or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Samsung Galaxy S4 & Google Now accused of violating Apple patents for Siri
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Samsung Galaxy S4 & Google Now accused of violating Apple patents for Siri

post #1 of 46
Thread Starter 
In its ongoing litigation against Samsung, Apple has added five new patents to its claims, targeting both the company's new flagship Galaxy S4 smartphone, as well as the Google Now service for Android.

Galaxy S4


Two of the patents specifically relate to Apple's voice-driven Siri personal assistant, as noted on Wednesday by Florian Mueller of FOSS Patents. They are U.S. Patent No. 8,086,604, and U.S. Patent No. 6,846,959, both of which are entitled "Universal interface for retrieval of information in a computer system."

Beyond Siri, the filing also alleges the infringement of three other Apple-owned patents:

Apple filed the motion to amend its infringement complaint in a California court on Tuesday. It simply seeks to add Samsung's recently released Galaxy S4 to the existing complaint, which already targets numerous other Samsung products.

"The Galaxy S4 product practices many of the same claims already asserted by Apple? in the same way as the already-accused Samsung devices," the filing states.

As for the inclusion of Google Now, the '604 and '959 patents related to Siri are also included in the filing because Google Now has replaced the Android Quick Search Box in some instances. That search box was previously targeted by Apple in its complaint.

A hearing to discuss Apple's motion has been scheduled for June 25 in a San Jose court in front of Judge Paul S. Grewal.

Apple first signaled to the court last week that it intended to add the Galaxy S4 to its existing patent infringement suit. This week's formal filing has revealed exactly what five patents the iPhone maker has accused Samsung's latest smartphone of violating.
post #2 of 46
Come on Apple. Go get 'em! I'm so tired of hearing all the IP these clowns are ripping off.
post #3 of 46
Apple adds the Galaxy S4 to the suit after it's been out for a few weeks so that their engineers and IP experts have a chance to look at it and verify the infringement.

Didn't Samsung try to add the iPhone 5 to their suit before it was even announced?
post #4 of 46
Asynchronous data synchronisation? Seems legit.
post #5 of 46

Why don't Apple file this case when lots and lots of Samsung phones are sold?

They can show the number and gauge the damages, if they win the case.

post #6 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Barriault View Post

.

Didn't Samsung try to add the iPhone 5 to their suit before it was even announced?

I believe the patents in question were related to wireless tech and it was a safe assumption that Apple would build off the current, allegedly infringing tech, in new phones. So not that crazy sounding a move. Plus if it stopped or delayed the release of a new iPhone it would leave folks hopefully more willing to look at other models, like Samsung

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #7 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chandra69 View Post

Why don't Apple file this case when lots and lots of Samsung phones are sold?
They can show the number and gauge the damages, if they win the case.

Because it isn't about the actual money so much as the principle of the thing and the fear that once folks go to something like Samsung and Android they won't come back, particularly if they can, their eyes, get all the features of the iPhone for cheaper

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #8 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post


I believe the patents in question were related to wireless tech and it was a safe assumption that Apple would build off the current, allegedly infringing tech, in new phones. So not that crazy sounding a move. Plus if it stopped or delayed the release of a new iPhone it would leave folks hopefully more willing to look at other models, like Samsung

 

That's the alternative I was thinking, but in doing so they're implicitly admitting that said technology is standards-essential, and thus must be licensed under fair and reasonable terms.

post #9 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post


Because it isn't about the actual money so much as the principle of the thing and the fear that once folks go to something like Samsung and Android they won't come back, particularly if they can, their eyes, get all the features of the iPhone for cheaper

So irritating that Google and Co. copied iOS and Apple to make their stand in industry and eating the market share with second grade OS and copy features.

post #10 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chandra69 View Post

Why don't Apple file this case when lots and lots of Samsung phones are sold?
They can show the number and gauge the damages, if they win the case.

When that happens the SG4 would be replaced with the SG5.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Barriault View Post

That's the alternative I was thinking, but in doing so they're implicitly admitting that said technology is standards-essential, and thus must be licensed under fair and reasonable terms.

Patents are either standard or not. There is no implicit standard as Apple would have to agree to it.
post #11 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Barriault View Post

That's the alternative I was thinking, but in doing so they're implicitly admitting that said technology is standards-essential, and thus must be licensed under fair and reasonable terms.

Utter nonsense. Wireless Tech != Standards Essential

iPhone 5 64GB, iPhone 4S 16GB, mid-2011 iMac, Apple TV 2nd Gen, iPod Nano

Reply

iPhone 5 64GB, iPhone 4S 16GB, mid-2011 iMac, Apple TV 2nd Gen, iPod Nano

Reply
post #12 of 46
Like Cook said before Congress, the IP court situation is such that by the time your case gets resolved, it's moot. Be nice if Congress would get some actual work done and fix this, but it's easier to sit there holding hearings and getting your face on TV.
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
post #13 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puevlo View Post

Asynchronous data synchronisation? Seems legit.

