If they don't copy, they don't need to worry about the patent. Here's a thought - how about they INNOVATE their way out of this ? Clearly it is impossible to change from slide to lock/unlock according to the Taiwanese Govt. They should therefore go to war with the USA to protect their right to copy and steal.
A Dutch court ruled an earlier Apple patent on the slide to unlock gesture was invalid because of prior art. The Neonode N1m phone running Windows CE had a similar gesture in 2006, but it didn't display a graphic. Apple added that to the new patent, but it's entirely possible a court will rule that to be "obvious" and unpatentable.
Incorrect.
In the first place it was a single judge who threw the request out not a "court decision." Secondly, one judges opinion on pre-trial matters does not set a precedent because nothing was officially decided by the court at all (there was no ruling). Third, what the N1M does, doesn't actually violate this patent because it's so completely different from what this patent actually describes. Fourth, the judge did this *before* Apple was granted the patent and thus couldn't do it again today anyway.
And finally, the patent Apple was granted was applied for *previous* to the design of the N1M meaning even if your poor interpretation of what happened in the Dutch case was correct, the N1M would still lose out to this patent.
Apple added graphics to the feature and called it their own. Maybe Apple applied for the patent before this phone was developed, but that'd be news to me.
Incorrect. Please see the reply to "KPOM" on this thread.
Meanwhile in a Taiwanese smartphone development department...
Boss: So, what other ideas do we have for unlocking a screen in a smartphone?
Designer: erm... **crickets**
Boss: COME ON!!!! Anything!!!
Designer: **opens Apple website and starts to look at it and sketch stuff on paper** **hands paper to boss**
Boss: Mmm... I like this...
And there we have it...
Seriously though, the fact that they say that a device without "slide to unlock" is not a smartphone is almost a statement of incompetence... Draw a circle, tap numbers in the corners, lick the ffffing thing, but please, stop copying as "the only option"...
Taiwan may be scared, because HTC is a smaller fish. Samsung would simply go to court and invalidate the patent.
I guess you must have missed this paragraph:
As a result of his actions, those two agencies could end up collaborating with Taiwanese companies to settle potential patent infringement lawsuits with Apple, if need be. The premier reportedly said that the agencies should "do their best to help defend the legitimate rights and interest of local companies in any patent fights with Apple."
Maybe it's not as easy to do as you make it out to be.
The Chinese and Koreans need to stop copying Apple and create their own products.
Copying is a sign of an immature society.
The Japanese use to copy U.S. products in the 1960s. Those old enough to experience it can laugh at the crappy clones the Japanese companies produced. But the Japanese grew up and now create their own products.
A Dutch court ruled an earlier Apple patent on the slide to unlock gesture was invalid because of prior art. The Neonode N1m phone running Windows CE had a similar gesture in 2006, but it didn't display a graphic. Apple added that to the new patent, but it's entirely possible a court will rule that to be "obvious" and unpatentable.
Let me correct the dates slightly. The first Neonode, using slide-to-unlock, was demoed in 2002, before the iPhone was even conceived.
The last Neononde model, N2, released in February 2007, displays arrows as guides for the gesture.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
This is a position I can support. Apple does appear to have the first patent and no "prior art" does what is explained in their patent, but I can see a court invalidating this patent because it's "obvious" as an inevitable way people will unlock a flat surface with a long history of physical doors having a flat slider to un/lock.
Which patents are you referring to?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody
Incorrect.
In the first place it was a single judge who threw the request out not a "court decision." Secondly, one judges opinion on pre-trial matters does not set a precedent because nothing was officially decided by the court at all (there was no ruling). Third, what the N1M does, doesn't actually violate this patent because it's so completely different from what this patent actually describes. Fourth, the judge did this *before* Apple was granted the patent and thus couldn't do it again today anyway.
And finally, the patent Apple was granted was applied for *previous* to the design of the N1M meaning even if your poor interpretation of what happened in the Dutch case was correct, the N1M would still lose out to this patent.
As a result of his actions, those two agencies could end up collaborating with Taiwanese companies to settle potential patent infringement lawsuits with Apple, if need be. The premier reportedly said that the agencies should "do their best to help defend the legitimate rights and interest of local companies in any patent fights with Apple."
Maybe it's not as easy to do as you make it out to be.
Maybe it's just cheaper to settle in advance than go full out on revoking the patent. Rumor has it that Microsoft doesn't really have any strong patents to extort money from HTC for Android, but HTC prefers to pay anyway (for patents that are secret).
Some kids are too scared to stand up to the bullies.
Maybe it's just cheaper to settle in advance than go full out on revoking the patent. Rumor has it that Microsoft doesn't really have any strong patents to extort money from HTC for Android, but HTC prefers to pay anyway (for patents that are secret).
