I think the end game for patents is upon us...

[Puddle Jumper]

It's called cross licensing, and it's the way technology patents work, there are a gazillion patents, if you want to use it, you license it or enter into a sharing agreement.

Yeah, but when two of the biggest players enter into a cross licensing agreement while refusing to do the same with another major player (Google) you don't think that is a problem? It looks like Apple and MS are attempting to use their control of the PC market to eliminate their biggest competitor in the mobile market.

 

[senseamp]

Governments will have to step in and smack this down before it hurts consumers.

 

[Pliablemoose]

Yeah, but when two of the biggest players enter into a cross licensing agreement while refusing to do the same with another major player (Google) you don't think that is a problem? It looks like Apple and MS are attempting to use their control of the PC market to eliminate their biggest competitor in the mobile market.

That's where patents determined to be FRAND come in.

MMI and Samsung are going to be in a world of hurt because they're trying to use FRAND patents to fight with Apple.

 

[Mopetar]

But these legal wars worry me beyond the mobile space as this legal practice, if successful, could be taken up by many companies in many industries and that could cost us 100's of billions, even trillions and 10's or even 100's of millions of jobs.

I think it will save trillions of dollars and create at least a billion jobs. Also it will ensure everyone has a puppy, as long as we're pulling numbers and silly ideas out of our asses.

Even if Apple is wildly successful, which I doubt for a variety of reasons, at worst Android has to make some changes to way the OS or other functionality works. Patents are for specific implementations and there's usually more than one way to accomplish a given task. Even the design patents have proven to be a non-issue after a few tweaks to the design.

If there's a company that should worry Google, it's Oracle. They have a lot more power to hurt Android than Apple does. If they win their case, it's likely that every copy of Android manufacturers put on their phones is going to require paying Oracle a license fee. Add this on top of what Microsoft is already getting from most of these companies, and Android may not be as financially viable as other alternatives.

 

[senseamp]

Patents should be for specific implementations, but they are not in reality. They are written broadly and claims are added for variations that the inventor never actually implements, just describes them in a broad single sentence.

 

[Puddle Jumper]

That's where patents determined to be FRAND come in.

MMI and Samsung are going to be in a world of hurt because they're trying to use FRAND patents to fight with Apple.

And that's what's try absurd about the situation. Motorola and Samsung created meaningful patents that they are forced to license to Apple yet Apple can patent stupid things like a rectangle and is under no obligation to license it to Moto or Samsung. At the least the licensing should go both ways, Samsung and Moto can be required to license their patents to Apple but they should be able to get a cross licensing agreement as compensation.

 

[Bateluer]

And that's what's try absurd about the situation. Motorola and Samsung created meaningful patents that they are forced to license to Apple yet Apple can patent stupid things like a rectangle and is under no obligation to license it to Moto or Samsung. At the least the licensing should go both ways, Samsung and Moto can be required to license their patents to Apple but they should be able to get a cross licensing agreement as compensation.

No company should be forced to enter a licensing agreement and pay fees to make a product with a rectangular shape.

 

[Brian Stirling]

I think it will save trillions of dollars and create at least a billion jobs. Also it will ensure everyone has a puppy, as long as we're pulling numbers and silly ideas out of our asses.

Even if Apple is wildly successful, which I doubt for a variety of reasons, at worst Android has to make some changes to way the OS or other functionality works. Patents are for specific implementations and there's usually more than one way to accomplish a given task. Even the design patents have proven to be a non-issue after a few tweaks to the design.

If there's a company that should worry Google, it's Oracle. They have a lot more power to hurt Android than Apple does. If they win their case, it's likely that every copy of Android manufacturers put on their phones is going to require paying Oracle a license fee. Add this on top of what Microsoft is already getting from most of these companies, and Android may not be as financially viable as other alternatives.

No I don't think it will go so far that every company in the world goes down this road, but it doesn't have to reach that level to cause real problem to the consumer. It's more likely in fact that well before we reach that level that wiser heads will prevail and put the smack down on this trend. In the mean time lots of lawyers will be making tons of money and we the consumer will be the ones lining there pockets!

Apple is not the only one doing this and that's the problem. In other industries the technology evolves and all parties learn from everyone else and in the end we all benefit. Apple, however, believes they alone should be permitted to play and now the companies there attacking are fighting back. How is any of that a surprise?


Brian

 

[annomander]

No company should be forced to enter a licensing agreement and pay fees to make a product with a rectangular shape.

yawn, you know thats all BS but you still persist in it.