 

Asynchronous refers to data being sent in various chunks or sent only from one end. Not all at the same time or not from both ends at once. (Conversations are synchronous. Text messages are asynchronous.) And just to state the obvious, synchronization here refers to data being the same in both places. Asynchronous is the opposite of synchronous. It's not related to synchronized or synchronization in this sense.

post #14 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chandra69 View Post

Why don't Apple file this case when lots and lots of Samsung phones are sold?
They can show the number and gauge the damages, if they win the case.

It's not like the case is going to be heard today.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #15 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryA View Post


Utter nonsense. Wireless Tech != Standards Essential

 

If they are assuming that an iPhone cannot be released without using their technology, that means that the technology must be essential for the operation of a smartphone.

post #16 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Huber View Post

Like Cook said before Congress, the IP court situation is such that by the time your case gets resolved, it's moot. Be nice if Congress would get some actual work done and fix this, but it's easier to sit there holding hearings and getting your face on TV.


And how are the courts funded?  Taxes maybe?  To enable a greater throughput, they might need to be more generously funded.  Perhaps Tim could offer to provide the funding to get the end result he seems to want.

post #17 of 46

I am just curious how much Google is paying Samsung to fight their battles. We all know they apple has not directly attacked Google on most of these things since Google is the one who is fact creating the stuff that Samsung is using.

 

Yeah Google is attacking Apple via Motorola, but as we seen most of that has not gone anywhere. If anything the Motorola strategy has gotten google hands slapped a number of times by the courts was well the world Trade groups for unfair trade practices.

 

If I was Samsung and the reason they are battling Apple is due to features that Google developed, I would be making them pay to keep using their product.

 

Wonder if anyone done the math on if Samsung decide to move away from Android, what would Google Market share look like. Google has hitched its wagon to the Samsung horses at this point.


Edited by Maestro64 - 5/22/13 at 12:25pm
post #18 of 46
I seem to recall voice control functionality existing in android phones at least a year before Siri was released, so the notion anyone stole ip here is a bit silly. If apple holds the patent then it's fair game to go after anyone infringing on it, but to paint this as Samsung once again stealing from Apple's design prowess is a laughable assertion.
post #19 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

Because it isn't about the actual money so much as the principle of the thing and the fear that once folks go to something like Samsung and Android they won't come back, particularly if they can, their eyes, get all the features of the iPhone for cheaper

Don't kid yourself, it's always about money. Why aren't they going after HTC, Motorola, LG? Their phones have Google Now.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #20 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post


I believe the patents in question were related to wireless tech and it was a safe assumption that Apple would build off the current, allegedly infringing tech, in new phones. So not that crazy sounding a move. Plus if it stopped or delayed the release of a new iPhone it would leave folks hopefully more willing to look at other models, like Samsung


I believe it is built into the Qualcom chip that Apple uses for iPhone 5.

post #21 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cash907 View Post

I seem to recall voice control functionality existing in android phones at least a year before Siri was released, so the notion anyone stole ip here is a bit silly. If apple holds the patent then it's fair game to go after anyone infringing on it, but to paint this as Samsung once again stealing from Apple's design prowess is a laughable assertion.


It doesn't matter.  The matter was filed much earlier.  You go by the date of the patent not the product.

post #22 of 46
So Apple filed some paperwork in court. Big deal. Wake me when there's a verdict. Until then, this is hardly "news".

"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 #23 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post


And how are the courts funded?  Taxes maybe?  To enable a greater throughput, they might need to be more generously funded.  Perhaps Tim could offer to provide the funding to get the end result he seems to want.

I bet Tim would be happy to fund the US courts to speed up the cases before the points are too late and Scamsung had benefited from the delays to the tune of billions of dollars. It just might not look too good if they did and won... 1biggrin.gif
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
post #24 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

So Apple filed some paperwork in court. Big deal. Wake me when there's a verdict. Until then, this is hardly "news".

Normally I'd agree but just after Tim was pushing home the issue of the slowness of IP protection yesterday in front of the entire tech world (and a few politicians who probably didn't understand ) it seems more news worthy than normal IMHO.
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
post #25 of 46
Originally Posted by Marcus7110 
How is it possible patents are violated when the endresult is better than what Apple makes...?

 

Yeah, you'll be here for a while¡

post #26 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcus7110 View Post

..paid shill nonsense....


Everybody stop at the sidewalk and wait for the one-post troll to speed by...

post #27 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Barriault View Post

If they are assuming that an iPhone cannot be released without using their technology, that means that the technology must be essential for the operation of a smartphone.

There were smartphones before Apple and I'm sure MS Windows phone 7/8 doesn't violate the patents.
post #28 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Barriault View Post

Apple adds the Galaxy S4 to the suit after it's been out for a few weeks so that their engineers and IP experts have a chance to look at it and verify the infringement.

