http://gizmodo.com/5483632/apple-files-lawsuit-against-htc-for-infringing-on-20-iphone-patents
This and similar have increased in intensity at the moment and in the mobile device field this is going nuts. Everyone is suing everyone in regard to some form of patent breach etc.
Points go to all parties with their arguments but for me the biggest problem is them not filing patents, them not suing each other over them it is the Patent Offices itself.
At least of the things they have issues in the last 10 ish years should never have been given in the first place. Patent for OO based OS owned by apple? What a load of bulcrap. People have put this down on paper even before there was the software and hardware to do it properly. Not only that many of these patents people have formed through calibration and progression of technology and software and got to the same point via different methods of implementation.
Things like the unlock screen on a mobile device has been in some form for a lot longer then when apple did it for the iPhone. BUT they were the first to do it on a touch screen phone in the way they did it I think.
Others have copied this because it is a good idea, but they have a patent on it. I kind of think this sort of thing would stand but I would much prefer there to be a sub patent system for interface and software elements at least.
If you come up with something that someone else did with slight difference they should not have a full patent but a sub form which has a fixed fee royalty scheme set up that EVERYONE would adear too.
0.01% of every cent, for example and no matter what and who it is this is fixed off the money you make rather then out right "You can not do it"
At least here for something quite obviously similar if the other person has a claim on that first then ok, but to not allow anyone else to do it especially in terms of interface elements the industry will kill itself very quickly and there will be no innovation or progression at all.
The reason software interfaces are improving all the time and the whole Tech industry for that matter is this collaboration as well as Friendly and Full rivalry between people and companies trying to one up each other. They take what people do, take innovation, add their own element to it, improve on it and we progress.
I see a lot of this patent bullcrap actually doing irreparable damage to the software and hardware industry. Apple and like need to take a leaf out of the game industry. They do sue each other for ripping them off where it is due of course but the people who made gears of war certainly are not patenting or suing people for things like current methods of cover mechanics in a game. People certainly do not sue over use of interface ideas.
In regard to the Patent office itself which I went off track a little on.
What the f**k are they doing?
http://gizmodo.com/5473866/apple-now-has-a-patent-on-their-capacitive-multitouch-displays
Considering I know what people had done before then, Microsoft bought the guys who seemed to do it first and they must have a filing.
The patent office does not seem to cross reference patents or something, they seem to have no clue who is doing what at all in my eyes. They seem to not seek expert advice properly on what the thing actually means, certainly from the software and interface side of things because as I mentioned, a load of things they issue should not have gone through.
I am sure money goes under the table for some of these to go through, Corruption must be very high in the patents office?
Well two things to know about patents.
1. Often a company will register a patent just to stop someone else registering it, with no intention to act on it.
2. Any evidence of prior art registers the patent null.
Quote from: SamWell two things to know about patents.
1. Often a company will register a patent just to stop someone else registering it, with no intention to act on it.
2. Any evidence of prior art registers the patent null.
Both correct, not not really relevant to the topic.
Tis a joke indeed
A patent is supposed to include an inventive step - half this stuff is the natural progression of things and the fairly logical next step that any company developing technology in this area will implement.
Patenting using an OO based OS on a phone.... get a grip....
as for the unlock feature that was a joke too - standard feature on mobiles pre-touch screen
might as well patten an on/off button on a touch screen - or how about patenting something really pointless to f**k up all competitors - patent having the number 8 on a touch screen - yup you can have a mobile with a touch screen but if you incorporate a number 8 then you breach xyz companies patent...
patents are there to protect creativity not to create monopolies on particular markets - patenting generic un-inventive stuff for the sake of screwing over competitors is a complete abuse of the patent system and the US as usual is pretty retarded to allow it
http://www.out-law.com/page-6152
thankfully the UK patent system is a bit more robust...
Some of the stuff apple has patents are, are indeed as used as on/off.
It is crazy.
Apple do not mind ripping off things when it suits them though, They are not special. Whole top bar of the iphone is basically patented by Palm, the silent switch is patented by them as well.
That is why apple do not sue them over multitouch.
An article popped up:
QuotePatent trolls would generally disappear, because a loophole in the current patent system allows them to wait for a technology to spread before retro-actively patenting it. If software patents were good for just seven years, these parasites would either have to claim a more recent priority date and face a lot of prior art, or keep their early filing date and be left with obsolete patents.
For instance, the patent on wireless messaging technology used to sue Apple and others was filed in 2005 - well after the invention it describes became common knowledge. However, through the continuation-in-part loophole, it pretends to have the same protection from the law as if it had been invented 10 years prior. By filing late, patent trolls can make sure that their patents cover the hot technology of the day, and later claim that they invented it. And it's legal.
http://entrepreneur.venturebeat.com/2010/03/04/in-favor-of-software-patents/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+Venturebeat+%28VentureBeat%29
What do you call that company that was set up just to file and buy patents so they could cash in on them
I read a report on them yesterday as they are involved with one of my banking customers
Quote from: MarkWhat do you call that company that was set up just to file and buy patents so they could cash in on them
I read a report on them yesterday as they are involved with one of my banking customers
Apple?
Quote from: EddQuote from: MarkWhat do you call that company that was set up just to file and buy patents so they could cash in on them
I read a report on them yesterday as they are involved with one of my banking customers
Apple?
LOL, Your right though,
Most of the patents they filed they knew they did not come up with and nor should they have got them, but they apply for them and when they get them they then use them to...
a) Establish themselves in the market
b) Stump or slow rival progression when they get to good/close to their product (like HTC with Apple right now, most people agree the HTC HD2 is one of the best phones out there at the moment)
c) Because they can.
And it is the stupid Patent Office allowing all of it.
Here you go, my point proved again...
http://hothardware.com/News/Sonys-Great-Idea-Demos-That-Become-Less-Fun-When-Played/
So Sony hold the patent for you getting bored after playing a demo to much.
W T F !