Unless, of course, "start in the middle of a circle and move to the outside of said circle by swiping with your finger" can be called something different.
I'm pretty sure Apple has a lock on that one, but I'm not a lawyer.
I said something similar a few months ago and several people challenged me on it so I went back and read the entire patent wording very carefully and (IMO of course), I don't see how Samsung (or any Android vendor) can get around it.
I'm fine with that anyway since it's pretty clear that (whatever the courts decide), Apple *did* in fact come up with the idea first.
No one has yet come forward with anything that really similar as prior art or in fact claimed that they invented it first. Those arguing against it are merely arguing that they should be allowed to copy it because it's "obvious," which is the defence of pretty much every IP thief.
I hope they win anyway. I've had a few of my ideas stolen myself and I'm always on the side of the inventor/artist over those who are just users.
Pick a different gesture then and problem solved assuming that the patenting of gestures is determined patentable (obviously I'm not an expert on the details of patent law). This just looks like patent trolling anyway. Apple wants to limit the competition, so they look for anything that could be interpreted as infringement on one of many vague patents. They're just tying up the court systems.
I think you are uninformed on the facts.
The patent in question is hardly vague. If they lose the case at all it will be because the patent is in fact overly specific.
The facts would also indicate that far from just being obstructionist or using patents as a weapon, Apple is actually interested in protecting it's original ideas. The screen unlock is definitely an original Apple idea as are the data detectors.
The only way you rationally conclude Apple was interested in pushing these patents for other reasons than protecting their original IP is if you can prove that they aren't in fact original ideas.
And by the way this whole thread is trolling. Or does it only count when the troller is using common sense?
By the way, thanks for "sharing" about the two accounts (snitch). As you can clearly see (administrator), one was never authorized, i.e. I made a mistake the first time. Feel free to delete the account I've never used.
Any more "damming" secrets you want to share about me? I'm sure you can find some if you dig around enough. And by all means, avoid the point.
Good. Now maybe we can get back to the point.
Do you consider suing for "autocorrect" a patent troll activity, that screams "We can't compete with Samsung, so we better try another chickensh*t lawsuit."
The patent will be invalidated. There's prior art everywhere. Apple probably doesn't even expect it to stand up in court. They're just doing what Microsoft perfected years ago. FUD.
By the way, thanks for "sharing" about the two accounts (snitch). As you can clearly see (administrator), one was never authorized, i.e. I made a mistake the first time. Feel free to delete the account I've never used.
You can always change your user information after the fact. The only thing you can't change is the username itself.
Quote:
Good. Now maybe we can get back to the point.
You don't have a point. Your point is trolling, and there's no call for responses to that.
Quote:
Do you consider suing for "autocorrect" a patent troll activity, that screams "We can't compete with Samsung, so we better try another chickensh*t lawsuit."
Imagine that, but sixteen times larger. "Can't compete with Samsung". I can't even BREATHE right now!
Quote:
The patent will be invalidated. There's prior art everywhere. Apple probably doesn't even expect it to stand up in court. They're just doing what Microsoft perfected years ago. FUD.
So Microsoft has a patent for the exact same implementation of autocorrect that Apple has patented and is asserting here? Seems strange that they'd NEVER USE IT in any of their products, then, given how much better Apple's autocorrect is than anything else available.
Unless, of course, "start in the middle of a circle and move to the outside of said circle by swiping with your finger" can be called something different.
foreplay?
Edit: On second thought... "Slide to Unlock" and "foreplay" are just two different phrases describing the same activity...
Oh sweet heavens, we're going to have to suffer through twenty pages of the anti-Apple guys here telling us what the definition of 'swipe' is, aren't we?
Comments
The patent system desperately needs to be overhauled.
Unless, of course, "start in the middle of a circle and move to the outside of said circle by swiping with your finger" can be called something different.
I'm pretty sure Apple has a lock on that one, but I'm not a lawyer.
I said something similar a few months ago and several people challenged me on it so I went back and read the entire patent wording very carefully and (IMO of course), I don't see how Samsung (or any Android vendor) can get around it.
I'm fine with that anyway since it's pretty clear that (whatever the courts decide), Apple *did* in fact come up with the idea first.
No one has yet come forward with anything that really similar as prior art or in fact claimed that they invented it first. Those arguing against it are merely arguing that they should be allowed to copy it because it's "obvious," which is the defence of pretty much every IP thief.
I hope they win anyway. I've had a few of my ideas stolen myself and I'm always on the side of the inventor/artist over those who are just users.
Pick a different gesture then and problem solved assuming that the patenting of gestures is determined patentable (obviously I'm not an expert on the details of patent law). This just looks like patent trolling anyway. Apple wants to limit the competition, so they look for anything that could be interpreted as infringement on one of many vague patents. They're just tying up the court systems.
