Sale of Galaxy Nexus Banned in the US 696
New submitter busyqth writes "After the injunction against the Galaxy Tab 10.1 earlier in the week, A U.S. district court judge has now also granted an injunction against the sale of Google's flagship ICS phone, the Galaxy Nexus. Is Steve Jobs laughing in the great beyond? Is this the beginning of the end for Android?"
Two blows to Samsung in one week, and now the FTC is investigating Google for misuse of Motorola Mobility patents in relation to RAND standards.
Well they are both rectangular (Score:5, Funny)
And I once walked into a store and banged down hundreds of dollars for an iPad only to find once I got it home it was a Samsung Galaxy tablet. Perhaps the words on the box, the different software, the different colour, the different interface should have tipped me off, but heck, they were both RECTANGULAR with a BUTTON.
So judge Koh is protecting poor people like me, who desperately want an iPad but accidentally buy a competitor that out powers it, out functions it, comes in a wider range of varieties and is developing faster than it.
Incredible to think a single person can do so much good for the world and all without any bribe money!
Re:Well they are both rectangular (Score:5, Funny)
Pah! Just wait until Apple catches wind that I own the patent for rectangular boxes!
Re:Well they are both rectangular (Score:5, Insightful)
Apparently the decision was based on, "Apple's claim to the patent to search multiple sources, which Apple says is the basis of Siri. [...] Judge Koh said 'Apple has articulated a plausible theory of irreparable harm [because] of long-term loss of market share and losses of downstream sales."
On the surface of it, it sounds awfully stupid to me. If I'm remembering correctly, "searching multiple sources" by voice query existed in Android devices first, no?
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2012/06/breaking-judge-grants-apple-an-injunction-against-the-galaxy-nexus/ [arstechnica.com]
Re:Well they are both rectangular (Score:5, Funny)
Shouting to a room of grad students or interns?
Re:Well they are both rectangular (Score:5, Insightful)
Forget the absurdity of the similarity claims and the who's done it first angle... this phrase from TFA should be enough to draw some conclusions:
Koh granted the injunction after Apple argued that the Galaxy Nexus phone caused it irreparable harm due to long-term market-share loss and "losses of downstream sales," according to The Next Web.
This is simply anti-capitalism stated on a single sentence. Basically, from what I grasp, the idea is "we need to avoid that competitor's action because we would lose money if competition were to happen".
I intended to throw a joke to mock the US for this kind of reasoning in the legal system, but the situation is actually kinda depressing and worrying when one assess where the current trends are taking the entire country. Although I'm not from the US, it makes me pause just thinking about the long term consequences of these changes.
Maybe someone smarter than me could figure out what we'll have in the future, since capitalism might join socialism in the History books.
Re:Well they are both rectangular (Score:5, Insightful)
Patents are inherently anti-competitive. In fact, limiting competition is their entire function.
(I almost said "their entire purpose," but then corrected myself: the "purpose" of patents is to "promote the progress of science and the useful arts." Whether patents' purpose and function jive with each other is another issue entirely...)
Re:Well they are both rectangular (Score:5, Funny)
On the surface of it, it sounds awfully stupid to me
Stupid or not, Surface is a registered trademark of Microsoft - pay up.
Re:Well they are both rectangular (Score:5, Insightful)
Looks like the file date is 2000 and the issue date is in 2005. Am I looking in the wrong place?
The funny thing is, none of the actual heavy lifting in this patent appears to be theirs. It's all in the cited patents held by other companies. All they appear to have said here was, "we're patenting the idea of putting a textbox in Mac OS to do this stuff everyone else already invented and patented".
I'm a little amazed that such a thing can be considered a valid invention. It reads like, "Well John over here invented the car, but I'm going to patent the idea of painting it blue as if that's an invention".
But I'm not an attorney... I guess we'll see how it all shakes out.
Re: (Score:3)
You don't know many Mac users then. All the ones I know do use it, including me.
I use both Safari and Chrome - both have their quirks, but both a decent browsers. I swapped my second browser to Chrome from Firefox, which I used to use all the time.
Re: (Score:3)
I literally know not a single OSX user that doesn't use Chrome or Firefox as their main browser and would remove Safari if it was possible, much like pretty much everyone I know with a Windows machine would dump I.E. in a second if that were possible.
Well count one right here then.
I'm a web developer, run several virtualized instances of Windows and have Chrome, and Firefox installed on my host OS as well as my virtualized Windows machines, but I use Safari as my main browser.
