Apple files countersuit against Nokia

145791014

Comments

  • Reply 121 of 278
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post


    I think what he means is Apple is showing "the Number one worldwide cellphone maker is in your sights and has nothing to combat their shrinking sales..." in their countersuit. It isn't related to who initiated the proceedings.



    Nah, looked like he was talking about going after these companies. Especially since he mentions RIM and Google... Apple wasn't sued by them if I recall? Nice try though.
  • Reply 122 of 278
    dluxdlux Posts: 666member
    The link keeps redirecting to page 3.
  • Reply 123 of 278
    richlrichl Posts: 2,213member
    Apple's patent list is an interesting one. All but one of those patents must have been filed 5+ years ago if Nokia can't claim prior art.
  • Reply 124 of 278
    Multi-touch has been in the pipeline for a long time - since at least the 80s - when the first attempts at building on the 60's initial attempts at touch-screen technology were rolling out. The attempts were (comparatively) kludgey for the most part and did not have any cachet at all in the consumer space. It was simply a geek thing for much of the early development. Multi-touch, (or multi touch or multitouch) has been a generic term covering several different aspects of the concept - using several points of contact on a surface as a user interface to control the machine. Much of the work being done in the space, by Jeff Han, his spinoff company PerceptivePixel, and easily a dozen others involves rear-projection or (as in the case of the Microsoft Surface and other, homebuilt interfaces) sub-surface rojection and a form of surface interaction sensing. The Surface uses four cameras in the infrared band to pickup finger touches and objects that have been set up with associative microdot labels. Jeff Han uses use infrared light emitting diodes along with an infrared camera in an implementation of FTIP. FingerWork, bought by Apple had developed an interface using capacitive touch sensing, which is more compact, and easier to use in high light situations (that dimish the performance of the infrared type).



    So multi touch is a broad term that covers a variety of screen technologies (infrared/capacitive/resistive, etc), a number of different implementations of interfaces and form factors. To argue that Apple claims to have invented it is rather silly and ignorant, in light of the known history, SJ's "quote" notwithstanding.



    'Nuf said.
  • Reply 125 of 278
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Wiggin View Post


    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.



    Save yourself the trouble of explaining how Patents are designed to work. People refuse to learn.
  • Reply 126 of 278
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Robodude View Post


    Nah, looked like he was talking about going after these companies. Especially since he mentions RIM and Google... Apple wasn't sued by them if I recall? Nice try though.



    what I am saying is Apple probably could counter sue most companies that comes after them, its not wise, but since Nokia choose to come after the Iphone, when I am sure they let other competitors/partners slide, shows they want a piece of the Apple pie (no pun intended), or at least to stop the hemorrhaging sales of their top spot. While Apple could have probably have sued Nokia before this point, they where probably keeping their cards close to their chest, as apple does with most of its technology. Its almost as if most of apple's competitors wait til they produce something before they see the inherent value of proper implementation.



    Companies like Nokia are going to have create their own multi-touch systems and do it well, which is not likely seeing their previous manifestations. So their best hope is to hopefully license what apple has built. Pointing out the microsoft surface as a viable multi-touch systems is ridiculous and could never been used at in a small form factor as phone. Now that apple has patented the best use of multi-touch they have a large target on their back. This is everyone is coming after them, but they will soon see the repeat of the Ipod phenomenon unfold before their eyes and competitors are powerless to stop it, unless they come after the most mundane of lawsuits/patent infringements. If a company could have done it better before Apple, then we would have certainly have seen it. Now companies are going to have spend millions to work around the patented apple multi-touch, and I gather that will be quite the challenge.



    Nokia's best bet is the 3D multi-touch they have patented, but a patent is a far cry from a working prototype. Sounds very interesting, but I doubt we will see that anytime soon to save Nokia's downward technology spiral.
  • Reply 127 of 278
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by gin_tonic View Post


    Android and Google repeats Windows (Unix, Linux, etc) way - the same OS on different hardware sets. And iPhone is pure Apple ideology - single OS on VERY limited hardware configurations.

    Let check the market share of Windows/Unix/Linux and MacOS - I think you will something interesting



    And apple will continue to be the premium brand and google will slide in the less desirable mass market with low profit/fractured OS that just runs OK on multiple devices. For those of us that implementation and proficiency is key will let a company build a device that is rock solid.



    Isn't Google already abandoning older Android for their new Google Phone ANDROID...how can anyone keep this straight? What interest does google have to update devices that compete against their latest and greatest Google Phone Android..what's that one called...snacky cake? Since the others are Donut, Cupcake, and Eclair....all MANLY SCUDLY names right? I will ask the first person with a Droid phone how they like their Eclair OS...I hope its sweet and stuff with sugary but useless filling...mmm..I prefer healthy treats like Apples...
  • Reply 128 of 278
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,660member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dlux View Post


    I don't understand why <you-know-who> keeps coming back, nor why AI allows him back. After close to 6500 posts of trivial provocation one would think this problem would get reconciled.



    Any forum has its contentious members, but I have never seen anyone so persistent or oblivious to correction. I enjoy when people more informed than myself answer arcane questions about wireless technology or software development, but I fear some of them have given up here because of the endless trolling. Slashdot has been held up as the example of a lost cause for technical discussion. Only with diligence can other sites not fall into that same category.



