Motorola's seven-patent ITC complaint against Apple detailed - Page 2

 

Yeah, Apple has never filed suit against Google. Even you know that they're trying to rack up wins prior to engaging Google so they have something to show in court.

 

Apple started the patent wars. This is their fault. The patent system is a joke, a broken mess at best, and this is what comes of it.

It is arguable. If a small programmer invents a new useful software, and it were un-patentable, then the mega-corporation would simply reinvent it and with their greater marketing resources put the small firm out of business. Under the current system the mega-corporation would have to buy out the small developer in order to obtain the rights to use the program functionality.

 

Of course in this case we have two mega-corporations. 

 

You are probably right about the patent though. The only thing unique about Motorola's claim is that it is for a mobile device. Apple most likely has earlier patents on similar technology but perhaps not with the description for use with a mobile device.

 

Regardless of Quinn's performance on the Samsung case, which I admit has been less than stellar, they are considered among the best in the industry. So its not that surprising that a law blog is praising them.

And where did they say that Apple started this against Google first? All that was mentioned was that Apple decided on going thermonuclear; something parroted by most people on this site.

The question to ask is can the US withstand the unemployment created by the destruction of the Apple ecosystem of business partners due to the banning of Apple products.

Is the ITC that stupid, I don't think so.

 

Oops, guess I hit Skil right in the feelings again.

 

After all the anti-anything-not-Apple bashing that goes on here, we really wouldn't want you to feel the same things you project. That'd just be wrong.

You mean all 47k of them? If EVERY single Apple employee in the US was let go today, the unemployment rate would tick up 0.03%. I realize that there are others employed indirectly, but why would they be losing their jobs? For example, if a retail store couldn't sell iPhones, they would simply sell something else.

 

Particularly when your entire premise is wrong.

Hmm? It should rather be Motorola here, nope?

Apple is nearly continuously on the defensive regarding patent suits, everyone wants a piece of Apple. Started way back with the Apple ][, when the Beatles decided to pad their pockets with Apple's cash. Maybe Samsung would like to cease copying the icons on the iPhone & the bounce effect when the end of a document is reached. It's blatant copying like that that Apple is trying to stop. Since before Apple sought court remedies, they have offered Samsung the chance to license Apple's patents & avoid this mess

Cheers !

War gets ugly. I knew Google will join Samsung fight against Apple. What a mess. :(

Edited by Andrey - 8/21/12 at 1:41pm

More like paid Apple off.  That $150 was a silent settlement so it wouldn't come out in a courtroom how blatantly they stole everything from Apple & screwed them over.

 

People don't want to know more than what helps their argument.  There is a reason Apple goes after everyone over patents, it's cause for years they've repeatedly been ripped off & doing nothing just about bought them bankruptcy.  

 

All that aside I don't know enough about the Motorola patents to know if they have a legitimate claim or not.  If the infringement is legit it should be recognized as such by lovers & haters alike.  I know I can't agree enough though with the statements that we need serious patent reform, it's just a massive train wreck out there and it's only getting worse.

Here is the thing. Apple is trying to get some leverage going forward for the coming battle over 4G, in which they are at a monumental disadvantage. Do you really think Apple can go head to head with Samsung or Moto in regards to this? They will lose that battle and they know it so they're trying to gain the upper hand first. Also, did someone on here really try to claim Apple invented swipe to unlock? Really? C'mon guys, if you wanna be fanboys that's fine but at least be a bit honest!

 

There will be no battle over a standard. Any patents therein will be licensed legally and fairly, period. Worldwide. It's just about the only thing we as a species can agree on. At least in the countries fortunate enough to have these standards.

Yeah, sorry, you're wrong dude. I'm not just talking about the standard. 

I don't see what all the fuss is about.  A modern smartphone utilizes roughly 9938273478392 technologies that neither Apple nor Google invented.

Apple patented making the phone in a usable shape, as well as touching it.  (Touch... Swipe... whatever)

 

Anyone is free to make a smartphone that uses the useful 9938273478392 technologies, as long as it doesn't come in the highly inovative usable shape or use the amazing breakthrough of being able to touch it.

 

 

Google/Motorola it appears, has the patent on the breakthroughs of talking into a phone, as well as the technology of having your *smart* phone actually display usable information (woah, who came up with that?)

 

Based on those amazing inovations, these companies are completely encouraging other companies to compete using the  9938273478392 technologies- just as long as their users can't touch them, speak into them,  come in a usable shape, or display any information.

 

Whats the problem?

 

The patent system is encouraging innovation as it is supposed to.  As we speak (errr... type) I'll bet Google is hard at work innovating new technologies that will enable them to compete developing a 'shapeless blob' technology as well as elite 'hover' technologies so that your shapeless phone can hover near you so you won't have to touch it. 

 

Apple is no doubt hard at work developing technology that can both read your mind, and inject information directly into your brain.  That way you won't have to talk into your phone or have it display any information to you.

 

That would be some serious innovation.  So clearly our patent system isn't the problem and everything is working as intended.

 

Then I don't see what they could possibly fight over involving 4G.

Which current apple phone has 4g on it again?

 

Try harder....