Re:Well they are both rectangular (Score:5, Informative)
Think this is the closest Apple's come yet to going after core Google. It's the search patent that appears to have snagged them. If they get this, they get every android phone currently out there and serve a continual warning to every potential Android licensee that if they even think of entering the Phone Market, they WILL be sued out of existence. Don't think even MS back in the day was ever as obviously aggressive as this.
For something that I've always suspected started as a way to negotiate cheaper component prices out of Samsung, Apple's really stirred up a poo storm.
Samsung? Contacts be damned, now's the time to stop shipping anything to your competitor who only wants to see you destroyed the second they can replace you.
Apple started the nerf bat swinging, never know who it'll take out in the end.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Well they are both rectangular (Score:5, Insightful)
if I was Samsung I wouldn't sell them so much as a screw.
You'd shoot yourself in the foot for banning your biggest customer. Hopefully, that's not *your* revenue stream we're talking about, so that you can easily say you wouldn't sell them a screw.
Hint: If Sammy drops Apple as a customer, they'd need a major restructuring and they'd also need something to do with the 100 plants they have serving Apple.
Famous last words of Walmart suppliers before they go out of business replaced by in store brand.
Re:Well they are both rectangular (Score:5, Interesting)
Apple is in danger of triggering Armageddon. Google has been fairly good natured so far, but if they decide to start a war things can only get worse for the consumer.
We need to put a stop to this. Patent reform is the only way.
Re: (Score:3)
Apple is in danger of triggering Armageddon. Google has been fairly good natured so far, but if they decide to start a war things can only get worse for the consumer.
I doubt it'll affect consumers much.
Apple's likely to have a bit to worry about if they take on Google though, especially now Google have Moto designs like the E 690in their hands.
https://www.google.com/search?q=motorola-e690&hl=en&safe=off&prmd=imvns&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=cOfuT9DDHqSXiQfC0-iADQ&ved=0CFYQsAQ&biw=1920&bih=1040 [google.com]
Re:Well they are both rectangular (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Well they are both rectangular (Score:5, Insightful)
If this gets upheld, Apple will be able to get an injunction on every Android phone because this is a core OS feature. I'd say that affects consumers. Plus, it seems like there's a pretty good chance that Google could find some patent between theirs and Motorola's that applies to the iPhone, which could lead to a counter ban. Maybe (hopefully) it won't get that far, but this is the patent armageddon that people have been worrying about with all these lawsuits.
On the contrary, this is exactly what needs to happen. Google should search their patents and find every single one that could apply to every single Apple device. Once they've built their case they should, without a seconds warning, nuke Apple with everything. Seek injunctions against Apple's entire business. Once granted, bring them to the table to sort all this stupidity out.
It's either that or everyone but Apple suffers a death of a thousand cuts.
Apple has long since passed the worst of MSFT's evil.
Re:Well they are both rectangular (Score:5, Funny)
Apple is in danger of triggering Armageddon. Google has been fairly good natured so far, but if they decide to start a war things can only get worse for the consumer.
We need to put a stop to this. Patent reform is the only way.
Patent reform from low earth orbit, its the only way to be sure.
Re:Well they are both rectangular (Score:5, Insightful)
I'll go one further and say patent abolition is the only way to stop it.
Re: (Score:3)
However, the WTO should blast America into orbit for allowing this kind of injunction, which is clearly intended to prevent foreign competition. Yay, lets have a trade war. Korea can ban the import of American beer and DVDs in retaiation!
Re: (Score:3)
I understand where you are coming form with this point of view, but that also means that anything which is independently invented by two or more people can't be patented.
Re:Well they are both rectangular (Score:4, Insightful)
That's kind of the point. The entire purpose of patents is to protect inventions made by someone which would not have been released to the public otherwise. If the patented invention could be invented by someone else anyway, the patent is purely a money making exercise, and not in the public good.
Re:Well they are both rectangular (Score:5, Informative)
The problem is, everything can be invented twice...
That's the whole point of reverse engineering [wikipedia.org]. And it's not a problem. It's a common sense limitation on patents - if it takes your competition all of 30 seconds to reverse engineer your software patent for X, without seeing the code or the specifications for it, the patent isn't worth the paper it's printed on. Obviousness.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Americans make beer?
Come on now, even the French make better beer (Louis Pasteur was the inventor of modern Lager).