I think you are uninformed on the facts.
The patent in question is hardly vague. If they lose the case at all it will be because the patent is in fact overly specific.
The facts would also indicate that far from just being obstructionist or using patents as a weapon, Apple is actually interested in protecting it's original ideas. The screen unlock is definitely an original Apple idea as are the data detectors.
The only way you rationally conclude Apple was interested in pushing these patents for other reasons than protecting their original IP is if you can prove that they aren't in fact original ideas.
I'm pretty sure Apple has a lock on that one, but I'm not a lawyer.
I'm pretty sure Apple has a lock on that one
Apple has a lock on that one
has a lock
lock
I see what you did there.
My apologise to Gatorguy and AbsoluteDesignz if I ever compared you to Galbi.
I don't think you ever have.
What amazing thing will Apple patent next? Sliced bread?
No, no, I'm only joking about the sliced bread -- stop lining up at the apple stores with $700 in your hands.
Of course when they do patent "Sliced Bread" they'll sue all the bakeries that have been making it for years.
"Gee, Grandpa, what did Apple do before they were patent trolls?"
post
Why have you created two accounts? This is against the rules.
Why are you trolling with this post? This is just silly.
Why have you created two accounts? This is against the rules.
Why are you trolling with this post? This is just silly.
Don' t you think?
And by the way this whole thread is trolling. Or does it only count when the troller is using common sense?
What amazing thing will Apple patent next? Sliced bread?
No, no, I'm only joking about the sliced bread -- stop lining up at the apple stores with $700 in your hands.
Of course when they do patent "Sliced Bread" they'll sue all the bakeries that have been making it for years.
"Gee, Grandpa, what did Apple do before they were patent trolls?"
They can move to circle sliced bread, but would be sued still
God I'm sick of the lawsuits. We're all having to pay for it in the price of the products we buy.
The patent system desperately needs to be overhauled.
At least you are getting something great in return!
What is Apple afraid of?
Forced to use Bing?
Don' t you think?
And by the way this whole thread is trolling. Or does it only count when the troller is using common sense?
By the way, thanks for "sharing" about the two accounts (snitch). As you can clearly see (administrator), one was never authorized, i.e. I made a mistake the first time. Feel free to delete the account I've never used.
Any more "damming" secrets you want to share about me? I'm sure you can find some if you dig around enough. And by all means, avoid the point.
Good. Now maybe we can get back to the point.
Do you consider suing for "autocorrect" a patent troll activity, that screams "We can't compete with Samsung, so we better try another chickensh*t lawsuit."
The patent will be invalidated. There's prior art everywhere. Apple probably doesn't even expect it to stand up in court. They're just doing what Microsoft perfected years ago. FUD.
What is Apple afraid of?
What are you afraid of? Coming here under false pretenses with two accounts?
By the way, thanks for "sharing" about the two accounts (snitch). As you can clearly see (administrator), one was never authorized, i.e. I made a mistake the first time. Feel free to delete the account I've never used.
You can always change your user information after the fact. The only thing you can't change is the username itself.
Good. Now maybe we can get back to the point.
You don't have a point. Your point is trolling, and there's no call for responses to that.
Do you consider suing for "autocorrect" a patent troll activity, that screams "We can't compete with Samsung, so we better try another chickensh*t lawsuit."
The patent will be invalidated. There's prior art everywhere. Apple probably doesn't even expect it to stand up in court. They're just doing what Microsoft perfected years ago. FUD.
So Microsoft has a patent for the exact same implementation of autocorrect that Apple has patented and is asserting here? Seems strange that they'd NEVER USE IT in any of their products, then, given how much better Apple's autocorrect is than anything else available.
What is Apple afraid of?
Create an account just to troll?
Grow up.
Competition isn't based upon copying the other guys work and then crying wolf. That's theft.
Get used to Samsung getting held up in court for years.
I was just about to post the same URL. The phrase "damn you autocorrect" is now used when anything doesn't work properly in our household.
I guess it's not a prerequisite that a technology actually work well for it to be patented.
AutoMisTypeAhead ate my homework...
Unless, of course, "start in the middle of a circle and move to the outside of said circle by swiping with your finger" can be called something different.
foreplay?
Edit: On second thought... "Slide to Unlock" and "foreplay" are just two different phrases describing the same activity...
Then, there's this....
Recipes
I know Samsung loves to rip off Apple so if it's modified to be like iOS then I hope Samsung loses.
If it is the other way then I hope Apple loses as I don't feel the notion of autocorrect should be patentable.
My apologise to Gatorguy and AbsoluteDesignz if I ever compared you to Galbi.
You haven't. All is good.
Oh sweet heavens, we're going to have to suffer through twenty pages of the anti-Apple guys here telling us what the definition of 'swipe' is, aren't we?
It depends what the definition of "is" is...