ITC ruling against HTC may spell trouble for other Android makers

1356711

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 209
    realisticrealistic Posts: 1,154member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by minicapt View Post


    It's the bad luck scenario, much like the process where Microsoft was able to develop Windows using exactly the same Xerox PARC technologies and ideas that Apple 'stole'.



    Cheers



    Check your facts as you and they are wrong.
  • Reply 42 of 209
    bongobongo Posts: 158member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by physguy View Post


    Why would this put HTC 'Out of business'?? For the first patent we're talking about 'data detectors' creating links contextually on information in a text stream. If Apple would be successful, and decide NOT to license, which is their right, HTC would just have to remove this feature - hardly out of business. It would put them at a competitive disadvantage but that's what R&D is all about.



    And for those that say 'This is obvious'. First, its the use of this in the UI which, I believe in 1996 (the priority date of the patent) was NOT obvious. It is now because its 15 years old!!!! but still under patent.



    This is what IP is all about and it is NOT anti-competitive. Google/HTC knew well about this patent and chose NOT to work around it and NOT to license it. Their bad.



    First of all these are not HTC features... these are core Android features and by core i mean even third party apps use them through the Android API.

    Regarding obvious... please... if you display text that contains a phone number how it is not obvious that selecting that phone number should enable a call.

    Software should be excluded from the patent system altogether.
  • Reply 43 of 209
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bongo View Post


    First of all these are not HTC features... these are core Android features and by core i mean even third party apps use them through the Android API.

    Regarding obvious... please... if you display text that contains a phone number how it is not obvious that selecting that phone number should enable a call.

    Software should be excluded from the patent system altogether.



    If the ruling in Apples favor stands then indeed they are not HTC features. They would be Apple features. Ones that HTC would be responsible for removing. Or licensing or cross licensing etc.
  • Reply 44 of 209
    irnchrizirnchriz Posts: 1,616member
    There is nothing new to see here, ALL companies sue each other and negotiate licensing deals ALL OF THE TIME. It is just that Apple is such a high profile company that this actually becomes newsworthy.



    It is also worthwhile for companies like Nokia and HTC to publicise these cases as Apple has a very public image and these cases tarnish that image. HTC etc hope that Apple will want a quick settlement to avoid further possible bad press.



    Patent cases are a part of business, just get over it. Again, nothing to see here.
  • Reply 45 of 209
    bongobongo Posts: 158member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by irnchriz View Post


    There is nothing new to see here, ALL companies sue each other and negotiate licensing deals ALL OF THE TIME. It is just that Apple is such a high profile company that this actually becomes newsworthy.



    When was the last time Google sued for one of it's ~700 patents? Exactly... never.
  • Reply 46 of 209
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bongo View Post


    When was the last time Google sued for one of it's ~700 patents? Exactly... never.



    Perhaps you should launch a search engine using their software patents and try out your theory.
  • Reply 47 of 209
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,718member
    I have been trying to google Steve's statements regarding how well patented the iPhone technology was back at the original launch of the iPhone as it seems to to ring very true now. I've had no luck so far as all this new stuff swamps the results. However, I seem to recall Steve made a pretty pointed comment about the fact Apple had patents and would defend them regarding iOS. This was back when a Blackberry was considered leading edge and Schmidt was still trusted by Jobs and Google and Apple were friends.
  • Reply 48 of 209
    toppuratoppura Posts: 4member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post


    I have been trying to google Steve's statements regarding how well patented the iPhone technology was back at the original launch of the iPhone as it seems to to ring very true now. I've had no luck so far as all this new stuff swamps the results. However, I seem to recall Steve made a pretty pointed comment about the fact Apple had patents and would defend them regarding iOS. This was back when a Blackberry was considered leading edge and Schmidt was still trusted by Jobs and Google and Apple were friends.



    You can find Steve's introduction of iPhone on YouTube. There he mentions about those patents.
  • Reply 49 of 209
    piotpiot Posts: 1,346member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post


    I have been trying to google Steve's statements regarding how well patented the iPhone technology was back at the original launch of the iPhone as it seems to to ring very true now.



