Apple iPhones Found to Have Violated Chinese Rival's Patent (bloomberg.com) 130
Beijing's intellectual property regulator has ordered Apple to stop sales of the iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus in the city, after it found that the design of Apple's iconic smartphone is too similar to a Chinese phone. The aforementioned handsets infringe on a Chinese patent for exterior design held by a company called Shenzhen Baili for its 100C smartphone. From a Bloomberg report: While the decision covers only Beijing, future lawsuits against Apple could take the case as a precedent, potentially influencing the outcomes of litigation elsewhere in China. Baili is one of scores of smartphone brands trying to cash in on the country's mobile boom. [...] "If the position by the Beijing IP office is upheld and Apple doesn't appeal further, then in theory they wouldn't be able to sell the iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus," IP specialist Ted Chwu said. The iPhone 6, and iPhone 6 Plus were launched in 2014. What took them so long?
Interesting (Score:5, Insightful)
I didn't know that China understood the concept of design protection.
Re:Interesting (Score:5, Insightful)
They feel differently when it's a Western company "violating" a Chinese company's patent.
Re: (Score:3)
The iPhone 6, and iPhone 6 Plus were launched in 2014. What took them so long?
The wheel of (in)justice turns slowly... unless someone grease the wheel.
Re:Interesting (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
You have misquoted Emo Phillips. The correct quote [azquotes.com] is: "Some mornings, it's just not worth chewing through the leather straps."
Re: (Score:3)
Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
You have misquoted Emo Phillips. The correct quote [azquotes.com] is: "Some mornings, it's just not worth chewing through the leather straps."
That's entirely possible. However, it is also possible that he is misquoting me, since I have been using that tagline since the days of logging into BBSs using Telix on a 286 in the late 80s. I am sure that I copied it accurately from the guy I swiped it from, because my tagline management program was really good at that.
Re: (Score:2)
Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
You have misquoted Emo Phillips. The correct quote [azquotes.com] is: "Some mornings, it's just not worth chewing through the leather straps."
That's entirely possible. However, it is also possible that he is misquoting me, since I have been using that tagline since the days of logging into BBSs using Telix on a 286 in the late 80s. I am sure that I copied it accurately from the guy I swiped it from, because my tagline management program was really good at that.
Oh, so HE misquoted Emo. ;-)
I just noticed because I've used that line off and on since I first heard it around 1990 or so (I think).
Re: (Score:1)
By that same logic, I hereby declare that the US now owes me $5 million.
Go and vote a trump, you dipshit.
Re: Interesting (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The iPhone 6, and iPhone 6 Plus were launched in 2014. What took them so long?
The wheel of (in)justice turns slowly... unless someone grease the wheel.
I've heard that only matters to the people on the rim.
Re:Interesting (Score:4, Funny)
Isn't a more interesting question, "How far has Apple fallen that they now have to copy Chinese designs?"
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't a more interesting question, "How far has Apple fallen that they now have to copy Chinese designs?"
That's sarcasm, I assume.
Re: (Score:2)
No, Mr Cook, I'm being serious. Ever since the iWristwatch, Apple has had the stink of desperation on it.
Re:Interesting (Score:4, Insightful)
No, Mr Cook, I'm being serious. Ever since the iWristwatch, Apple has had the stink of desperation on it.
I think Apple did the Apple Watch because everyone EXPECTED them to do it; not because they thought it was the greatest new thing ever.
The issue is not "Desparation", so much as "Having most, if not all, of the "boxes" checked already."
Honestly, can you think of another new CLASS of product that would fall logically into Apple's wheelhouse (or any company making similar products?) that anyone has come up with in the past 5 years or so? The Smartwatch is pretty much "it".
Virtual Reality/Augmented Reality is just now becoming sorta interesting. Rumor has it that Apple has been snapping-up talent in that area for about the past year or so.
But computer improvements in general (hardware-wise) have been slowing down across the board; same with mobile. It happens.
For example, when was the last big improvement in home entertainment systems? Product classifications and industries (and consumer tastes) change and mature over time. High-tech stuff is no different.
If Apple is desparate, it is because the entire industry is desparate.
If you can find me another company in a similar product-space as Apple that is truly burning-up the press with stuff that is more than just incremental improvements to existing products, that truly changes the way all similar products look and act, like the iPhone did for cellphones, or are truly a new CLASS of product, I'm all eyes.
Re: (Score:2)
No, Mr Cook, I'm being serious. Ever since the iWristwatch, Apple has had the stink of desperation on it.
Clearly you missed that Apple's phone was released almost 2 years before the Chinese manufactured phone. China copied it and waited until they had a product on the market and then banned the Apple version. That's how China works. They copy, copy, copy and keep copying and when their shit copies aren't being purchased they outlaw the foreign competition by banning or suing them.
