A double agent, commonly abbreviated referral of double secret agent, is a counterintelligence term used to designate an employee of a secret service or organization, whose primary aim is to spy on the target organization, but who in fact is a member of that same target organization oneself."

Schmidt, according to idiots, primarily aimed to spy on Apple (aka target organization). But he was indeed a *board* member of the target organization. Ergo, double agent! POW! Is English not your primary language?

But seriously, methinks that Wikipedia entry needs editing.

Yes, it does need editing, since what it describes is a 'mole', which is what Schmidt has been accused of being, and is not the same as a 'double agent'. You have to admit, he does resemble a mole.
post #24 of 101
Those who can, do.
Those who can't, copy.

Do no evil.
post #25 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by joindup View Post

Those who can, do.
Those who can't, copy.

Do no evil.

. . . Pray for world peace and feed the children too.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #26 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by joindup View Post

Those who can, do.
Those who can't, copy.

Do no evil.

HTCs look like iPhones now?
post #27 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by jd_in_sb View Post

If patent 6,343,263 was filed in 1994 doesn't it expire in 3 years from now? If the Android industry can just appeal and stall for 3 years they are home free.

Nice try but you just can't stall a lawsuit out of existence. The lawsuit is already in process so if the patent violation was upheld all the violating products sold prior to the expiration would be subject to pay whatever fees and damages the court declared.

"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." Douglas Adams

Reply

"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." Douglas Adams

Reply
post #28 of 101
Since Schmidt ended up in the posts again, it's a good time to remind some folks here what prompted he and Apple to agree that's it was the right time to part ways. In a nutshell, if it was allowed to continue it may have turned into an FTC suit against both Google and Apple with a claim that they were working too closely together in an attempt to stifle competition.

http://brainz.org/news/ftc-examines-...oard-ties/198/
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #29 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post

HTCs look like iPhones now?

This is a case about works like, not looks like.

I think you are getting confused on your high horse.
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #30 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by jd_in_sb View Post

If patent 6,343,263 was filed in 1994 doesn't it expire in 3 years from now? If the Android industry can just appeal and stall for 3 years they are home free.

Wrong. If they lose the case, they could still be liable for damages from the date the case is filed until the expiration of the patent.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jd_in_sb View Post

I believe it is 20 years from the date granted so that would make the expiration date ... a problem for Android.

No, it's 20 years from the date of filing. It used to be 17 years from the date granted, but this was changed a long time ago.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #31 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConradJoe View Post

For applications that were pending on and for patents that were still in force on June 8, 1995, the patent term is either 17 years from the issue date or 20 years from the filing date of the earliest U.S. or international (PCT) application to which priority is claimed (excluding provisional applications), the longer term applying.[3][4]

Because it was filed before June 8, 1995 the above paragraph makes it sound like the patent is good for 17 years from 2002 because "the longer term applies." So they have 8 more years, not 3.

Please update the AppleInsider app to function in landscape mode.

Reply

Please update the AppleInsider app to function in landscape mode.

Reply
post #32 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Since Schmidt ended up in the posts again, it's a good time to remind some folks here what prompted he and Apple to agree that's it was the right time to part ways. In a nutshell, if it was allowed to continue it may have turned into an FTC suit against both Google and Apple with a claim that they were working too closely together in an attempt to stifle competition.

http://brainz.org/news/ftc-examines-...oard-ties/198/

I know you're paid to come here and defend him, and generally propagandize and distract, but, a) no one really believes that's why he left the board -- i.e., post hoc fallacy, or, sometimes a coincidence is just a coincidence, despite how it's attempted to be spun, and the more likely truth is that Steve Jobs allowed him to resign rather than simply kicking his ass to the curb -- and b) it's irrelevant to the point under discussion, although, combined with his alleged mole-like activities, your post would support the double agent allegation, if your post were to the point and that were actually what happened, which is unlikely at best.
post #33 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

This is a case about works like, not looks like.

I think you are getting confused on your high horse.

even better. so HTC phones work like iPhones now?
post #34 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

I know you're paid to come here and defend him, and generally propagandize and distract, but, a) no one really believes that's why he left the board -- i.e., post hoc fallacy, or, sometimes a coincidence is just a coincidence, despite how it's attempted to be spun, and the more likely truth is that Steve Jobs allowed him to resign rather than simply kicking his ass to the curb -- and b) it's irrelevant to the point under discussion, although, combined with his alleged mole-like activities, your post would support the double agent allegation, if your post were to the point and that were actually what happened, which is unlikely at best.

so what was said is less likely than what you wishto be truth?

cute. any evidence to back up your big bad Eric Schmidt take or no?

a lesser man than myself may conclude that you're pretty much a liar.
post #35 of 101
deleted
post #36 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post

Millions of Americans have Samsung, HTC and Motorola phones. If Apple wins all patent cases and all companies mentioned as well as Google are forced to shut down operations, these Americans would lose their phones. Before they can afford to get a replacement, grievous bodily harms could come to them and they would not be able to text or phone a friend for help.

Apple must be stopped.

Don't hyperventilate. Samsung, HTC, etc can pay for the use of the IP (assuming they lose).
post #37 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

"Know" sounds pretty certain.

Proof or apology, which will it be?

And do you really imagine this tiny forum in a random corner of the 'net would really be worth any company paying someone to write anything here?

Geez, what passes for logic 'round here....

Don't worry about anything he claims about me. He doesn't vote in my district and I wasn't inviting him for dinner, so no worries. He asked me point blank one day if I was a paid poster, to which I responded no. That was good enough for him. . . for a couple of days.\

He's going to make silly accusations every time he has no other argument, so don't waste time responding. No one that matters listens to the "paid" claim anyway.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #38 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post

Millions of Americans have Samsung, HTC and Motorola phones. If Apple wins all patent cases and all companies mentioned as well as Google are forced to shut down operations, these Americans would lose their phones. Before they can afford to get a replacement, grievous bodily harms could come to them and they would not be able to text or phone a friend for help.

Apple must be stopped.

And all those millions will still have those phones if Apple wins. However, the millions following will have to make another choice when they purchase a new phone from the phones that are allowed to be sold then. Nobody will be going around gathering up the phones from these people or shutting their service off. You sound ridiculous here.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #39 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post

Millions of Americans have Samsung, HTC and Motorola phones. If Apple wins all patent cases and all companies mentioned as well as Google are forced to shut down operations, these Americans would lose their phones. Before they can afford to get a replacement, grievous bodily harms could come to them and they would not be able to text or phone a friend for help.

Apple must be stopped.

Sounds like the reasoning that justified U.S. investment banks getting bailed out by the U.S. taxpayer because if they were allowed to pay for their mistakes, it would destroy our borrowing-based economy.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #40 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Yes, it does need editing, since what it describes is a 'mole', which is what Schmidt has been accused of being, and is not the same as a 'double agent'. You have to admit, he does resemble a mole.

Sorry, it's beneath me to judge other people's appearance. Feel free, though.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › ITC reviewing Apple patent victory over HTC