You know that it wasn't just about a rectangular shape its about the whole bundle, but carry with twisting it you might get someone people to believe you.

 

[Mopetar]

Apple, however, believes they alone should be permitted to play and now the companies there attacking are fighting back. How is any of that a surprise?

If this were true then Apple would have already sued any number of other companies. Their beef is entirely against Android, which is more just an extension of Steve Jobs's personal vendetta over what he believed to be a stolen product as Eric Schmidt was serving on Apple's board and may have passed a lot of information along to Google's Android team.

 

[Brian Stirling]

If this were true then Apple would have already sued any number of other companies. Their beef is entirely against Android, which is more just an extension of Steve Jobs's personal vendetta over what he believed to be a stolen product as Eric Schmidt was serving on Apple's board and may have passed a lot of information along to Google's Android team.

Yeah, Google should have pulled Schmidt from Apples board as soon as they knew they'd be competitors in ANY market. Google didn't and shame on them!

This may have played a roll in Jobs vendetta but vendetta it is. The man and the company will file a lawsuit at the drop of a hat and always have -- long before Google even existed.

There goal is more than killing Android but they sure do want to kill Android. As mentioned before, they've gone after small players like the Spanish tablet maker and even though Apple had no chance of winning in court they sued anyway, no doubt feeling they might intimidate them into getting out of the market and not risking millions they might not have in a protracted legal fight with someone with billions and the desire to spend it -- on lawyers!


Brian

 

[Mopetar]

There goal is more than killing Android but they sure do want to kill Android. As mentioned before, they've gone after small players like the Spanish tablet maker and even though Apple had no chance of winning in court they sued anyway, no doubt feeling they might intimidate them into getting out of the market and not risking millions they might not have in a protracted legal fight with someone with billions and the desire to spend it -- on lawyers!

The Spanish case was an odd one to be certain. First of all, it's the only instance I know of where Apple has gone after a small company like this and secondly the charges filed were criminal charges so the case was dropped fairly quickly because the courts obviously felt it wasn't a criminal matter.

Outside of this spat with Google/Android, Apple's litigation history is mostly related to the perceived misuse of their trademark and a copyright case against Pystar. Outside of those cases, Apple doesn't have a long history of legal disputes, especially over patents, or at least not anymore than any other company.

I don't know if all of this could have been prevented if Eric Schmidt had resigned his position, but it's pretty easy to understand why Jobs would insist on going after Android like he did, given Apple's past history with Microsoft and how all of that shook out. That said, I really don't see Apple much more litigious than any other tech company, and I definitely don't see them as having some nefarious plan to corner the entire market to themselves through any means necessary.

 

[senseamp]

If this were true then Apple would have already sued any number of other companies. Their beef is entirely against Android, which is more just an extension of Steve Jobs's personal vendetta over what he believed to be a stolen product as Eric Schmidt was serving on Apple's board and may have passed a lot of information along to Google's Android team.

Jobs is dead, but Apple keeps on suing. It's in their DNA.

 

[Mopetar]

Jobs is dead, but Apple keeps on suing. It's in their DNA.

Or the current management agrees with Jobs on this one. If it were in their DNA they'd have gone after several other companies in the past and a handful more in the present.

 

[zerocool84]

The Spanish case was an odd one to be certain. First of all, it's the only instance I know of where Apple has gone after a small company like this and secondly the charges filed were criminal charges so the case was dropped fairly quickly because the courts obviously felt it wasn't a criminal matter.

Outside of this spat with Google/Android, Apple's litigation history is mostly related to the perceived misuse of their trademark and a copyright case against Pystar. Outside of those cases, Apple doesn't have a long history of legal disputes, especially over patents, or at least not anymore than any other company.

I don't know if all of this could have been prevented if Eric Schmidt had resigned his position, but it's pretty easy to understand why Jobs would insist on going after Android like he did, given Apple's past history with Microsoft and how all of that shook out. That said, I really don't see Apple much more litigious than any other tech company, and I definitely don't see them as having some nefarious plan to corner the entire market to themselves through any means necessary.

Apple sued a school in Canada over the use of an Apple in their ads, Apple sued the city of New York over the use of an Apple in their ads, Apple sued Woolworth's over the use of an apple in their ads.

 

[Sho'Nuff]

They seem to be.

Also, rectangles, specific colors, pictures(any) on a screen are patentable. So sayeth the Mighty Apple.