    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VLb5XdxRm8&NR=1

    Around 2 min 30 sec



    For some Steve Jobs drama (plus humour) part one is worth another look also.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZYlhShD2oQ
  • Reply 50 of 209
    Yeah the patent system is messed up and very arcane, and it is quite a legitimate complaint that, much of what is patented seems to be obvious to those us programmers who have been in the business and read some of seminal research over the years.



    However, one must admit that Apple has created what seems to be some of the most innovative products, innovative functionality, innovative business practices. Proof is that the iPod, ipodtouch, iPhone, iPad, Apple Stores, AppStore, iTunes have created whole new areas, and that those trying to compete have been doing so by producing products that are as close to Apple products as possible. It should be clear that IP law must protect Apple and the very few other innovative companies (and people) as a matter of critical public policy -- actually it's constitutionally required.



    Apple's success is an emergent property of their internal practices, their leadership, the quality of the people they hire. Apple is a forest which has created and maintains it's own ecosystem, each tree being a patent, trademark, copyright, trade secret, and secrecy in general. As the most sued company on the planet, others are trying to destroy the forest one tree at a time, where each tree alone seems unimportant.
  • Reply 51 of 209
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MadGoat View Post


    As much as I dislike Android and all the other iPhone knockoffs. It seems that Apple is becoming the big patent troll these days.



    Sorry, but defending your patents does not make one a patent troll.





    More importantly, everyone has missed the major issue here. ITC has been dropping patent infringement cases left and right. For the past few years, it appeared that no matter what you did, ITC would rule that there was no infringement - regardless of how strong the patent. This is the first time for quite a while that ITC said that there was infringement. If ITC says there's infringement, you can take it to the bank.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by robbydek View Post


    It's sort of obvious that Apple had stuff taken, but I wonder if it would be such as big deal if it was another company? The question that remains is will Apple allow a reasonable settlement or is the Federal government going to have to step in because they force their competitors out of business. Hopefully, not the latter. If a company steals another's patent, they should have to pay, but in the same way, a company who holds all the patents for the ideal device, shouldn't be able to keep patents away their competition and hence have no competition. Apple is already huge and we really don't want them being the only major mobile device maker and operating system.



    Why should Apple do that? Apple has no obligation to license their technology, nor should they. You see, we live in a free market economy. It is up to APPLE to decide what to do with their inventions, not a bunch of people whining on AI.



    [QUOTE=macologist;1901838]Ideally, Android should have offered a very Unique Thing of it's own, not a Me Too Imitation!!! /QUOTE]



    Android's entire business is based on "FREE" rather than innovation. Why are you surprised that there's no innovation there?



    Not to mention, of course, Google's years of disregard for anyone else's intellectual property.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post


    Actually he's closer to being right than you think. The supreme court recently changed the game here and made it far harder to get an injunction from the court system, because courts were required to consider public interest as well as the patent holders rights. Absent an injunction the best a patent holder can do is extract court awarded damages and license fees going forwards.



    That applies mostly to preliminary injunctions and very unusual cases. The Supreme Court has allowed companies to refuse to license their technologies.
  • Reply 52 of 209
    neiltc13neiltc13 Posts: 182member
    mailto: links were around a LONG time before Apple filed that patent. I hope this was taken into account.
  • Reply 53 of 209
    freediverxfreediverx Posts: 1,423member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MadGoat View Post


    As much as I dislike Android and all the other iPhone knockoffs. It seems that Apple is becoming the big patent troll these days.



    I would love to see all the android devices fall off the face of the earth, but not like this.



    To paraphrase Wikipedia:

    A patent troll is a company that enforces its patents in an unduly aggressive or opportunistic manner typically with no intention to manufacture or market the patented invention.



    Apple is certainly being aggressive in protecting its patents but they're clearly not in the same category as scumbag companies who buy obscure patents with the sole intention of making easy money.



    You may not like Apple using its patents against Google's Android but they are the last company that would meet the definition of a patent troll, given their role in singlehandedly revolutionizing the smartphone industry and continuously pushing the envelope over the last four years.