Re:Well they are both rectangular (Score:4, Insightful)
There are other things to consider. Would you be happy, as a CEO, to work your butt off 24/7 for years to invent something great, and just when it catches up and start making real money, see Google make the *very exact same thing* (with a different logo) on a much much much larger scale (because they're so much bigger) and make you go back into mothingness?
I guess not.
Patents are here for a reason, and that reason is perfectly valid. Of course, the process can be perfected. For example, I think patents should be adapted to the field they apply to. For instance, software patents should last 5 years max.
But remove patents altogether and all hell will break lose.
Re:Well they are both rectangular (Score:5, Insightful)
I am not sure about Armageddon, but Google has money and this is a solid, concrete example of patents as a true hinderance to the advancement of the economy.
In this case maybe we play the fucked up short-term game to get a needed long-term change.
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Well they are both rectangular (Score:5, Informative)
"It's no coincidence that Samsung's latest products look a lot like the iPhone and iPad, from the shape of the hardware to the user interface and even the packaging," an Apple spokeswoman said in an email. "This kind of blatant copying is wrong and, as we've said many times before, we need to protect Apple's intellectual property when companies steal our ideas."
Oh yes because Apple invented phones, calendars, address books, web browsers and SMS messaging tools. I'm sure don't believe their own shit, rather they see this as a means to delay successful delpoyment of a competitive product.
Re:Well they are both rectangular (Score:5, Insightful)
Well the flipside of that argument could be: if they don't know enough about the iPad to tell the difference, how do they/we really know they wanted an "iPad" instead of "a tablet" anyway?
They could just be using iPad as the only name they know of for a new fangled flat computer. And even then - if "iPad" is the only name they know of to ask for in the store or the only name to look for on the box, why weren't they sold one?
If similar looks are really such an issue, wouldn't these people who just grab something in the store (without asking for an iPad or looking for "iPad" on the box) be in danger of accidentally walking out with an electronic picture frame or something? Should the judge get involved there too?
This is all moot though - from the sound of things it was Siri search patents rather than looks that are behind the injunction.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
They could just be using iPad as the only name they know of for a new fangled flat computer.
This. I saw it myself with iPod; working at CompUSA back in the day, I'd say 75% of people would come in looking for an 'iPod' and then ask me why I was only showing them the ones Apple made and not the Sansui's, Samsungs, Zunes, and all the other branded ones. When I'd point out that they asked for an iPod, they'd respond "Yeah, but I don't necessarily just want the Apple iPods...these other iPods are much cheaper" while they're sitting there with an iRiver in their hands.
I would have to educate them tha
Re:Well they are both rectangular (Score:5, Funny)
Ford sues GM cuz "their's looks like a box with wheels and it goes vrooom vrooom, just like ours. It cornfuses people, make 'em stop."
Re:Well they are both rectangular (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
thats not the judges job (Score:3)
If the judge owns any apple products or shares, he has conflict of interest.
Patent trolling is the new iWhite... (Score:5, Interesting)
Slide to unlock? Unified search bar?
I wonder, do the engineers and techs working at Apple feel ashamed all this trolling?
I know it's management and legal who make the decisions, but still...
Re:Patent trolling is the new iWhite... (Score:5, Insightful)
Who cares? It's fine to copy elements from other devices. It's fine to make look-alike and work-alike devices of other successful devices. That's how progress is made in high tech.
And Apple itself copied most of the iPhone design elements, and much of its functionality from other companies, including key features like desktop sync, MP3 sync, app stores, launchers, and many more. If such copying weren't allowed, there would be no iPhone.
What makes Apple's behavior so wrong and destructive is that they copy liberally from others and then turn around and try to monopolize the market with bad patents.
Re: (Score:3)
What makes Apple's behavior so wrong and destructive is that they copy liberally from others and then turn around and try to monopolize the market with bad patents.
THIS!
Re:Patent trolling is the new iWhite... (Score:5, Informative)
JooJoo Tablet came out before the iPad was even announced I believe. I keep hearing 'well, there wasn't anything like the iPad before the iPad came out' but there were devices that worked like it (though cheap and bad Chinese Android tablets), and tablets that /looked/ like the iPad (JooJoo tablet).
Samsung had similar designs in other places, I don't think it's a stretch of imagination to use those same designs in your own products, that someone else just happens to have also used. Though even then, hold a Samsung Android Tablet and an Apple tablet, and the difference is obvious.