Re:Interesting (Score:5, Insightful)
I doubt the deliberately copied it, they just created an environment where companies feel that rounded corners are worthy of protection and litigation. Karma is a bitch, huh Apple?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not quite as far as Samsung.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Only if by "kinda" you mean not like that at all, you stupid fuck.
Re:Interesting (Score:5, Insightful)
They feel differently when it's a Western company "violating" a Chinese company's patent.
Exactly this, calling the Chinese Judicial system an actual Judicial system is playing extremely loose with what those words mean. I mean, there is justice, but about as much justice that could be meted out with weighted dice in place for actual judges, if the dice are weighted against you, you might as well hang it up and find out how to get your own set of weighted dice. More than likely Apple will pay whatever "operating cost" they need to pay and move on with their lives. More so, this is exactly how business as usual runs in China. There are certain "operating costs" that have to be paid before you sell something/build something/enslave someone there and failure to do so has you running afoul with the Judicial system.
This isn't Apple's first rodeo in the Chinese legal system and they're well aware of what needs to be done. Doing business in China is a balance of how much are you willing to pay off people and how much you stand to profit. The more you want to profit, the more of that profit you need to "invest" in the Chinese legal system. The Chinese don't see it so much as bribery as the do what they tend to call it "investments". People who sell products in China, need to be vested in the unique interest of China in order to sell their wares there. Or at least that's how the logic works that I've been explained. But I must say that it sounds like it would be dreadful to do business in that country.
Re: (Score:3)
It's actual
Re:Interesting (Score:5, Insightful)
So it's basically like the US, where patent holders always sue in this one corrupt court that never seems to favour their foreign rivals, like Samsung. Got it.
Re: (Score:2)
They feel differently when it's a Western company "violating" a Chinese company's patent.
Especially when the President of that Western company's country just had a meeting with a political enemty of the Chinese goverment. It's all about petty revenge.
Re: (Score:2)
They feel differently when it's a Western company "violating" a Chinese company's patent.
Apple feels differently when it is on the receiving end of a design patent suit?
Re: (Score:1)
Sure they understand it: If the Chinese designed it, it deserves protection. :P
Re: (Score:1)
How does that differ from US design protection? Each country protects the patent they have issued. Rounded edges... as if that's such a huge design accomplishment.
Re: (Score:1)
Apple does not have a patent on rounded edges. They have a design patent where rounded edges is one of 20+ other distinctions.
Re: (Score:2)
There is not enough information is TFA. When did the Chinese company file for a patent?
It used to be that one (inventor or applicant) must prove where the invention idea came from when files for a patent. It was changed a while back and now it is "first to file" which is stupid. One conspiracy theory is that the Chinese company stole the design idea from Apple (using the loop hole in patent filing). An enforcible patent must be filed in the country it is enforced (or covered) in order for claims to be valid
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Actually, rounded corners not withstanding, that looks an awful lot like the 2007 iphone. And, iphones were already in manufacturing in June, 2014, so the design came earlier. It's much more likely that Shenzhen lifted the design from the specs sent to Apple's manufacturers.
It doesn't matter in Chinese court. When you are a foreigner you won't win. That's why most corporations set up a shell company inside China who acts like a partner to sell your products.
Re: (Score:2)
Only when it serves a suppressive country's interest in controlling communication.
Re: (Score:3)
I didn't know that China understood the concept of design protection.
They do when it benefits them to do so.
What took them so long? Simple (Score:5, Informative)
It took them that long to file the patent...once the iPhone 6 was released.
Let's face it: "Chinese Intellectual Property Law" is an oxymoron.
Re: (Score:3)
It took them that long to file the patent...once the iPhone 6 was released.
Let's face it: "Chinese Intellectual Property Law" is an oxymoron.
Their phone was released 6 months before the iPhone. Unless you think that they invented time-travel, the odds are that their design was completed long before the iPhone in question was released.
Re: (Score:3)
Their phone was released 6 months before the iPhone. Unless you think that they invented time-travel, the odds are that their design was completed long before the iPhone in question was released.
Yeah, it probably was, but can you say that these two designs [macdailynews.com] really resemble each other?
Re: (Score:3)
what probably happened is apple did what they usually do, work with foxconn to develop the next models. someone at foxconn took early drawings and gave them to another company who actually got a barely-similar model out to market before apple's fairly predictable development cycle could.
and a patent ruling that only affects ONE CITY? wtf is what? that itself sounds like a sham. imagine imagine if all the rulings in east texas only applied in east texas district....
That is EXACTLY what happened. I would bet anything on that, knowing how Chinese "product development" works.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
They look about as much alike as the models in the Apple v Samsung design lawsuit, which eventually resulted in Samsung owing Apple $400M+.