Didn't Samsung try to add the iPhone 5 to their suit before it was even announced?


Does it really matter? Is it that important to find every angle possible to paint Samsung as evil and Apple as saintly? Neither company is naive. They do what they feel is best at a time that makes the most sense to them.

post #29 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcus7110 View Post

How is it possible patents are violated when the endresult is better than what Apple makes...? Google Now is much better than Siri, so Google does better things with the so called pattents from Apple. Apple must realize that they fall behind more every year. Just take a look at the HTC One

I believe HTC took a long hard look at iPhone 5 before anyone looked at the HTC One.

post #30 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcus7110 View Post

How is it possible patents are violated when the endresult is better than what Apple makes...? Google Now is much better than Siri, so Google does better things with the so called pattents from Apple. Apple must realize that they fall behind more every year. Just take a look at the HTC One

Lovely! Another troll to block, and on its first post; though probably been round in numerous guises. Now if only there were some dedicated Android sites we could visit and mock. Nope, just sites where the droid users whine & complain and beg for assistance.

 

As Nelson would say, "Ha, ha."

When I find time to rewrite the laws of Physics, there'll Finally be some changes made round here!

I am not crazy! Three out of five court appointed psychiatrists said so.

Reply

When I find time to rewrite the laws of Physics, there'll Finally be some changes made round here!

I am not crazy! Three out of five court appointed psychiatrists said so.

Reply
post #31 of 46

This article is a little misleading.  Apple is suing over on-device search I believe.  Google Now only refers to the service that prefetches relevant data from the internet and Google's cloud.  I don't think Apple would have ground to sue over the actual Google Now since it's simply an extension of Google's search engine.

post #32 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post


Because it isn't about the actual money so much as the principle of the thing and the fear that once folks go to something like Samsung and Android they won't come back, particularly if they can, their eyes, get all the features of the iPhone for cheaper

 

If Apple's lawsuits are indeed about principle, why isn't Apple after Google, not Samsung?

post #33 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post


I bet Tim would be happy to fund the US courts to speed up the cases before the points are too late and Scamsung had benefited from the delays to the tune of billions of dollars. It just might not look too good if they did and won... 1biggrin.gif


I was thinking that maybe they could be really clever and sneaky and not put such creative effort into minimising their taxes and just pay more, then the govt might be slightly better able to improve resources that they would benefit from.

post #34 of 46
Originally Posted by Marcus7110 
It looks nothing like the Iphone5.

 

Pay attention to what you're saying before posting again.

post #35 of 46
Of course Apple has the right to defend patents. And it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out why they are targeting Samsung - it's the biggest competitor. Having said that, though, what Google is doing with Google Now is pretty far ahead of Apple. I don't expect that to change, as Google is an information and search behemoth and Apple is the maker of the best damn tech hardware on the planet.

For me personally, Apple hardware and robust Google apps are the best of both worlds. :-)
post #36 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by wakefinance View Post

This article is a little misleading.  Apple is suing over on-device search I believe.  Google Now only refers to the service that prefetches relevant data from the internet and Google's cloud.  I don't think Apple would have ground to sue over the actual Google Now since it's simply an extension of Google's search engine.

The '604 patent that Apple would like to assert against the Google Now feature was already deemed not infringed by a US Appeals court several months ago in a preliminary injunction case Apple brought against the Galaxy Nexus and the Android Quick Search box. In addition it's also involved in a USPTO reexamination and may be invalid in whole or part. Apparently Apple wants to take another stab at it now that the feature has been changed to Google Now.

 

http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2012/10/apple-v-samsung-adding-elements-to-avoid-infringement.html
 

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #37 of 46
I am sick to death of Apple's bullying other companies. Nonsense.
{2010 Mac Pro-6 core 3.33-12gb 1333 ram-ati5870-velociraptor 600's-SL/win7/64-Konnekt Live/Onkyo-Dell3007wfp}
{2008 Mac Pro-8 core 3.2's-16GB-evga285} {MBP17}{ipad}{iphone 4 blk16gb}
Reply
{2010 Mac Pro-6 core 3.33-12gb 1333 ram-ati5870-velociraptor 600's-SL/win7/64-Konnekt Live/Onkyo-Dell3007wfp}
{2008 Mac Pro-8 core 3.2's-16GB-evga285} {MBP17}{ipad}{iphone 4 blk16gb}
Reply
post #38 of 46
Originally Posted by xgman View Post
I am sick to death of Apple's bullying other companies. Nonsense.


And cut! Great, Ted, thanks; we'll use that sound byte if Apple ever starts to bully other companies.

post #39 of 46
Another thing copied from apple by google and its counterparts...
post #40 of 46
What bull* as a developer myself I perform those mentioned patented tasks everyday. They are just waiting everyone's time.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • Samsung Galaxy S4 & Google Now accused of violating Apple patents for Siri
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Samsung Galaxy S4 & Google Now accused of violating Apple patents for Siri