Re:Patent trolling is the new iWhite... (Score:5, Insightful)
So what? That's how technology goes: good design costs, so you start with good enough, and iterate to good. It's worth noting that the OpenMoko phone, ab open source phone, also very similar to the iPhone, was under development and probably would have come out before the iPhone if they'd had more money. Trade secret protection is not a defense against independent development, and rumors don't change that.
The fact is that the market was primed for devices like the iPhone and iPad when they came out. The parts had gotten cheap enough. The iPhone is a great product, and the iPad is a great product, but neither product was a surprise, and neither product gives Apple the rights to a monopoly on that form factor.
Re:Patent trolling is the new iWhite... (Score:4, Insightful)
I once worked on some high-quality, German engineered washing machines. It was discovered that, rather than spend hundreds of thousands on R&D, LG Electronics bought one of these units, disassembled it and copied it feature-for-feature albeit with minor design modifications.
The result? A washer that boasted the same features, yet "walked" across the floor during the spin cycle.
There were no legal breaches by LG in cleanrooming like that. I guess Samsung just pushed the envelope a bit far in the aesthetics department.
German engineering (Score:4, Interesting)
In fact, one of our suppliers used to sell their machines to the Far East after 18 months to 2 years because by then they had worn to the extent that they were about as good as new Far Eastern machines. By doing this, they helped German companies keep their machine tool sales up.
Re:Patent trolling is the new iWhite... (Score:5, Insightful)
The first time I saw an iPhone, i bet the bloke who was with me that Apple had bought Mizi Research's Prizm Linux stack. http://www.linuxfordevices.com/c/a/News/Korean-Linux-smartphone-stack-achieves-new-release/ [linuxfordevices.com]
I lost the bet of course.
But to anyone who was involved with mobile devices at the time, the precursors of Apple's designs were clear; they took bits from PalmOS Cobalt, Prizm, Maemo and others.
As far as the physical design of the phone goes, it's all about fashion. Before about 2006, smartphones were all silver or grey, had a curved lower "chin" where the button cluster lived and still-curved but flatter top. By late 2006 though, most phones marketed as stylish (LG Prada, Samsung Chocolate & F700 etc) were dark or black, becoming much more squared off and had minimalist button designs.
I think Apple did well, they designed an iconic phone with components like processors and capacitive screens that were just becoming available at reasonable prices. However, I have no doubt if the iPhone hadn't been released, there would still be dozens of similar looking phones on the market, because that's where fashion and technology was taking them.
Apple's been clever to ride that fashion, but that doesn't mean they're entitled to a free ride.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
They copied ascii.
Your posts in this thread reveal more about your irrational prejudice than Apple's patent-troll behavior, especially when you start enumerating the adoption of open standards as copying.
Re:Patent trolling is the new iWhite... (Score:4, Insightful)
Look at what happened to the companies Apple copied their major technologies from: Xerox, Palm, Diamond, Psion, Nokia, AT&T, etc. They are largely history. So are many of the small apps developers that innovated in the mobile space only to get copied by Apple. Those are the people who actually spent lots of money and effort on innovation, they just didn't manage to compete against Apple's design and marketing juggernaut.
So, don't pretend that these patents and lawsuits Apple keeps winning are rewarding the innovators. The innovators have already gone out of business. What Apple's patents are rewarding is a ruthless company that "shamelessly steals" (a direct Steve Jobs quote) other people's great ideas and doesn't invest a dime in research itself. And shameless stealing is not something we want to reward.
Re:Patent trolling is the new iWhite... (Score:5, Insightful)
Progress in technology is made by copying what is successful and then improving on it. Forcing companies to start from scratch and break convention and compatibility in everything hinders progress.
And copying is exactly how the iPhone improved on what was there before: Apple largely cloned Palm's functionality and UI, reused their OS that was derived from Mach and Smalltalk, and added a smattering of Nokia and Symbian into the mix.
Re: (Score:3)
"Historically, imitation has frequently been proposed as the central mechanism mediating the reproduction, spread, intergenerational transmission and stabilization of human cultural forms, population-specific behavioral traditions found in groups of non-human primates, or both"
-Sylvia's recipe: The role of imitation and pedagogy in the transmission of human culture
http://www.ceu.hu/node/7740 [www.ceu.hu]
Re:Patent trolling is the new iWhite... (Score:4, Insightful)
Whether their they look similar or whether Samsung copied Apple's design ideas is completely irrelevant. There's no general protection against "copying ideas".
