or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple says it may file new patent suit targeting Samsung Galaxy S4
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple says it may file new patent suit targeting Samsung Galaxy S4

post #1 of 39
Thread Starter 
A judge this week rejected Apple from adding Samsung's new flagship Galaxy S4 smartphone to an existing lawsuit, causing Apple to signal it may file a new suit to target the device.

life companion


U.S. Magistrate Judge Paul S. Grewal said adding another product to the case in San Jose, Calif., would be a "tax on the court's resources," Bloomberg reported on Thursday. Citing the fact that additional products take up "considerable amounts of the court's time and energy," he said the Galaxy S4 would not become part of the ongoing patent infringement case.

In response, an attorney representing Apple said that the exclusion would require the iPhone maker to file a new, separate lawsuit. That's because the products in question in the current suit, including the Galaxy S III, will likely be out of date by the time the case goes to trial next March.

Apple first attempted to add the Galaxy S4 to the California lawsuit in May, soon after Samsung launched the device. Apple's initial analysis of the Galaxy S4 suggested to the company that it too infringes on the company's patented inventions.

Specifically, Apple believes the Galaxy S4 infringes on five patents it owns, related to Siri, data synchronization, and graphical user interface elements. Apple's complaint also took issue with the Google Now assistant service for Android.

Apple even offered to knock an existing product out of the lawsuit to appease the judge, keeping the total number of products in question at 22 with the inclusion of the Galaxy S4. But that wasn't enough for Grewal, who hopes to keep the case on track for a scheduled March 2014 trial date.
post #2 of 39
With such a gap between the speed of the court and the speed at which smartphones and tablets are currently advancing, Apple's course of action should be obvious: blatantly rip off any good ideas from any of the competitors and incorporate them into the iThings. By the time the courts get around to taking action, the device in question is at least two generations in the past.

I really don't think there are any features from Samsung, Android, Windows Phone, Blackberry, etc. that I'd really want, but I am guessing there may be some that would be popular. Apple ought to just blow off the IP system and use them. It's obvious that their competitors have no shame or hesitation to steal from Apple, so Apple ought to get off its high horse and steal right back.

Until our government takes its duty to "establish justice" seriously, Apple has to use the Law of the Jungle and not the Marquess of Queensberry rules.
post #3 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Specifically, Apple believes the Galaxy S4 infringes on five patents it owns, related to Siri, data synchronization, and graphical user interface elements. Apple's complaint also took issue with the Google Now assistant service for Android.

 

Software patents, maybe they should sue Google then... or at least sue Motorola.

Or the infringements are all on the Samsung layer over Android?

post #4 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by macFanDave View Post

With such a gap between the speed of the court and the speed at which smartphones and tablets are currently advancing, Apple's course of action should be obvious: blatantly rip off any good ideas from any of the competitors and incorporate them into the iThings. 

 

Did Sammy give you this line of reasoning?   What "ideas from competitors" are there?  When the competition consists of a shark-tank of rip-off artists, there's no competitor "idea" to steal.

 

Perhaps Apple should try to file "blank" lawsuits, or simple suits over a triviality, and then when the suit finally makes it to court, they can amend it to include whatever product Sammy is selling at the moment, and drop the trivial claim.  Since it seems to take forever for the US courts to get around to doing anything.

post #5 of 39
The length of time to get a patent case to trial should be weeks to a few months, not years.
What a joke.
post #6 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeaEarleGreyHot View Post

 

Did Sammy give you this line of reasoning?   What "ideas from competitors" are there?  When the competition consists of a shark-tank of rip-off artists, there's no competitor "idea" to steal.

 

Perhaps Apple should try to file "blank" lawsuits, or simple suits over a triviality, and then when the suit finally makes it to court, they can amend it to include whatever product Sammy is selling at the moment, and drop the trivial claim.  Since it seems to take forever for the US courts to get around to doing anything.

