Apple vs. Samsung: The Legend Continues

/

John Paczkowski for some site:

Apple is seeking $2.5 billion from its Korean rival, which it argues illegally chose to compete by copying Apple. “Samsung once sold a range of phones and a tablet of its own design,” Apple wrote in its filing. “Now Samsung’s mobile 13 devices not only look like Apple’s iPhone and iPad, they use Apple’s patented software features to interact with the user.”

Popcorn, anyone?

Google Promotes Patent Trolls

/

Asa Mathat writing for some publication on Google's recent patent woes:

In attempting to fend off Apple and Microsoft’s suits against Motorola Mobility and advancing its own patent litigation against both companies, Google, which is facing a lot of regulatory scrutiny in the U.S. and abroad over what some allege is abuse of SEPs, has been arguing that proprietary non-standardized technologies that become ubiquitous due to their popularity with consumers should be considered de facto standards.

What Google's doing here is encouraging the filing of more patents. Phantom patents. Companies will need to patent something, anything, whether they ever intend to make it or not just so that if the day should come that they make something needing the technology or process described in the patent they have it in their portfolio, ready to go. If, like Apple, a company values secrecy or showmanship (or both) they will be rendered unable to participate in the tech landscape in that way without filing a bazillionty fake/misleading patents or setting up shell corporations to do the same thing.

In short, Google is promoting patent-trollism.

On the Swipe-to-Unlock Patent

/

Ben Brooks on HTC's recent victory in the Swipe to Unlock trial:

I’m actually really glad Apple lost this patent because it’s something that just seems silly to not have on touchscreen devices.

This is a rare time when I disagree with Ben. Swipe to unlock may seem "silly not to have on a touchscreen device" now that you've been using it for 5 years. But Apple came up with that idea to overcome a potential problem. And now that Apple has figured out an excellent solution other companies should be allowed to just take that idea without putting in any of the work? I strongly disagree.

Patent Absurdity

/

John Naughton, writing about Apple case against Googorola getting thrown out:

This is a landmark judgment, one of those moments when someone – in this case an eminent judge rather than a small child – points out that the emperor is indeed stark naked. Patent wrangling between technology companies has become both pathological and pointless. It is also a gross abuse of intellectual property law that uses the courts as tools for gaining competitive advantage. The people who should be deciding whether Apple's phones are better – more functional, reliable, easier to use – than Motorola's are consumers, not judges. By striking a blow for common sense in what had become a madhouse, Posner has set a really encouraging precedent.

I agree with the specific example and, furthermore, believe the entire patent system to be horribly flawed. That said, there needs to be a way to stop people (Samsung, I'm looking at you) from blatantly stealing everything Apple does. Like phones, tablets, Siri, and "ultrabooks"(read: MacBook Air Clones). I don't know for sure what that is, but something needs to change.