Jump to content

Galaxy Nexus Injunction


shaunm82

Recommended Posts

Guess Apple was able to win over an injunction on the Samsung Galaxy Nexus'.

 

Wonder how quickly Samsung can get a work around for that patent.

 

 

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-57464191-94/judge-oks-apple-injunction-on-samsungs-nexus-phone/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I cannot believe Apple made a statement like this:

 

"It's no coincidence that Samsung's latest products look a lot like the iPhone and iPad, from the shape of the hardware to the user interface and even the packaging," Apple said.

 

The Galaxy Nexus and the Galaxy S-III LOOK ABSOLUTELY NOTHING LIKE ANY IPHONE PRODUCTS EVER. The only similiarities they have aesthetically is that they both are smartphones. ICS and TouchWiz ICS is nothing like iOS, except they are both user interfaces. These kind of quotes just make the whole thing a joke, and really not even material to their complaint. I don't know why they even make such stupid comments.

 

Robert

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I cannot believe Apple made a statement like this:

 

 

 

The Galaxy Nexus and the Galaxy S-III LOOK ABSOLUTELY NOTHING LIKE ANY IPHONE PRODUCTS EVER. The only similiarities they have aesthetically is that they both are smartphones. ICS and TouchWiz ICS is nothing like iOS, except they are both user interfaces. These kind of quotes just make the whole thing a joke, and really not even material to their complaint. I don't know why they even make such stupid comments.

 

Robert

 

I know. Everytime I read that comment I have to shake my head, and Apply says it every single time a patent dispute comes up.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I consider myself an apple fan, and even I am just shaking my head in disgust at this mess. The courts need to tell apple to either license the patents or they are void. I am tired of this patent war. Microsoft had the patent war right. Sue the companies, until they pay you for each device and force them to support your platform.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This idiot judge is just fueling the fire. Maybe Apple can go patent using rechargeable batteries in phones.

 

It would go well with Apple's apparent patent of rectangular slabs with rounded corners.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I consider myself an apple fan, and even I am just shaking my head in disgust at this mess. The courts need to tell apple to either license the patents or they are void. I am tired of this patent war. Microsoft had the patent war right. Sue the companies, until they pay you for each device and force them to support your platform.

 

Yeah, they need to just cross-license all said "infringes" and move forward. They are wasting everyone's time, and their own money on this mess. They need to be sinking those $$$ into product innovation instead of legal fees.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not kidding when I say this, but I honestly and wholeheartedly believe that some of these judges(and other powers that be) are getting kickbacks and/or bribes from apple.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am sure that samsung is very "inspired" by apple.

 

Siri vs. S Voice for example

 

My favorite is the Samsung usb cable and charger - it's a black version of Apple's.

 

Let's just call it what it is - Apple feels that Samsung and others are infringing on their patients. Google is suing apple, apple is suing everyone, the beat goes on.

 

One thing this tells you is:

 

A) This is why we have a court system.

B) It's very good to be a tech patient attorney this day and age.

C) This is how companies feel they can protect their IP.

 

Not sure why people get so worked up. If you feel it's petty, don't buy that brand. I avoid apple products like the plague and have no regrets... but at the same time, I have no issues with them using the legal system to defend their intellectual property.

 

I still find it ironic that Apple and Samsung have such a huge relationship with one another yet the lawsuits battle on.

 

 

Moto is doing the same thing to Apple:

http://www.intomobile.com/2012/06/25/apple-could-face-ban-us-imports-iphone-and-ipad/

 

The beat goes on. If you couldn't protect the IP you developed, nobody would innovate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cross-licensing.

 

That's how things get handled in civility. Apple has decided to toss that out the window. Shameful.

 

Well considering the number of times Samsung and Apple have tried to do that and failed... it's hard to speculate as to why.

 

One thing you can't say is that they didn't try. Both sides feel like they have the law on their side, that's why we have a court system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not kidding when I say this, but I honestly and wholeheartedly believe that some of these judges(and other powers that be) are getting kickbacks and/or bribes from apple.

 

That's a lot of speculation right there.

 

No doubt apple has a lot of political influence (and for a reason) but to say that Apple is paying off judges? Regardless of if they are or not, it's absolutely irrelevant without any proof.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a lot of speculation right there.

 

No doubt apple has a lot of political influence (and for a reason) but to say that Apple is paying off judges? Regardless of if they are or not, it's absolutely irrelevant without any proof.