    If legal proceedings weren't so time consuming, Google could have been sent back to the drawing board before they built such a large platform based in large part on Apple's IP.
  • Reply 54 of 209
    zaim2zaim2 Posts: 45member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by freediverx View Post


    If legal proceedings weren't so time consuming, Google could have been sent back to the drawing board before they built such a large platform based in large part on Apple's IP.



    http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011...infringes.html



    Too bad just existing as an operating system let alone a smartphone infringes on Apple's 90's patents. The only way they couldn't infringe is not to build one at all.
  • Reply 55 of 209
    granmastakgranmastak Posts: 298member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MadGoat View Post


    As much as I dislike Android and all the other iPhone knockoffs. It seems that Apple is becoming the big patent troll these days.



    I would love to see all the android devices fall off the face of the earth, but not like this.



    I don't think they will fall per se. They may have to license those patents, as I'm sure they license others. Licensing is a great business to be in



    Everyone goes home happy
  • Reply 56 of 209
    cloudgazercloudgazer Posts: 2,161member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    That applies mostly to preliminary injunctions and very unusual cases. The Supreme Court has allowed companies to refuse to license their technologies.



    The public interest test is there though, and conceivably would apply if Apple tried to have the majority of smartphones excluded from the US market. My point was simply that it's not open and shut, possession of a patent doesn't necessarily allow you to refuse to license, other considerations exist especially if there's a big existing market being served.
  • Reply 57 of 209
    freediverxfreediverx Posts: 1,423member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by physguy View Post


    Why would this put HTC 'Out of business'?? For the first patent we're talking about 'data detectors' creating links contextually on information in a text stream. If Apple would be successful, and decide NOT to license, which is their right, HTC would just have to remove this feature - hardly out of business. It would put them at a competitive disadvantage but that's what R&D is all about.



    And for those that say 'This is obvious'. First, its the use of this in the UI which, I believe in 1996 (the priority date of the patent) was NOT obvious. It is now because its 15 years old!!!! but still under patent.



    This is what IP is all about and it is NOT anti-competitive. Google/HTC knew well about this patent and chose NOT to work around it and NOT to license it. Their bad.



    The "wheel" seems like an obvious invention yet look at all the otherwise highly advanced civilizations that never discovered it. It's easy to label a brilliant idea obvious after someone else comes up with it. How many years were consumers forced to wallow in the stagnant mobile phone market before the first iPhone completely revolutionized it?
  • Reply 58 of 209
    freediverxfreediverx Posts: 1,423member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by matrix07 View Post


    I'm on the same boat. Let them pay. Android is good for anyone who doesn't want or can't afford iPhone. That's OK but they have to pay. No free ride.



    I don't get the idea that Android phones provide an affordable alternative to the iPhone. The subsidized price of a smartphone is insignificant compared to the cost of a corresponding data plan over a few months. Even if you gave iPhones away for free there would be a very large segment of the market who could not afford the data plans.



    Why should mobile phone manufacturers who failed to deliver a shred of quality or innovation for years get to freely copy Apple's many innovations and secure a large stake in the market while claiming Apple's inventions are just common sense? Likewise why must Apple allow competitors to steal their ideas and their market share in exchange for licensing fees?
  • Reply 59 of 209
    freediverxfreediverx Posts: 1,423member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by minicapt View Post


    It's the bad luck scenario, much like the process where Microsoft was able to develop Windows using exactly the same Xerox PARC technologies and ideas that Apple 'stole'.



    Cheers





    Classic troll. Do some research before parroting simplistic lies.
  • Reply 60 of 209
    freediverxfreediverx Posts: 1,423member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post


    I have been trying to google Steve's statements regarding how well patented the iPhone technology was back at the original launch of the iPhone as it seems to to ring very true now. I've had no luck so far as all this new stuff swamps the results. However, I seem to recall Steve made a pretty pointed comment about the fact Apple had patents and would defend them regarding iOS. This was back when a Blackberry was considered leading edge and Schmidt was still trusted by Jobs and Google and Apple were friends.



    Enjoy:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8JZBLjxPBUU



Sign In or Register to comment.