Apple Patent Breakdown: Which Samsung Tech, Gadgets Infringe? - Bounce Back ('381) - Slideshow from PCMag.com

Incorrect. Every tech company knows about this patent game. In fact, if they have the resources, a common practice is to reward employees with a bonus of a couple grand when they successfully file their own patent, which is then owned by the company, of course. The lawyers have been involved for years. Everything has been sent to the patent office for years. It's how you protect your work.

Apple was the only company able to put the NA carriers on THEIR knees. They told them to suck their dick. ATT didn't give Apple jack shit. Apple told them wifi was gonna be on their phone no matter what. ATT swallowed. Apple made them offer an unlimited data plan and not to mention the kickback from ATT for each iPhone plan sold. For the first time ever, ATT swallowed it all just to get exclusivity!

Instead of going to carriers to get their phones, won't ppl also go to the Apple, Samsung, or Microsoft store now? The only leverage the carriers have then is the ability to subsidize the phone. I'm pretty sure these guys will just tell the carriers to fuck off if they don't like some of the features on the phone.

...

Samsung got their ass raped because they have no patent portfolio that they can threaten Apple with. It's not like the iPhone doesn't use other company's patents. All smartphones use a bunch of other people's patents. "Hey, you wanna sue me for pinch to zoom? How about I sue you for LTE? Uhhhh...." Guess how that's gonna turn out?

So what was Samsung suing Apple for? I think I read they were asking around 500mil?
Are they counter-claiming Apple stole something from them too?

click on link to open image :considered:
click on image to zoom in 100% :denied:

Apple and Samsung have lawsuits going in 30 countries. The patent system is broken.

I am glad i have an iphone now, I can rustle jimmies just by pulling out my phone :troll:

how do you guys stand using an iphone? the freaking screen is so small. retina display or not, when you have high ppi on such a puny screen, it's like not having retina display.

i think s3 has the perfect size screen.

only apple product worth buying are ipads and their mac computers. anything with screen like iphone or smaller is a total waste of money.

That's a little ignorant don't you think? I don't own an iphone, but my phone's screen size is about the same. I use it for work, quick browsing, and quick searches on the go. Oh, and not to mention make PHONE CALLS.

Not everyone likes to lug around a mini tablet in their pockets and have to take it out when they sit down. I already have smokes, wallet, phone, keys and whatever else in my pockets - anything bigger and I'd need a purse. To each their own.

Daiso has some cheap reading glasses, you should check em out sometime :)

What kills me is how many people still take this out of context. What he was talking about (and what Picasso meant) was stealing the underlying inspiration that created ideas - not to steal the actual idea itself. Using this quote is as bad as saying Apple was suing over rounded rectangles.

Samsung didn't have any prior art worth showing. A "tablet" from 2001 - A Space Odyssey? Pathetic. Then bringing up the Fidler Tablet (which was never made and the mockups were nothing more than a piece of plastic with "stick-on" images to simulate screen shots).

Speaking of the Fidler Tablet, that backfired on Samsung big-time. Apple went out and gathered all the information they could find on the Fidler including images and videos. Then they made one. That's right, Apple made a prototype mockup of the Fidler tablet so that they could show it to the jury. Instead of looking at carefully angled shots from Samsung's lawyers to show the similarities to the iPad, they were able to pick up an actual physical tablet and quickly realized the Fidler is nothing like the iPad. There was even a "pen slot" on the Fidler when Samsung originally tried to imply the Fidler was a touch screen device that used touch gestures and not a stylus.

Worse yet, Samsung wasn't able to question Apple's final witnesses. The judge gave Apple and Samsung 25 hours each to present their case. Samsung used up their 25 hours while Apple had a few hours left. Apple was able to bring up witnesses and question them and all Samsung could do is sit back and watch - they never had the chance cross-examine.

Samsung's prior art for the touch screen devices (like the DiamondTouch or Jeff Han's touchscreen) also fell flat. Samsung thought they could "fool" the jury by showing them an older touchscreen and claim Apple's implementation had already been done before. The jury disagreed and said that Apple's version was different enough to deserve its own patent.

There's more than one way to do something.

It's like someone patenting the up and down buttons on a TV remote to change channels or change the volume, sure you could make another way of doing it but why should you have to. No offence but that video is a super shitty way of zooming in and out on a phone i'd hate to have to do that. Good luck zooming in on anything with one hand easily.

I wouldn't consider myself an Apple hater. I've owned two iPhones, a 3g, which I still use as an iPod in my car and an iPhone4. Yes, I hate the fact that Apple forced me to upgrade iOS on the 3g whenever I wanted to do something new to it, making it currently next to useless now... and I got rid of the 4 after two weeks because I hated how the phone itself felt in my hand as I prefer smooth edges to hold when I'm talking instead of the sharp ones they use. I can also go into how I think items like the iPad and most of their computers are overpriced purely because they know people will pay the price. However, with all that said, I still don't "hate" Apple anymore than I hate, say, Sony... or Samsung.

I'll admit that I don't know much about prior art or patents, but it's not like Apple has fubared the tech industry over by this. As people keep saying, this simply means it's a chance for other companies to come up with something new instead of ripping something off. I currently use a Samsung Captivate and for those who don't follow different things in tech, many people think it's an iPhone. They look that similar. Yes, one could make the argument that a car has four wheels, and is basically a box with two smaller boxes on each end, but that's where the similarities end. BMW can sue Volkswagen if they make a direct rip off of the X5, but they can't sue them if it looks like the Toureg. They both share a similar concept, but the end design is different. And this is where Samsung had to innovate with the Galaxy3. It's no longer an iPhone copy (yes, I'm aware the rounded edges part was thrown out), and it's something that's obviously not an Apple inspired design. And while I prefer the pinch to zoom option, other manufacturers like Sony with their non-multitouch phones already have come up with solutions to it. Software codes should be the property of the patent holder, not public domain.