Re: (Score:1)
Their phone was released 6 months before the iPhone. Unless you think that they invented time-travel, the odds are that their design was completed long before the iPhone in question was released.
Yeah, it probably was, but can you say that these two designs [macdailynews.com] really resemble each other?
They both look like an iPhone 4 to me. or maybe an iPod touch.
On second thought, they really do look like a Palm PDA without the buttons.
Yep. I'm going with they're both copies of the Palm.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, it probably was, but can you say that these two designs [macdailynews.com] really resemble each other?
Nope, but then it does have round corners so by legal precedence they are identical.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Their phone was released 6 months before the iPhone. Unless you think that they invented time-travel, the odds are that their design was completed long before the iPhone in question was released.
Yeah, it probably was, but can you say that these two designs [macdailynews.com] really resemble each other?
More to the point is just how different can the exterior of smartphones actually be - especially from a practical standpoint? The devices are only so big, intended to be held in identically-shaped hands and used in the same way. Many internal components, like batteries, are very much alike and limited in shape and size, so components can only be arranged in certain configurations. Buttons, cameras and microphones (etc) are limited in their locations due to usage needs. From a practical standpoint, it woul
Re: (Score:2)
Imagine if car manufacturers sued each other for similar design attributes.
You have four wheels. The steering wheel is on the left side. You have a key to start your vehicle. I'm suing you because your design is so similar to mine.
Re: (Score:2)
From a practical standpoint, it would seem that these devices must be more alike than different. Imagine if car manufacturers sued each other for similar design attributes. You have four wheels. The steering wheel is on the left side. You have a key to start your vehicle. I'm suing you because your design is so similar to mine.
Precisely.
Re: (Score:2)
Their phone was released 6 months before the iPhone. Unless you think that they invented time-travel, the odds are that their design was completed long before the iPhone in question was released.
Yeah, it probably was, but can you say that these two designs [macdailynews.com] really resemble each other?
Screen, speaker and mic in front - check.
/s
Front-facing camera and rear-facing camera with flash - check.
Rounded edges - check.
Uses an operating system that allows the installation of apps - check.
Got to admit it, the iPhone 6 does share those innovative and unique features.
Re: (Score:2)
Their phone was released 6 months before the iPhone. Unless you think that they invented time-travel, the odds are that their design was completed long before the iPhone in question was released.
Yeah, it probably was, but can you say that these two designs [macdailynews.com] really resemble each other?
Six months? How long before release do you think Foxconn was making iPhone 6 prototypes for Apple?
People around here have absolutely no concept of how long product design cycles are.
I wouldn't be at ALL surprised if Foxconn was making iPhone 8 prototypes right now.
Re: (Score:2)
Adblocking bullshit popover warning on that link.
Recommend you just don't click it at all.
Re: (Score:2)
Uh huh? And you don't think they had some inside information about upcoming iPhone designs, which are also manufactured in China? Gosh, they'd never resort to wholesale industrial espionage, would they?
Sorry China, but you don't get to play this both ways. Well, you DO, since it's your country, but we'll at least call bullshit on it. And in fact, we can't look too smug, since our own system is fucked up enough as it is, just not quite as fucked up as theirs.
This will probably result in Apple having to b
Its first to file, not discover or ship (Score:2)
In first to file, anything published is "filed" (Score:2)
I know nothing about Chinese patent law, other than that WTO membership requires China to have one. But in the United States, the switch to "first to file" did not abridge the novelty requirement. Anything published, even other than as a patent application, before a given patent application is filed is considered prior art and therefore "filed".
Re: (Score:2)
I know nothing about Chinese patent law, other than that WTO membership requires China to have one. But in the United States, the switch to "first to file" did not abridge the novelty requirement. Anything published, even other than as a patent application, before a given patent application is filed is considered prior art and therefore "filed".
No one said prior art no longer exists. The point is that Baili shipping first is not necessarily meaningful. If Apple filed before Baili shipped, and or course before Baili filed, then Apple "wins". Apple shipping second is not necessarily a problem as long as Apple filed early enough.
Re: (Score:2)
True, if Apple filed before Baili filed, shipped, or otherwise published its own design, Apple wins. But since the America Invents Act was announced, a lot of other Slashdot readers have posted comments under the mistaken impression that the replacement of interference proceedings with first-to-file somehow abridges novelty by allowing only patent applications to be prior art. For example, had Baili published a photo of its design before Apple filed, Baili might win.
Re: (Score:2)
As I understand it, the point of first to file is to avoid me saying "I invented it first, ask my buddies, we were down the pub last Christmas, honest. And this notebook, look, it has dates written in it with a different pen and everything" after you file. If it ain't externally verifiable it doesn't count.