Some kids are too scared to stand up to the bullies.
The original purpose of the unlock slide as a very specific gesture was to prevent it from unlocking in your pocket and accidentally dialing your wife while you are making out with your girlfriend.
Is the WinPhone unlock an equally deliberate sliding action or is it just slide up anywhere on the screen?
Taiwan may be scared, because HTC is a smaller fish. Samsung would simply go to court and invalidate the patent.
You can only try this, but you can not just do it because it does not depend on them but on a legal system (and you cant just throw money on it to make it go away). I have looked at the patent and read the so called pre-art. Personally I dont see how they (Sammy) could win it (with the information available at the time being).
And fuck it there are so many ways of unlocking the screen that it really doesnt matter at all to go after this. But the psycological effect is even worse for those that chose to use it in their phones if they remove it in fear of retaliation. Its just going to look like having a smoking gun in posession
You can only try this, but you can not just do it because it does not depend on them but on a legal system (and you cant just throw money on it to make it go away). I have looked at the patent and read the so called pre-art. Personaly think they (Sammy) wouldnt win it.
And fuck it there are so many ways of unlocking the screen that it really doesnt matter at all to go after this. But the psycological effect is even worse for those that chose to use it in their phones if they remove it in fear of retaliation. Its just going to look like having a smoking gun in posession
Well I think they have a good chance to invalidate the patent but in the end it's not up to us internet lawyers to decide.
As to unlocking, I am only arguing on principle; with a phone the size of mine slide-to-unlock is completely impractical, so I use the pattern unlock, and answer calls by pressing the camera button.
But we've seen that many manufacturers tend to herd in their often flawed implementations. It is not inconceivable that HTC really doesn't see how they can change the unlock around, or that Samsung sees value in crapping over Android with design stolen from iOS.
Apple added graphics to the feature and called it their own. Maybe Apple applied for the patent before this phone was developed, but that'd be news to me. Of course the worry is that they'll use this to go on another streak of lawsuits against competition.
Where does this show it was invented before the iPhones unlock. they had been working on the iPhone years before it was released.
Comments
Surely there are plenty of other gestures could be used to unlock a touchscreen?
Why use a gesture at all. What's wrong with a good old-fashioned button.
A Dutch court ruled an earlier Apple patent on the slide to unlock gesture was invalid because of prior art. The Neonode N1m phone running Windows CE had a similar gesture in 2006, but it didn't display a graphic. Apple added that to the new patent, but it's entirely possible a court will rule that to be "obvious" and unpatentable.
Incorrect.
In the first place it was a single judge who threw the request out not a "court decision." Secondly, one judges opinion on pre-trial matters does not set a precedent because nothing was officially decided by the court at all (there was no ruling). Third, what the N1M does, doesn't actually violate this patent because it's so completely different from what this patent actually describes. Fourth, the judge did this *before* Apple was granted the patent and thus couldn't do it again today anyway.
And finally, the patent Apple was granted was applied for *previous* to the design of the N1M meaning even if your poor interpretation of what happened in the Dutch case was correct, the N1M would still lose out to this patent.
This has been posted repeatedly, but whatever:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tj-KS...ature=youtu.be
Slide to unlock is demonstrated around 4:00 mark.
Apple added graphics to the feature and called it their own. Maybe Apple applied for the patent before this phone was developed, but that'd be news to me.
Incorrect. Please see the reply to "KPOM" on this thread.
Boss: So, what other ideas do we have for unlocking a screen in a smartphone?
Designer: erm... **crickets**
Boss: COME ON!!!! Anything!!!
Designer: **opens Apple website and starts to look at it and sketch stuff on paper** **hands paper to boss**
Boss: Mmm... I like this...
And there we have it...
Seriously though, the fact that they say that a device without "slide to unlock" is not a smartphone is almost a statement of incompetence... Draw a circle, tap numbers in the corners, lick the ffffing thing, but please, stop copying as "the only option"...
Taiwan may be scared, because HTC is a smaller fish. Samsung would simply go to court and invalidate the patent.
I guess you must have missed this paragraph:
As a result of his actions, those two agencies could end up collaborating with Taiwanese companies to settle potential patent infringement lawsuits with Apple, if need be. The premier reportedly said that the agencies should "do their best to help defend the legitimate rights and interest of local companies in any patent fights with Apple."
Maybe it's not as easy to do as you make it out to be.
Copying is a sign of an immature society.
The Japanese use to copy U.S. products in the 1960s. Those old enough to experience it can laugh at the crappy clones the Japanese companies produced. But the Japanese grew up and now create their own products.
Grow up Taiwan.