It's well established that "look and feel" are not protected by copyright (see Apple vs. Microsoft), so they've turned instead to these doubtful patents to stifle competition. Even if these trivial patents are in fact valid (and having one held invalid takes years and millions of dollars and relatively onerous standards of evidence), they're arguably an abuse of the system originally designed to protect other sorts of inventions.
Re:Patent trolling is the new iWhite... (Score:5, Interesting)
Have you actually used a Galaxy Nexus? I have one in my pocket right now. It looks nothing like an iPhone. The physical design and the way the OS looks and feels are entirely different. Not only is the design different, the hardware is superior in many ways. My friends routinely get me to take photos at parties because in low lighting conditions the GN camera seems to do a better job than the iPhone.
This is the most stupid decision yet. The GN has a very distinct design to the iPhone.
Re:Patent trolling is the new iWhite... (Score:4, Insightful)
So you've never used it then?
Re: (Score:3)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Patent trolling is the new iWhite... (Score:4, Informative)
Everybody stands on the shoulders of giants, even Apple.
Nokia video 2006 (slide to unlock, gestures)
http://www.phonearena.com/news/Here-is-how-Nokia-imagined-touchscreen-phones-in-2006_id28668/ [phonearena.com]
Samsung F700 (Korean design patent, December 2006)
http://gizmodo.com/235112/apple-iphone-vs-samsung-f700-which-is-touchscreenier [gizmodo.com]
Apple *IS* a patent troll (Score:4, Insightful)
This sentence isn't true: "A patent troll is a non-practicing entity"
A patent troll is abuses the incompetent system within USPTO to gain financial advantage, sure they mostly don't make things (why bother when its easy money), but some do, and Microsoft and Apple both make things AND are patent trolls.
So in Apple's case they patented research of others that they used in the iPod Touch, and claimed to have invented it:
http://www.businessinsider.com/and-boy-have-we-patented-it-2010-3
I think they just saw Han's work, myself, rather than go back and copy the CERN work from the 70's which covered the same slide, pinch etc. gestures.
http://www.ted.com/talks/jeff_han_demos_his_breakthrough_touchscreen.html
You can't really blame them, the USPTO has showed it will issue patents to anyone for things that aren't inventions, to people who didn't invent them, and for things that are obvious (and in some cases industry common practice at the time), and of course there will be roaches that come out and feed on this feeding opportunity.
"Defending your patents doesn't make you a patent troll. "
Once you get your USPTO issued joke patents, defending them with a straight face IS PATENT TROLLING. The art is to not laugh when you tell the judge how you invented these things.
Re:Patent trolling is the new iWhite... (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't give a flying fuck whether Apple is a patent troll or not.
Apple is using a broken system to prevent competition. Frankly so are Samsung, Motorola, Nokia and other portable device manufacturers.
The patent system is broken. It needs fixing. It's inhibiting innovation, constraining consumer choice and damaging the economy.
Apple are merely the poster childs for everything that's bad with it.
The rest of the world does not care (Score:5, Insightful)
Well - pity for those in the US, they wont get the new stuff now...
Fortunately the rest of the world can enjoy all those things that are forbidden in the US. Seems the US is no longer the place to get your new stuff.
Now I am the last one to say anything about the quality or something, but at least the rest of the rest of the world has a free choice.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
it's really sad to see what capitalism is doing to a country that had such high goals when i was first created. now it seems mostly you will get incarcerated, sued, beaten up or criminalized for things that are perfectly normal in the rest of the free world.
i think it's really cynical of american polititians to even use the word "freedom" in their campaigns since it has basically lost all meaning due to the entanglement of business, military and politics.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
If that's what you believe, you really are totally out of touch with what's going on in the world.
Re: (Score:3)
There have been plenty of lawsuits and injunctions based on Apple patent and design claims in Europe as well, and as a consequence, there are many Samsung devices you can't get in Europe either.
So, before you start developing a new product ... (Score:5, Insightful)
. . . you need to engage your legal department, if you are big enough to have one, to verify that the product won't get bogged down in long, drawn-out, legal battles.
It used to be that the work in the lab was most important. Now work in the legal department is more important than R&D.
Sad.
Re: (Score:3)
Sensationalist submission is sensationalist. (Score:5, Informative)
"Is this the beginning of the end for Android?"
Don't be so fucking stupid.
Is this the beginning of the end for Android? (Score:5, Insightful)
"Is this the beginning of the end for Android?"
No, it's the beginning of the end for Apple.
Re:Is this the beginning of the end for Android? (Score:5, Insightful)
Those who can't innovate, litigate. Seems like that would be Apple.
