Motorola Seeks Ban On Macs, iPads, and iPhones 446
bonch writes "Google-owned Motorola is asking the International Trade Commission to ban every Apple device that uses iMessage, based on a patent issued in 2006 for 'a system for providing continuity between messaging clients.' Motorola also claims that banning Macs and iPhones won't have an impact on U.S. consumers. They say, 'With so many participants in the highly competitive Wireless communication, portable music, and computer market, it is unlikely that consumers would experience much of an impact if the requested exclusion orders were obtained.' The ITC has yet to make a decision."
Re:What goes around comes around... (Score:5, Informative)
Nokia fired first and Apple paid $600 million and something $20 a hand set on going
Depends how far you want to go back though.
Apple sued MS back in the eighties over look and feel and didn't win that.
Samsung sued LG last month, but it hardly got reported. There are no saints and angels here
http://www.devicemag.com/2012/09/11/samsung-sues-lg-for-alleged-oled-technology-theft/ [devicemag.com]
I call bullshit on Ars Technica (Score:5, Informative)
If this was "made public" today, why is there so [androidauthority.com] many [eweek.com] articles [appleinsider.com] from August 20th, when it was submitted? This is total bullshit, posted by Ars, just to try and get publicity with the iPhone 5 release tomorrow.
And for the record, I am not an Apple apologist, and I own a Galaxy S3. But I mean, bullshit is bullshit.
Re:Moto can lock them out of a big part of the cab (Score:5, Informative)
No, they can't. The patents in question with cable are FRAND, so at most, Apple might be forced to pay a small tithe.
Google has not hesitated to sue and try to get injunctions based on FRAND patents in the past, unlike Apple.
[citation needed]
And remember, that's Google we're looking for a citation on, not Motorola Mobility from times before Google bought them. Some of us DO have long-term memories longer than the last Apple product announcement and remember that Google has not owned Motorola Mobility for long at all, which is why we're confused and want clarification.
Re:Google already working to limit software patent (Score:5, Informative)
Not to take away from anything you said, but Google also very secretly invested in Intellectual Ventures(yes that Intellectual Ventures that Slashdot hates, founded by Paul Allen), which unfortunately for them, came out in a court filing
You didn't link the original source. Unfortunately for you I found it [patentlyo.com].
For the most part, these tech companies appear to have invested in intellectual ventures as part of a licensing agreement. ... Google ...
I wouldn't call a licensing agreement "very secretly invested". There's a list of the real investors too.
Re:This is the patent you all claimed to hate (Score:5, Informative)
Apple's "Patent" was actually a design patent, all about the whole look and feel. Apple only sued one company over it. And yet the Apple suit spawned countless discussions about the evils of software patents in general and Apple's use of them to destroy the whole market.
Do you have ANY clue of what you're spouting here? Hard to believe you're that ignorant, I am starting to think you're not an Apple fan but a troll at this point.
Pray, tell us which of these are design patents? And why are they suing HTC? Also, I am ignoring all the tens of court cases they have filed with things like multitouch, slide to unlock etc. etc. Not to mention they won on multitouch and the scrolling patent in the Samsung case, how are they design patents? What are you smoking?
http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/02/apple-vs-htc-a-patent-breakdown/ [engadget.com]
Patent #7,362,331: Time-Based, Non-Constant Translation Of User Interface Objects Between States
This is an interface patent granted in 2008 -- it's not specifically related to phones. According to the claims, it's a method of moving a GUI object along a path with a non-constant velocity for a period of time -- one of the claims specifically covers minimizing windows with a scaling effect like OS X, and two others describe a row of icons that rearranges itself when icons are added or removed, just like the iPhone's app dock.
Patent #7,479,949: Touch Screen Device, Method, And Graphical User Interface For Determining Commands By Applying Heuristics
We did this one at length after it was issued in January of last year -- check out our Palm discussion for more. The big one here is scroll behavior: starting a scroll in a single direction locks you in that direction, but starting it at an angle lets you pan around freely -- just like the Android browser.