A Dutch court ruled an earlier Apple patent on the slide to unlock gesture was invalid because of prior art. The Neonode N1m phone running Windows CE had a similar gesture in 2006, but it didn't display a graphic. Apple added that to the new patent, but it's entirely possible a court will rule that to be "obvious" and unpatentable.
Let me correct the dates slightly. The first Neonode, using slide-to-unlock, was demoed in 2002, before the iPhone was even conceived.
The last Neononde model, N2, released in February 2007, displays arrows as guides for the gesture.
This is a position I can support. Apple does appear to have the first patent and no "prior art" does what is explained in their patent, but I can see a court invalidating this patent because it's "obvious" as an inevitable way people will unlock a flat surface with a long history of physical doors having a flat slider to un/lock.
Which patents are you referring to?
Incorrect.
In the first place it was a single judge who threw the request out not a "court decision." Secondly, one judges opinion on pre-trial matters does not set a precedent because nothing was officially decided by the court at all (there was no ruling). Third, what the N1M does, doesn't actually violate this patent because it's so completely different from what this patent actually describes. Fourth, the judge did this *before* Apple was granted the patent and thus couldn't do it again today anyway.
And finally, the patent Apple was granted was applied for *previous* to the design of the N1M meaning even if your poor interpretation of what happened in the Dutch case was correct, the N1M would still lose out to this patent.
Can you quote any dates or patent numbers?
I guess you must have missed this paragraph:
As a result of his actions, those two agencies could end up collaborating with Taiwanese companies to settle potential patent infringement lawsuits with Apple, if need be. The premier reportedly said that the agencies should "do their best to help defend the legitimate rights and interest of local companies in any patent fights with Apple."
Maybe it's not as easy to do as you make it out to be.
Maybe it's just cheaper to settle in advance than go full out on revoking the patent. Rumor has it that Microsoft doesn't really have any strong patents to extort money from HTC for Android, but HTC prefers to pay anyway (for patents that are secret).
Some kids are too scared to stand up to the bullies.
Maybe it's just cheaper to settle in advance than go full out on revoking the patent. Rumor has it that Microsoft doesn't really have any strong patents to extort money from HTC for Android, but HTC prefers to pay anyway (for patents that are secret).
Some kids are too scared to stand up to the bullies.
... or the kid knows that the other kid is right.
How does WinPhone 7 unlock? I have never actually seen one yet.
you slide up to unlock a wp7 device
you slide up to unlock a wp7 device
The original purpose of the unlock slide as a very specific gesture was to prevent it from unlocking in your pocket and accidentally dialing your wife while you are making out with your girlfriend.
Is the WinPhone unlock an equally deliberate sliding action or is it just slide up anywhere on the screen?
Taiwan may be scared, because HTC is a smaller fish. Samsung would simply go to court and invalidate the patent.
You can only try this, but you can not just do it because it does not depend on them but on a legal system (and you cant just throw money on it to make it go away). I have looked at the patent and read the so called pre-art. Personally I dont see how they (Sammy) could win it (with the information available at the time being).
And fuck it there are so many ways of unlocking the screen that it really doesnt matter at all to go after this. But the psycological effect is even worse for those that chose to use it in their phones if they remove it in fear of retaliation. Its just going to look like having a smoking gun in posession
You can only try this, but you can not just do it because it does not depend on them but on a legal system (and you cant just throw money on it to make it go away). I have looked at the patent and read the so called pre-art. Personaly think they (Sammy) wouldnt win it.
And fuck it there are so many ways of unlocking the screen that it really doesnt matter at all to go after this. But the psycological effect is even worse for those that chose to use it in their phones if they remove it in fear of retaliation. Its just going to look like having a smoking gun in posession
Well I think they have a good chance to invalidate the patent but in the end it's not up to us internet lawyers to decide.
As to unlocking, I am only arguing on principle; with a phone the size of mine slide-to-unlock is completely impractical, so I use the pattern unlock, and answer calls by pressing the camera button.
But we've seen that many manufacturers tend to herd in their often flawed implementations. It is not inconceivable that HTC really doesn't see how they can change the unlock around, or that Samsung sees value in crapping over Android with design stolen from iOS.
This has been posted repeatedly, but whatever:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tj-KS...ature=youtu.be
Slide to unlock is demonstrated around 4:00 mark.
Apple added graphics to the feature and called it their own. Maybe Apple applied for the patent before this phone was developed, but that'd be news to me. Of course the worry is that they'll use this to go on another streak of lawsuits against competition.
Where does this show it was invented before the iPhones unlock. they had been working on the iPhone years before it was released.
Or maybe they could simply come up with their own way to unlock their phones.
My thought exactly.
Why can't you simply say "Open Sesame" to unlock the thing?
That would be ...
Old Mac Guy "Please Siri, unlock"
Siri "Voice analysis confirms you are Old Mac Guy, unlocked"