Re: (Score:3)
Support your local underdogs (Score:5, Insightful)
Stuff like this makes me want to buy a Samsung device right now, simply out of spite for these agressive, bullshit patent practices that limit competition and my choices as a consumer.
Also, I have this built-in genetic disposition of always wanting to support the underdog.
Re:Support your local underdogs (Score:5, Insightful)
the injunction against the Galaxy is precisely that: an injunction. the underlying patent case has not yet been decided before the court. approving the injunction means that the suing party has, at first glance, met their evidentiary burden to move forward with the case. but the case itself still must be decided, and such cases can take up to a year or more to work themselves out. meanwhile, Apple can enjoy the "fruits" of reduced competition. don't kid yourself: that doesn't benefit anyone but Apple.
and with how specious software patents can be, we should ALL be wary of lawsuits whose primary effect is to stifle competitors not in the market, but out of it. doesn't matter if it's Apple, Samsung, Google, or any other party; this sort of lawsuit stinks any way you look at it.
this is not a win for Apple. this is not a win for Samsung/Google. worst of all, though, this is not a win for the consumer.
Re:Support your local underdogs (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not an Apple hater. All I know is that if I wanted to by a Samsung in the U.S. right now, I couldn't, thanks to Apple. And Apple did the same thing in Germany some time ago. Truly, I don't know alot about the legal background on these patent wars. But it seems to me that Apple, amongst other companies, is bringing these fights to a new level which wasn't there before, and that that isn't a good thing for me. Did TV, car, microwave, or wearing glasses manufacturers get sued and their products barred from the market on the whim of a competitor in the past? Not that I'm aware of.
I don't have any kind of smartphone yet, and in fact I was still weighing my options. I was leaning towards an Android device because I could code my own apps for it in Java, but alot of people are telling me how Apple is better, so I was still pretty much undecided. The fact that Apple is now twisting the market in its favor doesn't make me happy.
Re: (Score:3)
Dude, I adore Apple. I've been buying Apple products since MacOS 10.1 came out. I switched to a Google Nexus a couple of years ago after really enjoying my iPhone when Apple discontinued support for the iPhone when I was still in contract. This is just downright abusive behavior, and it continues: my iPad is also no longer supported as of iOS 6. The reason people are pissed off at Apple is that they have gotten too big for their breeches and started to abuse their customers. So the new intelligenc
Re:Support your local underdogs (Score:5, Insightful)
You switched to an Android device because Apple stops supporting technology after _THREE_ years??? Are you joking?
Say whatever you want about Apple but they support their tech a HELL of a lot longer than Android manufacturers who often aren't utilizing the latest version of Android the day the device hits the shelves, let along a couple months later and most certainly not after _THREE YEARS_.
And before anyone points it out, I realize that's not Google's fault - it's the manufacturers - but to state you switched from an iOS device to an Android device because of "lack of support" is absolutely laughable.
Re: (Score:3)
I thought I made that clear - they're abusing FRAND patents. In my humble opinion, any company that abuses FRAND patents is the worst sort of offender, truly intent on stifling competition within an industry and guilty of the worst sort of anti-competitive behaviour deserving of swift and severe punishment from whatever trade organization can take action against them. If a company agrees to include their patented technology in an industry standard under FRAND terms and then renegs on those FRAND obligations, they are doing more harm to competition within an industry any any company possibly could. That, imho, makes them the true villains.
There's nothing in FRAND that says they have to give it away, only that they have to be reasonable with their licensing terms. The FRAND terms that *most* of the industry seems to have agreed on is "you don't sue us, we don't sue you". Apple is the one that doesn't like those terms, even though they were offered them.
Re: (Score:3)
That's not even vaguely true. Not even a little bit. The terms that most companies use is "we would rather not spend cash so how about we work out a cross-licensing deal for some of our patents". Apple, on the other hand a) has plenty of cash to pay licensing fees and b) would rather develop a competitive edge over their competition that differentiates them. Thus, they don't want to cross license - they just want to cut a check _AS IS THEIR RIGHT_. The amount being asked by Samsung and Motorola are what they consider to be unfair and unreasonable and are inherently discriminatory since they specifically target Apple.
They were still offered an option that would not have cost them anything out of pocket, and they rejected it. Samsung et. al. expecting to be paid for their work is not unreasonable, and IMO, they've gone *well* beyond what I would consider fair pricing by offering Apple an option that would have cost them nothing. Apple are the ones who rejected a fair offer.