Patent #7,657,849: Unlocking A Device By Performing Gestures On An Unlock Image
This one's cute 'cause it's brand new -- seriously, it was just granted on February 2. It's almost exactly what it says on the tin: it covers unlocking a touchscreen device by moving an unlock image. It's broad enough for us to say that it covers virtually every unlock behavior we've seen on phones, not just the iPhone's slide-to-unlock implementation.
Patent #7,469,381: List Scrolling And Document Translation, Scaling, And Rotation On A Touch-Screen Display
Yep, we covered this 2008 patent in our Palm piece too -- well remembered, friends. Jump back to that for the full details, but the executive summary is that it covers the iPhone's distinctive scroll-back-and-bounce behavior.
Patent #5,920,726: System And Method For Managing Power Conditions Within A Digital Camera Device
Granted in 1999, this patent is surprisingly broad -- it flatly covers managing power in a digital camera device to a power manager that sends state information to a processor controlling the camera.
Patent #7,633,076: Automated Response To And Sensing Of User Activity In Portable Devices
This was issued in October of 2009, and it's really quite specific: it covers a phone with multitouch input, a proximity sensor, and an ambient light sensor, which allows input when the sensors indicate one condition and doesn't allow input in others. In simple terms? It's how the iPhone shuts off the touchscreen when you hold it to your ear, a scenario that's specifically called out in the claims.
Patent #5,848,105: GMSK Signal Processors For Improved Communications Capacity And Quality
The year was 1998, and times were lean in Cupertino. Steve Jobs had just returned to Apple, and although the company's fortunes were turning with the introduction of the iMac, it was clear that a true breakout was needed. "We have the answer!" cried William A. Garnder and Stephan V. Schell, two of the company's employees. "We'll develop an an apparatus
Re:Of course they won't.. (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Like who again? (Score:4, Informative)
That's because it never got that far - the manufacturers to date simply caved in before it got to court.
OTOH, I can assure you that a metric ton of money is moving in Redmond's direction, and it makes Android just that less of a viable option (plus it forces the makers to make and sell the competing WP-loaded phones).
Here's the trick: Google doesn't need Apple to survive. They do however require the handset makers to keep using Android to make any money (at least in the mobile field). So who would you go after first - a competitor who took out a couple of models from one of your clients over look-and-feel (a design patent issue), or would you go after the guys who are raping the very makers that you need to continue using your products?
Put it this way: would you go after the fox who occasionally gets a chicken from one farm's henhouse, or try and do something about the locust swarm that's currently eating into all of the crops in the county?
Re:Of course they won't.. (Score:5, Informative)
Not really. Apple made the case that this was all a part of their trade dress, and their design patents are meant to protect their trade dress so they were a very integral part of the case. The way Samsung spins it, you'd think the case was all about rounded rectangles.
Re:Of course they won't.. (Score:3, Informative)
Were there any other major quotes? That's the only memorable line I got out of that movie (though it's been a while since I've watched it)
Are you kidding me?!?
JOSHUA: How. ah-bout. a-nice. game. of chess?
DAVID: Maybe....later....now...let's....play....global....thermo...nuclear....war.
DAVID: Is...this...a...game...or...is...it...real...?
JOSHUA: What's the difference?
Dad: [painful crunch] ...This corn is raw!
Mom: I know! Isn't it wonderful? It's so crisp!
Dad: Of course it's crisp-- it's RAW!!
Falken: Path - follow path. Gate - opengate throughgate closegate. Last ferry leaves at 5:30 so run run run!
Falken: ...and Nature will start over, probably with the bees.
Falken: We're the lucky ones. We'll be spared the horror of survival.
Regular nerd to super-nerd: MR. POTATO HEAD!! MR. POTATO HEAD!!! BACK DOORS ARE NOT SECRETS!!!
And that's just off the cuff. With more time and a few hints I might be able to reconstruct 70% of the dialogue in the whole film. ;-)
Yes I know, intertubes winnar = real life luser. I'm fully aware... I mean, it's Slashdot, and I have a relatively low UID.
Re:Of course they won't.. (Score:5, Informative)
Of course, this goes to show how ridiculous the original quote was, too. If by "don't play" they meant "don't stockpile nuclear weapons" ...
Erm, no, the game was Global Thermonuclear War. Only fools and psychopaths, or suicidals, play that game.