 

 

And before that:

 

Quote:
What Did Apple Copy From Android and Windows Phone in iOS 6?

http://pocketnow.com/2012/06/13/what-did-apple-copy-from-android-and-windows-phone-in-ios-6

 

and...

Quote:

Top 10 Features iOS 5 Copied from Android

http://www.ibtimes.com/top-10-features-ios-5-copied-android-313714#


Edited by cnocbui - 6/27/13 at 7:38am
post #7 of 39
It's bad enough that the courts are so under staffed and under funded that it takes half a decade to get any progress on these issues.... but now to deny Apple adding current products is inexcusable.

This shows how the court system is broken. "A tax on the court's resources". Government insists on running the courts and like all government services it charges a lot of taxes and then spends little to provide competent service.

The courts "resources" should never be a question of justice. If the device is infringing then Apple has the right to pursue it... and adding it to a current case should be more efficient than doing a whole other case -- in terms of everyone's resources.

Once again we see the lie of the statists when they claim we need the government to provide services--- government never provides quality service and it costs way WAY too much in taxes.

But politicians don't care, they get rich off of the tax money (by spending it on programs and getting kickbacks or by handing it out to favored contributors to their campaigns, etc.)
post #8 of 39

 

This article only serves to show how dishonest the android zealots are in their desperation to claim that it was OK for google to rip off iOS.

post #9 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by herbapou View Post
Software patents, maybe they should sue Google then... or at least sue Motorola.

Or the infringements are all on the Samsung layer over Android?

 

Motorola suing Apple was the first patent lawsuit that started the whole "patent war".

post #10 of 39

I just love all the hoopla about Apple copying shamesungs copy of Apple iOS. 

post #11 of 39
New suit makes sense to me. One to focus on how current Samsung phones, while now more differentiated, were based on and profited from the initial theft of Apple's IP.
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
post #12 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jessi View Post

 

This article only serves to show how dishonest the android zealots are in their desperation to claim that it was OK for google to rip off iOS.

Huh?

post #13 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeaEarleGreyHot View Post

 

Did Sammy give you this line of reasoning?   What "ideas from competitors" are there?  When the competition consists of a shark-tank of rip-off artists, there's no competitor "idea" to steal.

 

Perhaps Apple should try to file "blank" lawsuits, or simple suits over a triviality, and then when the suit finally makes it to court, they can amend it to include whatever product Sammy is selling at the moment, and drop the trivial claim.  Since it seems to take forever for the US courts to get around to doing anything.


"A blind squirrel finds an acorn every now and then."  Sure, most of Samsung's "features" are silly gimmicks, but even if they stumble upon a cool trick, Apple ought to shamelessly adopt it as partial payback for the wholesale theft Samsung committed.  Every now and then, my hands are wet or dirty and I'd rather not make physical contact with my gorgeous iPhone, so I could occasionally use those remote gestures.

 

The main point is that the courts are so slow, the devices will be obsolete before they face justice.  The government ought to set up a fast-track court for high-profile, fast-moving technology.

post #14 of 39
Phase 4: rinse and repeat.
How to enter the Apple logo  on iOS:
/Settings/Keyboard/Shortcut and paste in  which you copied from an email draft or a note. Screendump
Reply
How to enter the Apple logo  on iOS:
/Settings/Keyboard/Shortcut and paste in  which you copied from an email draft or a note. Screendump
Reply
post #15 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post

[links]

lol.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3Eleven View Post

Huh?

What could possibly have been confusing.

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply
post #16 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by herbapou View Post

 

Software patents, maybe they should sue Google then... or at least sue Motorola.

Or the infringements are all on the Samsung layer over Android?

 

There is a reason Apple goes after the hardware.  Software patents are far riskier.  It would be incredibly complicated to explain how Android (in and of itself) is a violation of patents.  It would probably involve showing lines of code to a jury and explaining algorithms and programming concepts in great detail.  Software patents cover concepts and logic, not physical or visual ideas.  