Besides, if Samsung *really* wanted to be anti-competitive to Apple, they could simply decide that they're not going to sell LCD panels to Apple any m
Is this the beginning of the end for Android? (Score:5, Insightful)
No, but it is somewhere in the middle of the end of the USA as a technological leader.
Fuck Apple! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Patent abuse -- by the goose and the gander (Score:3)
Survey says:
I just wonder if things would work better if Apple Corp. might deign to share the color black with us mere mortals, who have to put up with non-black smartphones with razor sharp corners (sometimes with greater or less than 4 sides!).
NutJobs ... (Score:4, Insightful)
And the war is on... (Score:5, Insightful)
Boycott Apple (Score:5, Informative)
Please explain to all your non-techie friends and family what Apple is doing, and why they shouldn't ever touch any Apple product until they change their way.
It's very easy, I already prevented sale of a at least a few iphones.
Disclaimer: I'm not working for Google, Samsung or any other mobile related company. I'm just disgusted by Apple, and boycotting is the only way to stop them.
Re:Boycott Apple (Score:5, Interesting)
My closest friend bought the iPhone 4 just over 18 months ago, even after all my efforts. He kept telling me it was an iPhone and that's all that mattered.
He's too cheap to buy the apps, another mate half-jailbroke it, stopping all his banking apps working, iTunes was taking half a day to backup and often failed, the phone wouldn't factory reset, we couldn't even copy his contacts. He's pissed off with the lack of high quality free mapping. No Siri. Dull screen. The list of moans is endless.
He's just bought his daughter one. His wife is getting one in a few weeks time.
I can't understand it. They've seen my S2 connect to their TV via a common USB cable and streaming 1080p. They've seen me wirelessly send files to their laptop. They've seen Google Maps on Android. They've seen the photos it takes. And it's not even the best Android phone any more!
It's not easy at all.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Anecdotal evidence warning.... (Score:4, Interesting)
EVERYONE I know with an opinion on this topic is getting put MORE off Apple devices by it than on. I work on a floor of 40 nerds / gadget freaks, there is only 3 iphones left and 2 of those users intend to switch to Android as well.
Apple are doing themselves no favours at all.
windows 8 will destroy Apple (Score:5, Funny)
Watch out. Fuck the iphone. Windows Phone is the futucha
Oh, for fuck's sake! (Score:4, Interesting)
When are we going to get some goddamn patent reform???
This is like Chevy suing Toyota because people would buy more Chevy cars if Toyota wasn't selling a similar product. "They use a wheel and foot pedals to control their vehicles. We use a wheel and foot pedals. That's our thing!"
Ya know what? Fuck Apple. Fuck them right in their stupid asses. I was seriously considering making the switch back when they get an LTE iphone (paying full retail to retain my unlimited data plan and an ETF), and pick up a retina MacBook and iPad because they're freakin' gorgeous displays and it will be a year or more before anything like that hits the Android/Windows market and I'd have everything under one roof and this sentence is really long. But if this is how Apple chooses to "compete", fuck 'em. I'll wait for less litigious companies to catch up.
And that's what makes this so damn stupid. The competition is a year or more behind apple in just about everything (except data speed on phones). First to market with a consumer-friendly smartphone. First to market with a retina display smartphone. First to market with a high res tablet. First to market with a high res laptop. It's not enough for Apple to be the first up the mountain, they've got to hang their asses over the edge and shit on everyone below them.
Re: (Score:3)
Really? Really? Swipe-to-unlock is amazing innovation that should be used as a club to hobble the competition? Entering data for a search query is another, along with processing that request and returning the results. Those are the kinds of things we're talking about here. Not concepts or innovations that have years of R&D behind them.
Silver Lining (Score:5, Informative)
Apple was ordered to post a bond of $95 million [arstechnica.com] to enact the injunction, which would be used to pay Samsung damages if the decision is later reversed.
Re:Silver Lining (Score:5, Insightful)
At which point Samsung will have $95M but will have to re-start their advertising campaign, essentially re-launch the product, and target a market that has just bought a bunch of competing products - among which iDevices from which Apple stands to gain a lot more through e.g. app store purchases, third party products such as docks that use licensed tech, etc..
And that's assuming that by the time the decision lands the device is even relevant enough in the market to be relaunched. It may be better to launch a new product instead.
Which Apple would then seek an injunction against.
$95M - I'd love to have it, but I'm guessing Samsung are not particularly impressed.