 

But in the current patent environment there is little incentive to patent a standard.  What happens when Google and Motorola develop that next gen wireless technology that has way more bandwidth and is the equivalent of going from dialup to broadband?  Are they going to seek a '5G' patent and license under a FRAND patent?  Maybe if there were 10,000 competing companies who all could benefit and Google could make a little money off each.  In our current environment Google is around 60% of the market and Apple is a little over 30%.  Google will just file it as a proprietary patent and not license it to Apple at all. 

 

No one is going to want a smart phone that still runs on 'dialup'.  If Google were to develop that patent first they could pretty easily see any viable alternative design and patent the bejesus out of anything similar.  No one could head in that direction without a 90ton lawsuit.  That is what our patent system encourages today.  Look at technology.  Look at the obvious direction it is heading.  Spend a lot of money to punch a tunnel to get a little bit ahead.  Patent the crap out of where you are.  When the others get there- Roadblock!  Do something goofy and awkward to go around or pay me a ton of money *IF* I choose to let you through.

 

The patent system in the technology sector does not protect innovation.  It thwarts competition.  The only patents that should stand are FRAND patents and the filer needs to include their terms.  If deemed unreasonable they dont get the patent issued.  If reasonable everyone has to actually pay.  Under the current rules companies can just offer to pay half a penny for any FRAND license and when the holder refuses you call them unreasonable and don't pay unless they sue you :-/

 

Innovation in technology is its own reward because consumers demand it.  But then how will Apple be rewarded for its innovation?  Ermm.... I'd say 100billion in the bank and the mongo market cap are pretty good incentives.  Its an enviable spot and a great job by Apple.  They could choose to copy what everyone else that has been in their shoes has done- which is to try to lock out competition and kick everyone else down the hill (and every company that has done that has both failed and only generated ill will.... I mean seriously do you know anyone that really wants Windows phone to do well?) or they could be innovative and grow to a trillion dollar company by innovating more and just leaving everyone in their dust :p

 

Whoop, better suit up first… 

 

 

*ahem* "The AT&T iPhone 4S." 

 

lol oh yeah I forgot about that bit of sillyness, until I start seeing down speeds over a mb im gonna go ahead and sort of disagree on the "4g" capabilities of my 4S on AT&T.

 

Perhaps sleepy was referring to the upcoming product launch where Cook brags about being in an innovator and presents a LTE iphone. I am sure that by now all Android phones have the ability to tunnel through time and forsee future apple keynotes to for pre emptive trolling. I mean they are afterall way more advanced.

and 50% of the articles aren't about Apple nor referencing Apple ....so your point is moot.

 

Yeah, because we certainly only get trolls in our Apple articles. My point couldn't be further from moot, but I would have been more shocked had you not said anything about it.

Frankly I have been quite unimpress with the majority of dialogue surrounding the patent situation of late. After the endless parade of suits--oft to garner a favorable ruling in another country when the desired results were not achieved at home--I entertained prematurely that the news was being followed, that a measurable degree of knowledge would improve. Samsung vs Apple in specific has illustrated quite vividly what motivates, what necessitates and what is outright strategic posturing when it comes to patent disputes. Case in point, where's the historical background of these new claims made by Google, oh right it's Motorola that's technically bring these infringements to light. Why now? How on earth has it taken them this long to acknowledge these infringements? Really, first generation devices are being cited. True Apple has not always been timely with their complaints but they appear less strategic in regards to the state of the marketplace, impending product reveals, or bad quarterly report statements. As excercises in fruitly goes the mobil OS platform debate takes the cake. I comprehend that those not using iOS are innodated with often favourable reviews and analysis, however consider the years of endless put downs of Apple users endured. Prehaps Apple's profits have been mistaken for market share. Do your research, a blog here and there is not the way to get to the facts. (I read every page of released documents, followed historic evidence online and sourced numberous websites, foreign news service and read countless posts. And I still don't believe I could vote without reasonable doubt--on some of the matters.) This rampant emotional back and forth between OS platform users has been as tiresome as it has been informative. No platform will satiate the diverse range of needs and wants of users. All this bickering when, if investigated, the product knowledge and ability to use all the hundreds of smartphone features are unknown to their users.

dude, you've been called a troll even on other Apple fan sites...your input is truly worthless.

My point is do you think ANY or a majority of the Android fans would be here if Apple Insider didn't make it it's duty to appear in RSS feeds?

That's why I'm here...reading articles, seeing the constant disinformation.

Fact: You'd be down at least one Android fan if not for the site's need to mention Android every other article.

 

In what regard? What's your point? I don't worship every decision Apple makes. That makes me a troll to some. Who cares? My input is of no less worth than yours.

 

 

Why not… just remove it from the RSS feed, then? Is… that not possible for some reason?

 

Or… you could just… not… read the site. 

 

Someone else chime in here, is anything I'm saying somehow impossible or wrong?

I chose to be here, BECAUSE of what I've read here...simple a that. I'm not saying I'm forced...but I'm explaining what prompted my decision.

 

In and of itself, there's nothing at all wrong with that statement.

 

But upon seeing and being intrigued by the ludicrousness of a 'Baby Eating Convention' flyer, I wouldn't remain at the convention after having seen that people are actually eating babies there. 

LOL