Say what? So you can do pinch to zoom with one hand? I'd love to see a demonstration of that.

Apple's method for returning to full screen is a double tap with a single finger. It's no faster than my example strumming with three fingers, nor is it really any easier. And it would avoid infringing on Apple's IP. Some people might not find my other examples as nice as pinch/zoom, while some users might prefer them.

Better yet, why can't Samsung come up with several methods of zoom and let the user choose which one they like after trying them all out? This would make the phone more accessible to people with different sized hands and dexterity. What a novel idea - letting the user pick their zooming gestures of choice.

In my examples zooming changes by a fixed amount after you apply a gesture (like doube-tap). But there's no reason you couldn't have a settings page where you can set the amount and speed of zoom. Or have an intelligent zoom that knows the screen resolution and image size and makes a decision how much to zoom based on those factors. This way images the same res as the display wouldn't be able to be zoomed much, but very large images would allow a higher rate of zoom to get to the detail.

See, if you just sit down and think about things for a few minutes you can come up with all sorts of ideas. The next step is to code them and let people try them out. Make adjustments based on user feedback and refine your ideas until you have something that works great. You know - brainstorm and innovate.

That's not what Google has been saying recently.

Their position is if something becomes popular it should be a standard. So if I invent something new and patent it, and it then becomes hugely popular, then I should be forced to license it since it's now a "de-facto standard." Of course, they say I'll still make money from licensing, but that I can't refuse to license someone, even if they're a competitor.

Pretty scary stuff, if you ask me.

how about a clockwise or counter clockwise finger motion to zoom.

Really? I rest the bottom of my phone on my pinky, ring and middle finger hold the back and the thumb and index zoom in and out. Assuming you're not in landscape mode and you don't have the hands of a 12 year old girl that should be super easy to do

That's actually what I do too. Not terribly difficult to do.

Yeah, can't say I agree with Google on that one. I agree that if they want to trademark it and sell it to others simply because they want to, great. Everyone wins in that case. But a company shouldn't be forced to hand over something simply because it's been popularized.

And if you're in landscape mode? Or if you're working on a tablet? Or a Galaxy Note? Or if you're moving and want a better grip on your phone so you don't drop it?

I mentioned that already (like a virtual scroll wheel). It's in the notes section under the video.

This is where people get confused with patents. When you have FRAND patents you have to license them to whoever wants at fair prices - even your competitors. If your patent isn't FRAND, then you're under no obligation to license them.

People wonder why Apple's patents aren't FRAND when most of Samsung's or Motorola's patents are. The difference is that a company has to declare or offer their patents up as FRAND patents. Samsung might invent some technology for the next gen 5G phones. They want people to use their patents for 5G, so they approach the necessary standards bodies and say "if you use our technology for 5G then we'll offer our patents as FRAND".

The benefits Samsung gets are they get a royalty on every single 5G phone sold worldwide. The drawback is the per-unit royalty will be much less than a regular patent, and they have to agree to let anyone willing to pay use their patent.

This has been explained umpteen times online, and people still don't seem to get it.

At least we can choose to upgrade the OS on the iphone, most of the older android phones are stuck with an old versions of the OS.

can you name me a phone that came out the same time as the iphone 3g that is able to use a current OS? even ios6 supports 3gs with selected support.

doesn't sound scary at all.

it just sounds like pure ego and greed right there.

if you invent something that's gonna help, you shouldn't be trying to with hold it because of money.

if you invent something, you've invented it for humanity, not for yourself.

unless you are that selfish greedy and egotistical.



the idea is scary if you let someone control some feature or product 100%, and they don't ever let anyone else use it, and it's the best/most efficient way.

it's like if i invent the wheel, i can be a dick and say, no one is allowed to use the wheel. invented it. think of another way. fuck you. me me me. i invented. my idea.

no it's not your idea...

the idea came from the years and years of knowledge and information that you've built up. and that knowledge and information was passed down by generations, by people doing research and thousands of years of innovation.

what if we patent those ideas too? you're not allowed to learn those ideas or apply them because some dude thought of it. you have to pay him. and only him.

what if they suddenly decide to just not let anyone use it, and it's not even in their product. they just decide to hide it from the world?

the sharing of an idea or innovation, should never be left to one entity to decide.

you are part of a whole. you will share it.


these patent wars remind me of what pharmaceutics companies do with their drug patents and money.

havn't been following the thread because I think dangonay is autistic

but

Groklaw - Jury in Apple v. Samsung Goofed, Damages Reduced -- Uh Oh. What's Wrong With this Picture? ~pj Updated 4Xs

You are wrong on so many levels.

Unfortunately, I think the pinch-zoom is probably the best method.
Those other examples were alright, but I noticed two disadvantages.

- Consistent zooming (since you're just holding a finger on the screen, you cannot change the rate of the zoom by just sliding your fingers closer or apart at different speeds)

- Couldn't remember was it left-right tap or right-left tap to zoom in or out.

It's not really a big deal, and phone users will be able to adapt easily after a few days of usage, but those are just saying, those were the disadvantages I noticed.