    Ignore function. If everyone simply kept him on ignore, his posts would never enter into the discussion. It's really that simple.
  • Reply 129 of 278
    tbelltbell Posts: 3,146member
    Apple seems to have a strong defense and strong offense. Apple is essentially saying, Nokia has an obligation to license it's patents to Apple under fair and nondiscriminatory terms because Nokia's patented technologies are standards and Nokia agreed to license it's patents under such terms to members of the trade group that both Apple and Nokia belong to. Further, Apple is saying Nokia is copying Apple's patents, which Apple has not agreed to license and are not necessary to create a standard.



    Nokia's patents are necessary for any cell phone operator to operate today. Apple's are not.
  • Reply 130 of 278
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,660member
    Since it seems to have come and gone, it's probably worth restating what is being reported as the crux of the matter:



    Nokia was attempting to use their patents on certain underlying GSM tech to force Apple to cross license aspects of the iPhone tech. They were doing this by using the stick of demanding excessive and non-typical licensing fees while holding out the carrot of "equitable" cross licensing.



    Apple didn't bite, so Nokia sued. Apple has counter-sued, claiming infringement on the very items that Nokia was trying to get an agreement on, plus using the lawsuit as a vehicle to make public editorial comment regarding Nokia's fee/cross-licensing strategy.



    The items Apple is claiming infringement on are all specific implementations of processes, not completely untenable claims to things like "scrolling lists." I really wish people would stop popping off about the terribleness of the patent process without least grasping that fundamental point.*



    *As explained above by Wiggin
  • Reply 131 of 278
    dluxdlux Posts: 666member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by addabox View Post


    Ignore function. If everyone simply kept him on ignore, his posts would never enter into the discussion. It's really that simple.



    Unfortunately, that won't work for newcomers. Their first impressions of the AI forums may be tainted by the endless provocation, and they may never come back.



    After 6400+ posts, the problem has gone on long enough. Report egregious trolling when it occurs and we'll all see a respite like we have now (which hopefully becomes permanent.)
  • Reply 132 of 278
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,660member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dlux View Post


    Unfortunately, that won't work for newcomers. Their first impressions of the AI forums may be tainted by the endless provocation, and they may never come back.



    After 6400+ posts, the problem has gone on long enough. Report egregious trolling when it occurs and we'll all see a respite like we have now (which hopefully becomes permanent.)



    I agree with that as far as it goes, but I do think that if people who have been around a little more do both (ignore, at least publicly, and report), the problem would be diminished.



    Certain posters feed off the attention, and back and forth in the discussion just increases the likelihood that such posters will continue their pattern. Also, "ignore" increases one's sense of well being and makes thread scanning much more relaxing.
  • Reply 133 of 278
    jfanningjfanning Posts: 3,385member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post


    I think what he means is Apple is showing "the Number one worldwide cellphone maker is in your sights and has nothing to combat their shrinking sales..." in their countersuit. It isn't related to who initiated the proceedings.



    Yip, Apple with their 0.7% market share
  • Reply 134 of 278
    tbelltbell Posts: 3,146member
    This should be resolved as follows: Apple pays the same licensing fees to Nokia that Sony and others pay, which is far less then Nokia is demanding. Further, Nokia doesn't get to license any of Apple's patents because Apple's patents are not part of a standard body.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Robodude View Post


    ... 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?



  • Reply 135 of 278
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TBell View Post


    This should be resolved as follows: Apple pays the same licensing fees to Nokia that Sony and others pay, which is far less then Nokia is demanding. Further, Nokia doesn't get to license any of Apple's patents because Apple's patents are not part of a standard body.



    do you or does anyone know any specific reasons why nokia is asking more money from apple?
  • Reply 136 of 278
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,660member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jfanning View Post


    Yip, Apple with their 0.7% market share



    Really? So we're going to start citing an out-of-some-bloggers ass percentage number based on global cell phone users to try and pretend the iPhone isn't doing fantastically well? As opposed to Apple's skyrocketing share of the smartphone market? Which of course is the only metric that makes any sense?



    Why?
  • Reply 137 of 278
    One simple question:



    Can an iPhone work without Nokia's technology? Survey says: NO !!!!!!!!!!!



    Can any of Nokia's phones work without Apple's technology? Hell yes....



    Suit dismissed. Suck on it Apple. You got caught and have to pay Nokia, but it will not come to that. An exchange of technology will happen and everyone will go their merry way. The only winners are the lawyers.
  • Reply 138 of 278
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,946member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by gin_tonic View Post


    Android and Google repeats Windows (Unix, Linux, etc) way - the same OS on different hardware sets.



    What happened to this user's posts?



    Anyway, Windows and Linux and Unix aren't even nearly the same thing and shouldn't be so quickly conflated. I don't see how Apple escapes this judgement, because Apple says iPhone OS X is derived from Apple OS X. The UI is very different, but the back end isn't so terribly different. Linux gets adapted at least as much to many different uses, such as wireless routers and TiVos, and people wouldn't know that unless they're told, the UI and code is changed to suit the task.
  • Reply 139 of 278
    gwydiongwydion Posts: 1,067member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TBell View Post


    , which is far less then Nokia is demanding.



    According to Apple. Courts will say which of them is right
  • Reply 140 of 278
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,946member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sapporobabyrtrns View Post


    One simple question:



    Can an iPhone work without Nokia's technology? Survey says: NO !!!!!!!!!!!



    Can any of Nokia's phones work without Apple's technology? Hell yes....



    Suit dismissed. Suck on it Apple. You got caught and have to pay Nokia, but it will not come to that. An exchange of technology will happen and everyone will go their merry way. The only winners are the lawyers.



    Way to take a complicated legal subject and oversimplify it to the level of children's playground logic.
Sign In or Register to comment.