 

It's far easier to show a jury two devices that look near identical and ask them to decide if it is a patent violation or not.  It's like the difference between a criminal trial with a lot of physical evidence versus a criminal trial with nothing but circumstantial evidence. 

post #17 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jessi View Post

 

This article only serves to show how dishonest the android zealots are in their desperation to claim that it was OK for google to rip off iOS.


Did you read this article or just talking out of your a... or you are one of those spin doctor graduates.?

post #18 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by macFanDave View Post


"A blind squirrel finds an acorn every now and then."  Sure, most of Samsung's "features" are silly gimmicks, but even if they stumble upon a cool trick, Apple ought to shamelessly adopt it as partial payback for the wholesale theft Samsung committed.  Every now and then, my hands are wet or dirty and I'd rather not make physical contact with my gorgeous iPhone, so I could occasionally use those remote gestures.

 

The main point is that the courts are so slow, the devices will be obsolete before they face justice.  The government ought to set up a fast-track court for high-profile, fast-moving technology.

Can you list some of those "silly gimmicks"? iOS7 is adopting most of them, so iOS is "silly" in your opinion?

post #19 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


lol.
What could possibly have been confusing.


Why, you cannot read? and or comprehend info?.

post #20 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by andrzejls View Post

Can you list some of those "silly gimmicks"? iOS7 is adopting most of them, so iOS is "silly" in your opinion?

The ridiculous phone-bumping.  AirDrop via Bluetooth is much more practical and dignified.

 

The camera looking at your eyes and stopping video is both creepy and stupid.  We can only imagine what Samsung is doing with the data it harvests from the camera that always watches you.

post #21 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by andrzejls View Post

Why, you cannot read? and or comprehend info?.

Whoop, you quoted the wrong one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by andrzejls View Post

Can you list some of those "silly gimmicks"? iOS7 is adopting most of them, so iOS is "silly" in your opinion?

If you don't even know what the gimmicks are, how can you POSSIBLY say that iOS is "adopting most of them"? 1oyvey.gif

Think before you troll.

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply
post #22 of 39
I swear these judges are being paid by Samsung. A tax on the court's resources? Really? That's a legitimate reason to deny? So a whole new trial won't be any more taxing? Give me a break. This is obviously a pro-Samsung move to keep the G4 on the shelves. By the time it comes to trial it'll be obsolete.
post #23 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by jax44 View Post

The length of time to get a patent case to trial should be weeks to a few months, not years.
What a joke.

 

Because the only company that has business to conduct in the courtroom is Apple, right?

 

Sorry Jax, but this is probably the only line Apple gets to stand at the back of just like everybody else.

post #24 of 39
post #25 of 39

Time for Apple to pull up stumps and relocate the spaceship campus to east texas.

 

Justice and land development seem to move faster there.

 

Designed by Apple in Austin.

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 #26 of 39

Quote:
Originally Posted by rednival View Post

There is a reason Apple goes after the hardware.  Software patents are far riskier.  It would be incredibly complicated to explain how Android (in and of itself) is a violation of patents.  It would probably involve showing lines of code to a jury and explaining algorithms and programming concepts in great detail.  Software patents cover concepts and logic, not physical or visual ideas.  

 

You're right about software patents, however (and it's easy to get lawsuits confused) this particular case is only about them.

 

For example, Apple's on background data synchronization, and Samsung's on video compression.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jax44 View Post

The length of time to get a patent case to trial should be weeks to a few months, not years.

 

It's because determining infringement of a software patent can easily depend on even a missing comma.

 

Figuring out meaning can be extremely time consuming.  This is exactly why Judge Koh has limited the amount of pre-trial legal debate about claim construction (i.e. the wording), by asking both sides to only worry about the claims that are their best shots at winning.

 

Otherwise, the trial could be delayed for another year.  She wants it instead to happen as soon as possible.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by robogobo View Post

I swear these judges are being paid by Samsung.

