Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple granted broad mobile patent

macworld.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 104 posts

Re: Apple granted broad mobile patent

#31

Post by vacri »

nicholassmith wrote: post #4

If Apple decides to use them it'll take years for it to litigate, and they'll probably be proved invalid in the process. Don't fear poor Android phones, you're safe for now.

Except that designers then tread in fear of violating patents and produce much cut down versions, harming the consumer.

I once worked in a place that designed a CPAP pump, which is essentially an air pump with a humidifier. It has a removable water tank with a heating plate for humidifying the air. We had to use a removable plate to expose the tank instead of a door - because our main competitor had patented a hinged flap to access the water tank!

Regardless of how obvious prior art is, it's cheaper to make minor design changes than to spend years in litigation. Even though it's worse for the consumer, you have to avoid anything patented unless you have the ready cash that Apple has lying around.

Re: Apple granted broad mobile patent

#32

Post by bitwize »

huggyface wrote: post #11
backprojection wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious what happens if you're wrong though. Suppose they successfully push on this and android devices are taken off the market, or priced so high to cover licensing fees that people won't buy them. What recourse does Google have? Presumably they can't sue the patent office for granting ridiculous patents that ultimately drive them out of business.

Apple isn't immune to the patent game either. What if any of the countless assaults on Apple succeed? There are a lot of what ifs. There are millions of patents in play.

Apple isn't immune to the patent game either. What if any of the countless assaults on Apple succeed?

Then Apple will simply license the tech, the patent holder will be happy, and life will go on. This is what they did for Xerox's GUI tech that got integrated into the Macintosh; it's what they did for that digital noise filter in the A5 chip, it's what they'll do if anyone tries to sue. Alternately, they could make a hostile takeover bid for Samsung. Think they won't? :)

For Apple, it isn't about the money, though. Stealing Apple tech is an assault on their prestige, so they are unlikely to negotiate licensing terms with Android handset makers, and those handset makers are doomed in this market.

Re: Apple granted broad mobile patent

#33

Post by fpgeek »

reitzensteinm wrote: post #20
fusiongyro wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know, I actually think it would be better if the patent was upheld. Imagine the fiasco it would create. It would put the spotlight on the absurdity and abuses of the patent system when applied to technology. Might even get non-technical folks interested. Ultimately I think the solution is going to be one of the ones Judge Posner outlined in his editorial, but it might take a big shakeup like this to turn patents…

Especially if the patent were found to be invalid elsewhere, and Android gets banned only in the US. That would cause people outside our industry to stop and think. Unfortunately I'm pretty sure Apple wouldn't get that far - they could demand a $20 or $30 royalty instead, so consumers won't be directly confronted with the insanity; Android phones would just start being closer in price to iPhones.

Well, the Galaxy Nexus was (temporarily) banned only in the US. That ban got people to stop and think, but few of those people noticed that the ban didn't mean anything for the rest of the world.

Re: Apple granted broad mobile patent

#34

Post by incongruity »

fusiongyro wrote: post #15
nicholassmith wrote: post #4

If Apple decides to use them it'll take years for it to litigate, and they'll probably be proved invalid in the process. Don't fear poor Android phones, you're safe for now.

You know, I actually think it would be better if the patent was upheld. Imagine the fiasco it would create. It would put the spotlight on the absurdity and abuses of the patent system when applied to technology. Might even get non-technical folks interested. Ultimately I think the solution is going to be one of the ones Judge Posner outlined in his editorial, but it might take a big shakeup like this to turn patents…

I find myself hoping for an acceleration of the patent insanity. At some point, the absurdity of software patents will come to light and we'll all be able to move on with things.

Until then, it's a painful, expensive process.

So, yes indeed, bring on the reductio ad absurdum.

Re: Apple granted broad mobile patent

#35

Post by diminish »

VanL wrote: post #26

The hyperventilating in this article is ridiculous. First, patents always issue on a Thursday - and any large company usually has a number in the pipe. There is nothing unusual about a company the size of Apple getting 25 patents issued in one release. Now, I haven't read all of the 25 patents issued to Apple, but this article makes the classic mistake of confounding the specification (which describes lots of stuff)…

Today a lot of mainstream media published articles along the same line on how Apple's new patents will kill competition; which makes me think, they do it to push the aapl share price higher in the lack of any major apple product announcements in the current quarter.

Re: Apple granted broad mobile patent

#36

Post by bcrescimanno »

ajross wrote: post #29
bcrescimanno wrote: post #18

I'm not entirely sure why this is surprising news to anybody; in the original iPhone announcement, I believe Steve Jobs said, "...and boy have we patented it." Let's be frank: Apple is not the only major technology company with a massive collection of questionable patents that they could use to stifle their competition. The system, as it is today, basically forces companies into these patents because if they don't pa…

That "could" is doing way too much work in that sentence. Yes, all the other patent holders "could" file ridiculous suits and bring the tech economy down, in the same way that the US "could" launch a nuclear first strike against china. The thing is, for the most part they aren't, and haven't, over several decades of detente. Apple did. I think that distinction matters, no?

I think it'd be interesting to put that assertion to the test: has Apple really been more litigious with their patent portfolio than Oracle, Microsoft, IBM, and Google (as totally random examples pulled from thin air)? I'm honestly not sure of the answer; but, I'm skeptical that Apple is "worse" than other major tech companies in this regard.

Re: Apple granted broad mobile patent

#38

Post by stewbrew »

bcrescimanno wrote: post #18

I'm not entirely sure why this is surprising news to anybody; in the original iPhone announcement, I believe Steve Jobs said, "...and boy have we patented it." Let's be frank: Apple is not the only major technology company with a massive collection of questionable patents that they could use to stifle their competition. The system, as it is today, basically forces companies into these patents because if they don't pa…

"because if they don't patent it someone else will"

AFAIK it won't be worth the stamps if there is some prior art. I.e. once release nobody can patent it. The above statement is false. They patented it to hinder competition.

Note: I'm not against patents (for significant inventions) per se.

Re: Apple granted broad mobile patent

#40

Post by majorapps »

I honestly believe that this is the beginning of the end for the patent system. If this was granted and enforced we would see something along the lines of the advertising mantra: "good advertising the the fastest way to kill a bad product"
Post reply on HN