Live data from Hacker News

Apple Wins Patent Ruling As Jury Finds Samsung Infringes

techcrunch.com

161–170 of 372 posts

Re: Apple Wins Patent Ruling As Jury Finds Samsung Infringes

#161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it is fair to say that Samsung may have crossed some lines as far as "trade dress" goes. But did Apple really invent pinch to zoom? Jeff Han demonstrated pinch to zoom gestures at TED in 2006, Microsoft Surface in 2007 before the iPhone was released, and I've seen various forms of "pinch to zoom" on different tablets and smart board applications. I think that Apple did a good job developing some multi-touch i…

Does anyone know why Jeff Han's work was not emphasized more as prior art? (there was also more at the time, but I can't recall specifics now). > If we had patents on desktop GUI user input standards like right click, ctrl key modifiers like ctrl-scroll to zoom, etc. then using computers would be a much bigger PITA. This is the key right here. I don't think everyone fully understands what is happening around these UI…

This is independent claim 8 from 7844915, which (IANAL and everything we have so far is based on breathless reporting) was found infringing:

A machine readable storage medium storing executable program instructions which when executed cause a data processing system to perform a method comprising:

- receiving a user input, the user input is one or more input points applied to a touch-sensitive display that is integrated with the data processing system;

- creating an event object in response to the user input; determining whether the event object invokes a scroll or gesture operation by distinguishing between a single input point applied to the touch-sensitive display that is interpreted as the scroll operation and two or more input points applied to the touch-sensitive display that are interpreted as the gesture operation;

- issuing at least one scroll or gesture call based on invoking the scroll or gesture operation;

- responding to at least one scroll call, if issued, by scrolling a window having a view associated with the event object; and

- responding to at least one gesture call, if issued, by scaling the view associated with the event object based on receiving the two or more input points in the form of the user input.

The last part in particular appears to give Apple exclusive right to direct manipulation of an object on screen via multitouch, since you can't match pixels to touch points without scaling.

This is why patents were not meant for a class of ideas, only actual implementations of ideas. No one deserves a 20 year monopoly on all multitouch interactions involving scaling, and this sure as hell does not promote the progress of the science and arts. I'm eager to hear how the "it encourages innovation by forcing them to come up with new approaches!" crowd suggests designing around this.

If we're going to have to have software patents, we should at least have to do it right, providing extremely specific descriptions of object models and event systems, the same way you have to give diagrams and descriptions of how the new crankshaft you invented physically connects to the motor. That would simultaneously make them much less useful and make them actually analogous to patents of physical devices.

Re: Apple Wins Patent Ruling As Jury Finds Samsung Infringes

#164

You know those 45% of HN readers that use a Mac? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4422121 Time to start voting with your $$ against AAPL. They are part of the problem, not part of the innovation.

The real problem are the laws, you can't expect companies to always just "play nice" within the context of those laws.

Re: Apple Wins Patent Ruling As Jury Finds Samsung Infringes

#165
So basically this means that if you are an independent developer and make an app that displays a graph your finger could edit you have to pay Apple for Twenty years!!

So this means that appart from the 30% cut of the Apple store, most of your profits go to Apple or MS who are going to dedicate the money to buy more monopolies(patents).

Or alternatively the US system(where nobody works anymore, you could only survive in finance, marketing, law or politics) collapses from within and some other country take its place.

Re: Apple Wins Patent Ruling As Jury Finds Samsung Infringes

#166
post #96
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How so? Issued patents have already undergone an examination by a patent examiner, who found that the patent met the statutory requirements for validity, so it seems reasonable to me that someone wishing to overturn that decision should bear the burden of proof.

Patent examiners do NOT conduct a very thorough review. The attitude is that it is better to get the patent out (for which they get paid) and let the courts sort out the bad ones. On this point I've been informed by patent lawyers that at trial something like 2/3 of patents will be found to be invalid. The problem is that nobody knows ahead of time which of those patents will be found to be invalid.

I have a few friends working as examiners for the USPTO. The review is more thorough than you make it sound. The problem is that the procedures drive examiners to err on the side of approving the patent. If the patent is rejected, a lawyer can appeal and the SPEs get involved. In the appeal, it takes much more evidence from the examiner to demonstrate that the patent is invalid.

Re: Apple Wins Patent Ruling As Jury Finds Samsung Infringes

#167
post #146

Judge rules Samsung owes Apple roughly one 'Instagram' in damages.

Which is decimal dust to Apple, less so to Samsung. The real value to Apple here is that Samsung was found to be infringing. That's going to mean a much tougher row for Samsung to hoe, even as the appeal is almost certainly being filed as we speak.

Re: Apple Wins Patent Ruling As Jury Finds Samsung Infringes

#168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it is fair to say that Samsung may have crossed some lines as far as "trade dress" goes. But did Apple really invent pinch to zoom? Jeff Han demonstrated pinch to zoom gestures at TED in 2006, Microsoft Surface in 2007 before the iPhone was released, and I've seen various forms of "pinch to zoom" on different tablets and smart board applications. I think that Apple did a good job developing some multi-touch i…

Does anyone know why Jeff Han's work was not emphasized more as prior art? (there was also more at the time, but I can't recall specifics now). > If we had patents on desktop GUI user input standards like right click, ctrl key modifiers like ctrl-scroll to zoom, etc. then using computers would be a much bigger PITA. This is the key right here. I don't think everyone fully understands what is happening around these UI…

There is a big misunderstanding of patents. Patents don't cover ideas, but inventions. "Pinch to zoom" is a feature, and the idea of doing that is not patentable by Apple or Jeff Han. It is the implementation that is patentable, and Apple's touch technology is very different from Jeff Hans'.

It's quite possible that both could legitimately patent their inventions.... just as the rotory and the piston engines can both be patented even though both are "internal combustion engines".

Re: Apple Wins Patent Ruling As Jury Finds Samsung Infringes

#169
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm actually pretty shocked that the Tab 10.1 was spared from the design charges, especially considering they lost that battle in Germany (and released the Tab 10.1N).

probably hasn't sold enough to make the damages worthwhile

That's irrelevant. The question was asked before damages were assessed.

Re: Apple Wins Patent Ruling As Jury Finds Samsung Infringes

#170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet, that's essentially a rounding error on Apple's bank account balance...

Totally, but not for Samsung. That's almost 10% of their net profit last year. This is going to scare the shit out of every Android handset maker out there.

Only 10% of a single year's profit. That is a bargain to become the clear number 2 in smartphones globally over several years and be one of the two companies making massive profits in the market.

Clearly HTC, Motorola and Sony did not infringe enough!

[I realise that copying may not be the only reason behind Samsungs success. They do make very nice hardware very efficiently.]

Post reply on HN