Apple not guilty of patent infringement with Siri, Chinese court says
Apple has won a decisive victory in a long-running intellectual property fight over Siri in China, as the Beijing Higher People's Court has decided that the company's personal digital assistant does not infringe on patents held by Shanghai-based Zhizhen Network Technology.
"The move means Apple's Siri voice recognition system did not infringe the protected rights of other patents and Apple fans can continue enjoying the conveniences brought by the technology," the court said when announcing the ruling, according to AFP. The dispute has been winding its way through the courts for nearly three years.
Zhizhen first sued Apple in 2012, alleging that Siri violated Zhizhen patents used on its "Xiaoi Bot" application. Apple subsequently attempted to have the patent invalidated, and then filed suit against China's State Intellectual Property Office after being rebuffed.
After losing that fight, Apple appealed to the Beijing Higher People's Court.
China is an increasingly important market for Apple, and the company has faced a number of legal challenges as it grows its Chinese operations and encroaches on local players. A previous trademark case --?involving the iPad trademark -- against Chinese display makers Proview resulted in a $60 million settlement.
"The move means Apple's Siri voice recognition system did not infringe the protected rights of other patents and Apple fans can continue enjoying the conveniences brought by the technology," the court said when announcing the ruling, according to AFP. The dispute has been winding its way through the courts for nearly three years.
Zhizhen first sued Apple in 2012, alleging that Siri violated Zhizhen patents used on its "Xiaoi Bot" application. Apple subsequently attempted to have the patent invalidated, and then filed suit against China's State Intellectual Property Office after being rebuffed.
After losing that fight, Apple appealed to the Beijing Higher People's Court.
China is an increasingly important market for Apple, and the company has faced a number of legal challenges as it grows its Chinese operations and encroaches on local players. A previous trademark case --?involving the iPad trademark -- against Chinese display makers Proview resulted in a $60 million settlement.
Comments
I find it a bit strange that a higher appellate court would add the statement " Apple fans can continue enjoying the conveniences brought by the technology" to their ruling. It gives the impression that the court is a supporter of Apple which obviously affects its image of impartiality.
I can't imagine the US Court of Appeals ever saying something like that.
I find it a bit strange that a higher apellate court would add such the statement " Apple fans can continue enjoying the conveniences brought by the technology" to their ruling. It gives the impression that the court is a supporter of Apple which obviously affects its image of impartiality.
I can't see the US Court of Appeals ever saying something like that.
It might also be an example of translation ambiguity.
Go SIRI. Go Go Go...
The iBooks ruling should be overturned soon.
China is an increasingly important market for Apple, and the company has faced a number of legal challenges as it grows its Chinese operations and encroaches on local players. A previous trademark case --?involving the iPad trademark -- against Chinese display makers Proview resulted in a $60 million settlement.
Apple is going to get burned in China eventually. The pseudo capitalist economy controlled by totalitarian elites cannot remain stable for very long. The middle class there will crash eventually and I’m not even a trained economist. It’s common sense. Google chose to leave China. Apple can’t at this point.
nope. Dialogue based program exist in 1960s.
For those who think Chinese court is wrong:
nope. Prior to that, is the patent office claim it's valid. (Every Chinese government departments work like the DMV, unless you have a enough personal relationship with important executive of the departments)
And of course, you can't have the court denounce their government at the first trial, it's like a brother to them.
And that's why Google leaves China: those nerds think if they are brutal enough, they can override the government departments, like those who think they can make DMV better.
i am super surprised. it nearly always goes the other way around. any non-Chinese company often gets nailed.