 

Whoa There Kemosabe!!! I was simply stating an opinion, which is relevant to me and relevant to this thread. If I had any sort of proof, it wouldn't be an opinion now would it. If you disagree then that's fine with me, I don't care, but don't tell me my comment is irrelevant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah Samsung does a lot to rip Apple. Thing is, this patent is nothing of the sort. This is just bad on a whole bunch of levels. Banning the Nexus because of voice search? So let me get this straight, Apple got the GNex banned over voice search?

 

This patent is from 2004 and is so deliberately vague that it should never have been granted.

Apple itself had to purchase Siri so they bought a technology that infringed the patent in question. Begs the question what did Apple say to get Siri to sell out to them.

Android had voice search in their phones before the iPhone 4S was released.

Yet, Koh rules in favor of Apple?

 

The technical ignorance on her part is outstanding. I'm normally one to defend Apple on here, but this is absurd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, here is the problem I have with all this patenting vague ideas that have not fully been through R&D, and then trying to ban other devices because they "infringe" on the intellectual property. The Alliance for Wireless Power. This alliance is about bringing a technology to market that will be safe and widely adopted and keep the technology affordable so everyone can enjoy it, not trying to attain a monopoly or disrupt the business of your competitor as if it is some petty playground spat.

 

As we know, the Samsung GSIII has a wireless charging system that will be available at some point... Instead of submitting a patent for the technology and finding some idiot judge to ban other devices that "infringe" on this technology, Samsung is forming a global initiative to integrate this technology into all consumer devices.

 

Wireless technology leaders Samsung and Qualcomm Incorporated have joined other technology leaders to form the Alliance for Wireless Power (A4WP), it was announced today.

 

The A4WP is open to new members and welcomes participation from vendors in all segments of the potential ecosystem, including: handheld devices, consumer electronics, semiconductor products, automotive, furniture, test equipment, cellular operators, and retail.

 

http://www.a4wp.org/news/PR_5.7.12.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whoa There Kemosabe!!! I was simply stating an opinion, which is relevant to me and relevant to this thread. If I had any sort of proof, it wouldn't be an opinion now would it. If you disagree then that's fine with me, I don't care, but don't tell me my comment is irrelevant.

 

It's irrelevant :)

 

Samsung has paid off so many judges, it's tots crazy! Frankly, everyone pays off everyone and all these lawsuits are so people can just get paid!

 

You paid off 500 judges last weekend to get some free chimichangas! Don't disagree with me cause I don't have proof! It's my opinion.

 

 

There is no need to add 100% made up "opinion" to this thread. Opinions are typically derived from facts. While you may have an opinion, it's based on nothing but your "gut" which is my opinion :)

 

Such the double-standard saying I can't state my opinion that your opinion is irrelevant! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whoa There Kemosabe!!! I was simply stating an opinion, which is relevant to me and relevant to this thread. If I had any sort of proof, it wouldn't be an opinion now would it. If you disagree then that's fine with me, I don't care, but don't tell me my comment is irrelevant.

 

It's irrelevant because it's based off nothing but your "gut".

 

Don't take it the wrong way, but let's have a thread that we can have discussion - not a thread based off gut feelings and instincts.

OK, here is the problem I have with all this patenting vague ideas that have not fully been through R&D, and then trying to ban other devices because they "infringe" on the intellectual property. The Alliance for Wireless Power. This alliance is about bringing a technology to market that will be safe and widely adopted and keep the technology affordable so everyone can enjoy it, not trying to attain a monopoly or disrupt the business of your competitor as if it is some petty playground spat.

 

As we know, the Samsung GSIII has a wireless charging system that will be available at some point... Instead of submitting a patent for the technology and finding some idiot judge to ban other devices that "infringe" on this technology, Samsung is forming a global initiative to integrate this technology into all consumer devices.

 

 

This is not to be "anti-patent" it's to create an ecosystem that multiple parties can profit from.

 

It's the same thing as apple allowing a ton of 3rd party vendors to create alarm clocks with iPhone docks, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is not to be "anti-patent" it's to create an ecosystem that multiple parties can profit from.

 

It's the same thing as apple allowing a ton of 3rd party vendors to create alarm clocks with iPhone docks, etc.

 

I see it as an internal component that could easily be patented and used only on Samsung devices. Instead of patenting the technology and developing it themselves, they are inviting any interested party into the development of the technology with the hopes that instead of having wires from our laptop, phone, tablet, game remote, speakers etc to an outlet, we have an internal component that can take energy generated at the outlet and convert it to power and charge the battery or power the device. This is different than allowing many 3rd parties to take your 30-pin connector and create peripherals to make your device more appealing to consumers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see it as an internal component that could easily be patented and used only on Samsung devices. Instead of patenting the technology and developing it themselves, they are inviting any interested party into the development of the technology with the hopes that instead of having wires from our laptop, phone, tablet, game remote, speakers etc to an outlet, we have an internal component that can take energy generated at the outlet and convert it to power and charge the battery or power the device. This is different than allowing many 3rd parties to take your 30-pin connector and create peripherals to make your device more appealing to consumers.