 

You're picking on the wrong judge.  Magistrate Grewal is the one who possibly helped Apple win their big trial last year, by preventing Samsung from presenting prior art evidence, even though he had the power to allow it.

post #27 of 39

I love the use of the word "may" in the title.  lol.gif

 

Because all of the mobile tech giants are constantly suing each other I think it's about time that someone like SNL spoofs the tech presentations in a  skit where the tech giants just announce their lawsuits.  Whether they spoof Apple, Google/Motorola, Samsung, or Microsoft it all plays out the same.

 

"I'm very excited to present this to you today.  We're filing 20, count them, 20 (!) new lawsuits against our competitor."

post #28 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cash907 View Post

 

Because the only company that has business to conduct in the courtroom is Apple, right?

 

Sorry Jax, but this is probably the only line Apple gets to stand at the back of just like everybody else.

 

Considering the massive economic impact that smartphone sales have and the rapid rate of innovation in a new industry, it would be understandable if cases like this one got priority and were allowed to cut in line.  I'd even think they'd develop a separate court to deal with high-value, early-stage technologies.

post #29 of 39

Apple should put the time, money and energy they invest into lawsuits into developing new products.  

post #30 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by macFanDave View Post

 

Considering the massive economic impact that smartphone sales have and the rapid rate of innovation in a new industry, it would be understandable if cases like this one got priority and were allowed to cut in line.  I'd even think they'd develop a separate court to deal with high-value, early-stage technologies.

 


Be careful what you wish for.

 

http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/06/04/itc-bans-us-import-of-older-apple-iphones-ipads-after-samsung-win

post #31 of 39

Quote:

Originally Posted by macFanDave View Post

The camera looking at your eyes and stopping video is both creepy and stupid.  We can only imagine what Samsung is doing with the data it harvests from the camera that always watches you.

 

Well, first off, it is not always watching.  It's like Siri or Facetime. You have to turn it on, and this particular feature is only available while using a certain video player.

 

More importantly, eye watching code only looks for realtime geometric shapes and shades.

 

Not sure what kind of info you think anyone could harvest from that.  Colors of face blobs, perhaps?

 

Apple undoubtedly gets a lot more useful info from the voices they harvest from Siri requests.

post #32 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by tkell31 View Post

Apple should put the time, money and energy they invest into lawsuits into developing new products.  

Right. So other (read Samsung) can steal without putting the time, money and energy into developing new products?

post #33 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by tkell31 View Post

Samsung should put the time, money and energy they invest into copying Apple into developing new and innovative products of their own.  

 

Fixed.

"We're Apple. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits."
Reply
"We're Apple. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits."
Reply
post #34 of 39
Asia=Western Idea Xerox Machine
post #35 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by tkell31 View Post

Apple should put the time, money and energy they invest into lawsuits into developing new products.  

Apple spends more on RD than most companies are even worth. STFU
post #36 of 39
Here's a viewpoint worth at least thinking about:
http://www.patentprogress.org/2013/06/27/smartphone-patent-wars-a-lesson-for-privateers/

Privateering isn't a good thing, but it's darn sure becoming more common. Nokia figured it out.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #37 of 39

Well if you don't like touching phones then use Wifi Direct which has been available on Samsung Galaxy S phones since version 1. Airdrop is just Apple's marketing name for Wifi direct. There are many more ways of sharing between phones with an Android device than just NFC.

post #38 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by macFanDave View Post

The ridiculous phone-bumping.  AirDrop via Bluetooth is much more practical and dignified.

 

The camera looking at your eyes and stopping video is both creepy and stupid.  We can only imagine what Samsung is doing with the data it harvests from the camera that always watches you.

Well if you don't like touching phones then use Wifi Direct which has been available on Samsung Galaxy S phones since version 1. I'm sorry to say but Airdrop is just Apple's marketing name for Wifi direct. There are many more ways of sharing between Android devices than just NFC.

post #39 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cash907 View Post

 

Because the only company that has business to conduct in the courtroom is Apple, right?

 

Sorry Jax, but this is probably the only line Apple gets to stand at the back of just like everybody else.

My statement applies to everyone, not just Apple.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple says it may file new patent suit targeting Samsung Galaxy S4