Sure, it is possible to patent a design in the U.S. But it is equally easy to avoid infringing a design patent. Simply don't copy what is in the drawing(s) of the patent in question.

Note - there are two types of patents in the U.S., design patents and a utility patents. They are significantly different and should not be confused.

<----- Patent attorney.

 

[Sho'Nuff]

Outside of this spat with Google/Android, Apple's litigation history is mostly related to the perceived misuse of their trademark and a copyright case against Pystar. Outside of those cases, Apple doesn't have a long history of legal disputes, especially over patents, or at least not anymore than any other company.

Not sure if you are serious. But if you are, you don't have any real world experience with Apple.

 

[Pliablemoose]

Honestly, when all is said and done, I see Samsung going exclusively to BADA, and Moto being the only company using Android along with some bit players that manage to stay under the radar.

 

[Puddle Jumper]

Honestly, when all is said and done, I see Samsung going exclusively to BADA, and Moto being the only company using Android along with some bit players that manage to stay under the radar.

As bad as it sounds I think we would have all been better off if Jobs passed away a few years earlier and avoided this entire war against Android.

 

[BenSkywalker]

What is Foss's batting record in predicting the patent battles, I know it is very close to zero. Him thinking this is a good sign for Apple should make everyone besides Apple breathe a lot easier.

With Apple's remote server utilizations in violation of a very non FRAND Moto patent there is a good chance iCloud and Siri will have to be taken down unless Apple wants to deal, and a deal with Moto at this point would be a deal for Android. They have tried the slide to unlock patent before, and failed badly(prior art knocked one out previously, a mild rewording isn't something the courts normally support). The linking of items was a feature in MS Word long before Apple was given a patent for it(and given the licensing deals that the companies already have with Microsoft, they have protection there). The auto complete feature has been commonplace in many apps for many years.

The four horseman of patents? If these are the four horseman of patents, they are spelling doom for Apple. They are *shockingly* weak given the mountains of prior art that exists. Going to be interesting to see if Apple ends up surviving this IP war now that Google is going to own patents for things like, you know, the cell phone(obviously that one is expired, but Moto's IP in this segment dwarfs Apple's- a whole lot of them not part of FRAND).

 

[preslove]

As bad as it sounds I think we would have all been better off if Jobs passed away a few years earlier and avoided this entire war against consumers.

fixed

 

[alent1234]

What is Foss's batting record in predicting the patent battles, I know it is very close to zero. Him thinking this is a good sign for Apple should make everyone besides Apple breathe a lot easier.

With Apple's remote server utilizations in violation of a very non FRAND Moto patent there is a good chance iCloud and Siri will have to be taken down unless Apple wants to deal, and a deal with Moto at this point would be a deal for Android. They have tried the slide to unlock patent before, and failed badly(prior art knocked one out previously, a mild rewording isn't something the courts normally support). The linking of items was a feature in MS Word long before Apple was given a patent for it(and given the licensing deals that the companies already have with Microsoft, they have protection there). The auto complete feature has been commonplace in many apps for many years.

The four horseman of patents? If these are the four horseman of patents, they are spelling doom for Apple. They are *shockingly* weak given the mountains of prior art that exists. Going to be interesting to see if Apple ends up surviving this IP war now that Google is going to own patents for things like, you know, the cell phone(obviously that one is expired, but Moto's IP in this segment dwarfs Apple's- a whole lot of them not part of FRAND).

how is it a violation of moto's ancient patents? apple uses amazon and Azure for their backend

 

[BenSkywalker]

how is it a violation of moto's ancient patents? apple uses amazon and Azure for their backend

It is a far more compelling and convincing violation of Moto's patents then anything Apple has come up with on their end. Is it a BS claim that should be laughed out of court? Yep, but some of the stuff the Apple lawyers have dared file should get them jail time it is so absurd

 

[alent1234]

not apple's fault germany has dumb design patent laws and samsung's lawyers are either morons or as a company samsung didn't have people come together to find all the prior tablet designs

 

[BenSkywalker]

not apple's fault germany has dumb design patent laws and samsung's lawyers are either morons or as a company samsung didn't have people come together to find all the prior tablet designs

Is it not Dahmer's fault that the kids didn't have proper protection? Obviously that is an absurd/over the top example, just pointing out that if someone is capable of defending themselves from something that is flat out wrong or not doesn't change if something is proper or not.