 

That's true - we saw Palm/HP go down the "Palm/HP devices only" path with their awesome touchtone charger - didn't pan out well.

 

The concept of a global ecosystem is like HDMI - you need everyone to have HDMI for it to be a solid interface. The HDMI licensing group allows people to license the technology, requires you to pay a fee, then a fee per device, then you have to display the "HDMI" logo correctly, etc etc. HDMI becomes branded and valuable.

 

But this is more apples to oranges - interface globalization vs. protecting IP. If a 3rd party like apple decided to copy the A4WP interface and not pay royalties to A4WP, one would hope that A4WP would offer them a licensing agreement like everyone else. If Apple told them no, I would suspect that A4WP would protect their technology and take them to court.

 

Look at apple getting skooled by HDMI group:

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/11/07/08/mini_displayport_to_hdmi_cables_face_recall_over_licensing_issues.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But this is more apples to oranges - interface globalization vs. protecting IP. If a 3rd party like apple decided to copy the A4WP interface and not pay royalties to A4WP, one would hope that A4WP would offer them a licensing agreement like everyone else or make them pay by suing.

 

Yes, offer a licensing agreement or make them pay, not block the sale of the device (unless it is a last resort.) The thing that I hate about all these lawsuits is that Microsoft has patents, but entered licensing agreements instead of using the courts as a pawn in some kind of game. So it would appear that Android OEMs are willing to enter licensing agreements.

 

I will concede this though, maybe the Android OEMs are completely unwilling to pay Apple licensing fees. They might think that they have patents that Apple is infringing upon and should pay less than what Apple thinks or pay nothing. I don't know what went on in those meetings. I look at the late Steve Jobs' comments about spending every penny of Apple's money to crush Android, it really paints Apple in a poor light and makes it appear that they are unwilling to license their IP, even for a fair price. It appears that they have gone the "destroy" route, using the courts to ban and disrupt the operations of the other makers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, offer a licensing agreement or make them pay, not block the sale of the device (unless it is a last resort.) The thing that I hate about all these lawsuits is that Microsoft has patents, but entered licensing agreements instead of using the courts as a pawn in some kind of game. So it would appear that Android OEMs are willing to enter licensing agreements.

 

I will concede this though, maybe the Android OEMs are completely unwilling to pay Apple licensing fees. They might think that they have patents that Apple is infringing upon and should pay less than what Apple thinks or pay nothing. I don't know what went on in those meetings. I look at the late Steve Jobs' comments about spending every penny of Apple's money to crush Android, it really paints Apple in a poor light and makes it appear that they are unwilling to license their IP, even for a fair price. It appears that they have gone the "destroy" route, using the courts to ban and disrupt the operations of the other makers.

 

I think that's the hardest part - we just don't know what's going on behind those closed door meetings. While Steve Jobs definitely seemed to take a more hardline approach, I think Tim Cook takes a more dollars and sense approach.

 

At the end of the day, I think companies like Microsoft win as resources are used by Samsung and Apple duking this out. If both Samsung and Apple feel they are in the right, the only thing left is to let the courts settle the matter... which sadly, turns into a poop show.

 

U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh in San Jose, California, ordered Apple Chief Executive Officer Tim Cook to meet face to face with Samsung CEO Choi Gee Sung. The general counsels of both companies also were directed to participate in the two-day mediation session to try settle Apple’s claims that Samsung’s smartphones and tablet computers infringe patents covering the design and feel of iPhones and iPads, as well as Samsung’s infringement counterclaims related to its Galaxy smartphones.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-05-21/apple-samsung-ordered-into-patent-settlement-conference.html

 

But we still don't see any resolution...

 

The two firms have trimmed the number of patents under dispute by half in a court filing earlier this month under the order of Northern District of California Court’s Judge Lucy Koh. Apple has sued Samsung for copyright infringement on designs, while Samsung in turn is asking for royalties against Apple for using its wireless transmission technology.

http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/tech/2012/05/133_111367.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that's the hardest part - we just don't know what's going on behind those closed door meetings. While Steve Jobs definitely seemed to take a more hardline approach, I think Tim Cook takes a more dollars and sense approach.

 

At the end of the day, I think companies like Microsoft win as resources are used by Samsung and Apple duking this out. If both Samsung and Apple feel they are in the right, the only thing left is to let the courts settle the matter... which sadly, turns into a poop show.

 

 

http://www.bloomberg...conference.html

 

But we still don't see any resolution...