It's simply easier to administer. Sucks if two guys are working on it independently at the same time in their sheds, but them's the breaks.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It took them that long to file the patent...once the iPhone 6 was released.
Let's face it: "Chinese Intellectual Property Law" is an oxymoron.
The verdict against Samsung copying Apple came 3-4 years after the infringement. What took Apple so long?
To paraphrase you: I guess Apple needed time to copy Samsungs original design?
Either that or court cases take time.
Re: Pics or GTFO (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Pics or GTFO (Score:2)
Missing Steve (Score:3)
If Jobs were still alive and at the helm, he would tell the Chinese to go pound sand.
Re: (Score:3)
And they'd reply
"Good artists copy; greate artists steal".
Besides, Apple's stance towards patents on appearances is well-known (see the rounded corners debate). If some legitimate court finds that the specific iPhone appears too similar to the 100c, what's Apple going to do? Complain that patents on appearances are bullshit?
Re: Missing Steve (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Are talking about the same company that brought lawsuits over a rectangle with rounded corners?
Apple's chickens may be coming home to roost.
First Copy (Score:2)
Meh... (Score:2)
Apple will simply assert that they were copied, do their best to prove it... and if they lose they just appeal after having a back room meeting with somebody that matters advising China that they are more than happy to take their production elsewhere if somebody doesn't step in and make this little problem go away.
Trump's master plan (Score:3)
Chinese company sues,
Apple onshores factories.
Re: (Score:2)
iFrone 6 (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
When I was in Beijing my favorite thing was seeing all the people wandering around with their "Nikee" or "Hilfinger" branded clothing. It might even have come out of the same sweatshop.
My lady bought me a "FUB" shirt at the local Grocery Outlet in Lakeport, CA. I think it was actually the only one that was wrong, maybe that's when the sweatshop closed down or something, right before embroidering the last "U" on the front of my shirt. It wasn't much crappier than a real FUBU shirt and it was fairly hilarious so I wore it. It's not easy finding shirts in my size, since I'm a double-tall, and most shirts aren't even single-tall.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
I have the same problem with condoms.
What took them so long? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Samsung is full of it though. They have a home market where they are one of only two major brands that have their toes in everything. The foreign market they are lucky if they grab 10% of it an any country. So a patent claim by Samsung against anyone acts to shut the competitor out of their home country and does little in foreign countries since it takes a stupid amount of money, time and lawyers to fight essentially the same patent in every country that has different patent filing times and rules.
China and
I for one Don't welcome... (Score:2)
I for one DON'T welcome our new Chinese overlords...color me surprised as well....I normally welcome our new overlords, wherever they come from....
Re: (Score:2)
It's just an expression. :) Re-reading what I posted, I can see how it can misconstrued though. Even though we are discussing the 'Chinese' as a nation where the legal dispute took place, some subconsciously read the 'Chinese' as all people who share a genetic link with the region. So to clarify, I distinctly mean the nation. It does have me thinking though, if I replaced Chinese with American, would it be misconstrued in the same way? I'm guessing not. Funny how that works.
Also, I may be back to welc
pics of the 100c phone (Score:1)
http://www.macrumors.com/2016/... [macrumors.com]
Personally, the iPhone 6 doesn't appear to look anything like the 100c, except perhaps the ring around the back camera.
What took them so long? (Score:1)
The Real Issue (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know, those pictures show very rounded corners on both devices.
Live by the patent, die by the patent (Score:2)
Patent trolling works both ways? Who knew!
Oh yeah? (Score:2)
Well here's our 'rounded corners' patent back at ya!
Matthew 26:52 (Score:2)
"... for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword."
Chinese Copyrights (Score:1)
The Chinese make a living by stealing from others, even stealing from their own Chinese companies.
They even copy the brand names, because they are so unoriginal.
And they swap out the expensive parts for cheapest crap on Earth.
Do you think anyone gives a damn about Chinese copyrights?
Karma (Score:2)
interrupted! (Score:1)
Looks like patent troll... (Score:4, Informative)
Company specialising in monetizing valuable IP (Score:2)
Allow me to correct you, because the term "patent troll" is unknown in business circles, largely dated, prejudicial, defamatory, and may open you up to legal action.
What you really meant to say is that the Chinese company affected is one that specialises in monetising Valuable Intellectual Property, by which means it spurs Innovation, while not necessarily being a practising entity.
There, fixed that for you.
If Apple hadn't sued over round cornered rect... (Score:2)
I'd feel a bit sorrier for Apple is they hadn't sued over round cornered rectangles...and won against a foreign company in a US court.
Claims Violated (Score:3)
1. A portable communications device: Where said device is manufactured by child and prison labor.