Can we end software patents now? (Score:5, Informative)
Maybe this would be a good place to mention the EFF's new campaign to reform software patents [defendinnovation.org]?
I used to like Apple, now I hate Apple (Score:3)
Apple is nothing but a litigious scam company - worse than Microsoft.
I very much doubt I will ever buy an Apple product. Not that Apple needs my business.
I cannot understand how anybody could sink so low as to buy from Apple.
Re:short memories (Score:5, Informative)
the combination of ignorance and arrogance (Score:5, Informative)
apple did not invent the floppy drive
apple did not invent the mouse
apple did not invent the windowing operating system
apple did not invent the cellphone
apple did not invent the smartphone
apple did not invent lossy audio encoding
apple did not invent portable music players
apple did not invent the online music store
apple did not invent unix
apple did not invent digital typography
apple did not invent video chats
apple did not invent the laptop
apple did not invent the internet
apple did not invent hard disk drives
apple did not invent fiber optic communications
apple did not invent wireless networks
apple did not invent OpenGL 3d graphics subsystem
apple did not invent voice recognition
apple did not invent outsourcing
Re: (Score:3)
I'm sorry, did I say Apple invented these things?
Re:citation needed (Score:5, Informative)
Wonder over to your favorite search engine and search for 'apple xerox parc'
The first link is the wikipedia link (for me anyhow)
for http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PARC_(company) [wikipedia.org]
Look under the Adoption by Apple section:
"The first successful commercial GUI product was the Apple Macintosh, which was heavily inspired by PARC's work; Xerox was allowed to buy pre-IPO stock from Apple, in exchange for engineer visits and an understanding that Apple would create a GUI product "
And:
"However, Apple's designs included quite a few concepts that were not part of (or were non-trivial advances to) the prototype developed at PARC. For example[6]:
The mouse was not invented at PARC, but by Douglas Engelbart in 1963, Apple's mouse was an improvement on PARC's version.
Unlike the Macintosh, PARC's prototype was incapable of any direct manipulation of widgets.
Unlike the Macintosh, PARC's prototype did not feature Menu bars, or pull-down menu, nor the trash.
Unlike the Macintosh, PARC's windows could not overlap each other."
Oh and about the Xerox lawsuit:
"The Xerox lawsuit was dismissed because the presiding judge dismissed most of Xerox's complaints as being inappropriate for a variety of legal reasons"
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
"The Xerox lawsuit was dismissed because the presiding judge dismissed most of Xerox's complaints as being inappropriate for a variety of legal reasons"
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PARC_(company) [wikipedia.org]
and http://www.nytimes.com/1990/03/24/business/most-of-xerox-s-suit-against-apple-barred.html [nytimes.com]
"A Federal judge today dismissed almost all the closely watched copyright lawsuit filed by the Xerox Corporation against Apple Computer Inc."
You can sue for anything (in the US at least). Winning.... Whole different mat
Really? (Score:5, Interesting)
You hate Apple because they required you to update your operating system when you installed a new development kit?
Seriously?
If thats enough for you to hate a company, then you may want to look at anger management classes.
Best of luck with iPhone development on Fedora then.
Re:Um, No (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't understand why you believe Apple can be placated with some design tweaks and different features. Do you work for Apple or something? You're literally the only person posting on this story taking Apples side. I work for Google and I've seen how my colleagues have consistently worked long hours to innovate and create new features. The Galaxy Nexus is an amazing phone. It's thin, and light, and doesn't even have any hardware buttons on the front at all - yet Apple still are not happy. If you can't see why you're blind.
Apples goal is not to get competitors to "design around" their patents. This has happened several times already, the Samsung Galaxy 3 has even been called out by tech review sites for having a "lawyer approved design" (it's not rectangular, it does not have slide to unlock, etc). Apple keep coming, with newer and even more stupid patents, because their goal is not individuality, it is the utter destruction of all competitors. Steve Jobs himself said that in words so clear nobody can re-interpret them.
What's more, it's very hard to make an Android phone that doesn't share design elements with the iPhone these days, because Apple has copied Android many times in the past few years, for example, its notifications tray is identical to the design that first shipped in Android 1.0, and inferior to the one shipping in Jellybean. Android 1.0 also shipped with a universal search box and pluggable API for it, it shipped with suspend/resume multi-tasking that is extremely similar to the (very unique) design Android came up with, and so on.
Re: (Score:3)
1 million phone activations a day isn't even close to the end for Android.