 

 

http://www.koreatime...133_111367.html

 

Yes, and the consumers pay the price. Such as the Evo LTE delay...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, and the consumers pay the price. Such as the Evo LTE delay...

 

Just hope Apple slips up. Could you imagine the headline?

 

"iPhone Launch Delayed due to Court ruling Apple infringed on Motorola patent"

 

followed by

 

"Foxconn workers go on strike, refuse to build iAnything"

 

Nice thing about higher end Samsung phones is that they are made in Korea. HTC phones are made in Taiwan.

 

I try to avoid anything made in china, if possible (which is actually pretty do-able if you try really hard).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a pretty straightforward article on the court ruling. Basically, the court found that android's search box infringes on Apple's patent on universal search. Obviously, Samsung will appeal this ruling and that may delay the injunction a while.

 

http://www.theverge.com/2012/6/29/3126934/apple-samsung-judge-bans-galaxy-nexus

 

Update: We've now had a chance to review the imposing 101 page injunction order and while there's obviously a lot going on, the core of the order is actually pretty straightforward. The court found that each of the four asserted Apple patents is likely infringed and valid, but only issued an injunction for infringement of the '604 patent. Judge Koh reasoned that unlike the other three patents, the '604 patent covered the highly valued unified search feature of Siri that contributed greatly to consumer demand for the iPhone 4S. Moreover, the court held that Android's infringing "Quick Search Box" feature was touted by Google as a "core user feature on Android" and, therefore, was also a key selling point for the Galaxy Nexus.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • Looks like there's a slightly taller building going up next door to where the decommissioned site used to be. Taking a look at StreetView, T-Mobile likely decommissioned the site because the east facing sector would blocked by the new building. If I had to guess, T-Mobile has already agreed to move to the roof of the new building and is just waiting for it to be completed to install the site there. What they should've done is just rearrange the sectors in the meantime but it seems like T-Mobile just bit the bullet and decommed the tower in the short term. — — — — — A permit was issued for a Sprint conversion at 150 Prospect Park West, finally filling in what is T-Mobile's largest coverage gap in Park Slope. Verizon is collocated on that building and AT&T has placed small cells along Prospect Park West to fill in coverage there while T-Mobile struggled using two sites, one at Grand Army Plaza at the far north and another at Bartel Pritchard Square to the far south.  
    • Yep, you can see the site was taken down between Aug 2022 and Apr 2023.
    • Verizon site at Woodbury Commons finally got C-band. I'm seeing upwards of 600Mbps there, a massive improvement over the <1Mbps I used to see. LTE is now at 10-20Mbps which is significantly better than before where speed tests would often fail. My only complaint is that C-band is super inconsistent. Not sure if it's a software issue but sometimes I'm connected to it and get the 600Mbps speeds previously mentioned and other times I connect and only see 15Mbps. Seems like whatever load balancing the network is trying to do is still shoving a ton of people to LTE, even in conditions where I have a strong C-band signal.  — — — — — You're absolutely right. The site on top of Bais Sarah Hall at 6101 16th Ave got decommissioned. Sad that they haven't installed a new site to fill in that coverage gap.  — — — — — In other news a carrier reached out to the board of my grandmother's building in Brooklyn about installing antennas on top of it so she called me today because she knows I map cell towers and she said a lot of people in her building, especially the folks on the upper floors, are worried about the health effects lol. I asked her if she knew what carrier it would be but she said she doesn't know. A quick glance at Cellmapper tells me it's either Dish or AT&T since Verizon and T-Mobile both have sites within a two block radius of her building but AT&T barely builds new sites so I'm leaning Dish. They're asking for a 25-year lease with an option to renegotiate the lease after 10-years. The board of her co-op said that if they do it, maintenance fees will go down since they'll be offset by the rent that the carrier would be paying them. She said she already voted in favor of it but she thinks that a lot of the older people in her building are against it.
    • Galaxy S7 FE most certainly doesn't have the same level of NR CA (if at all), it also looks like it doesn't have SA NR, so it's is inherently going to be much slower since most of the spectrum is now focused on NR rather than LTE. It's likely the same generation radio as the S21 (or maybe S20). Having trouble finding which it would be.
    • T-Mobile seems to be paying close attention to how much of B2 they refarm for NR, as on this trip down to South Padre Island I saw both 20x20 n25 and 20x20 B2 (but not both simultaneously) at various points on the trip. At South Padre itself, seems like someone else has 2.5 GHz licensed so the n41 setup here is 20+80 MHz. Speeds are still decent, but VZW has 100+60 MHz n77 live (and AT&T has some 80+40).
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...