1. stackberry369's Avatar
    Can rim sue amazon over the kindle fire since it can be confused for the playbook?
    08-19-12 06:19 PM
  2. timmy t's Avatar
    I want them to sue Apple over push email.
    08-19-12 06:35 PM
  3. Tre Lawrence's Avatar
    Can rim sue amazon over the kindle fire since it can be confused for the playbook?
    No.

    In fact, that is a similarity that might help RIM LOL.
    08-19-12 06:41 PM
  4. mikeo007's Avatar
    There's a reason the Kindle Fire looks so similar to the Playbook, and it's not imitation...
    08-19-12 06:50 PM
  5. Bla1ze's Avatar
    There's a reason the Kindle Fire looks so similar to the Playbook, and it's not imitation...
    Its name is QUANTA.
    mikeo007 and Tre Lawrence like this.
    08-19-12 06:58 PM
  6. howarmat's Avatar
    If i recall they sourced the design/manufactuing out to quanta who could use it as they please. Amazon picked it up and the rest is history.
    08-19-12 07:05 PM
  7. GTiLeo's Avatar
    I want them to sue Apple over push email.
    It's not true push and works differently then RIMs push
    08-19-12 07:06 PM
  8. Bla1ze's Avatar
    If i recall they sourced the design/manufactuing out to quanta who could use it as they please. Amazon picked it up and the rest is history.
    You got it, RIM didn't design it and holds no rights to it. Therefore, no legal basis for suing. Quanta is a ODM and they can do whatever they want with the design, including reselling it.
    08-19-12 07:08 PM
  9. EdY's Avatar
    I hope there will be an end to all this suing (sorry lawyers) as these patent wars have gone out of control.

    Let us get back to making products and really innovating and true competition. Patent ONLY what is a real concrete invention and not silly garbage or "vapour" just so you can sue someone else in the future who spent the effort to make it real. Otherwise we as consumers will all pay for it.

    Anyone following the Apple vs. Samsung case would know most of the patented stuff is used all across the market of devices, preceded both companies, or shouldn't have been patented in the first place.

    You look at RIM and the emoticon lawsuit.. It is really a shame that someone can patent a button that brings up a menu to choose an emoticon. Or the way an icon looks, I mean how many ways can you draw a phone on a button to make a phone call? Or pinch to zoom? Or the "bounce" effect at the end of scrolling a panel? Just ridiculous.

    The edge is fuzzy, I understand, but we need to push that edge back to something more practical and less crazy.

    Otherwise I will patent the "magnifying glass zoom effect on a portion of your screen activated by rubbing your finger over the area to magnify in small circular motions".

    Yes, anyone in the next 30 years who does that will have to pay me. Muhahahaha! $$$$$ :-)



    Sent from my BlackBerry 9810 using Crackberry Tapatalk Forum app
    Harborcoat likes this.
    08-19-12 09:53 PM
  10. VerryBestr's Avatar
    You got it, RIM didn't design [the Kindle Fire] and holds no rights to it. Therefore, no legal basis for suing. Quanta is a ODM and they can do whatever they want with the design, including reselling it.
    Why do people keep repeating this stuff? Do you have some kind of inside information from RIM about who designed the PB? I have never seen any source for this kind of information.

    As far as I know, this all started with some speculation ahead of the release of the Kindle Fire. You can read the speculation that started it all here:
    | The Amazon tablet will look like a PlayBook -- because it basically is. - gdgt

    It didn't matter that this speculation turned out to be completely false. Months later, there were articles like this quoting an analyst who believed that the Kindle Fire is a "disguised PlayBook."
    | Is Kindle Fire a PlayBook in Disguise? | Benzinga
    Respected tech journalists wrote repeated the misinfo, as here:
    | RIM: the long, slow death spiral begins - Therese Poletti's Tech Tales - MarketWatch
    Even today, a couple of CB mods are repeating this story.

    It is misinformation because teardowns have shown that the PB and the Kindle Fire contain almost no components in common. They both contain the same TI OMAP processor, and that is about it. They do have the same size screens, but the PB screen is apparently much better (much brighter, at least). The PB has a number of hardware capabilities that the Kindle Fire lacks. For details on what these two tablets contain, see these teardown reports. How many components in common can you find?
    | Kindle Fire Teardown - iFixit
    | BlackBerry PlayBook Teardown - iFixit
    | RIM BlackBerry Playbook Teardown and Product Analysis | OMAP4430, Die Markings, Die & Diffusion Photos
    | Look Inside the Amazon Kindle Fire | Amazon Kindle Fire Teardown & Product Analysis Report

    Here is what Peter wrote in a previous thread:
    "Interpretation for the non-technical: there are almost no components shared in common between the two, other than the CPU. The Kindle Fire has only the slightest similarity to the PlayBook and even that's almost entirely cosmetic."
    | http://forums.crackberry.com/blackbe...0/#post7134214

    Almost all electronic equipment is now manufactured by one of the large ODMs like Quanta. Since an ODM must be able to manufacture a given piece of equipment, I suppose that it has some voice in its design. An ODM probably has a good handle on what is possible, and probably proposes various possibilities and ideas to companies contracting with it. But that doesn't mean that the ODM "owns" the design. That would depend on the terms of the contract. And that would be true even if a company contracted the entire design to an ODM (which I doubt RIM did).

    Can anyone point me to an original source for the report that RIM contracted out the PB design to Quanta?
    Last edited by VerryBestr; 08-25-12 at 06:30 PM.
    08-25-12 06:27 PM
  11. VerryBestr's Avatar
    Having said that ... even if the Kindle Fire hardware were a copy of the PB, I don't see how RIM could sue sue Amazon.

    Copying isn't illegal in and of itself.

    Legal protection is afforded to patented concepts, copyrighted materiel, trademarks, trade dress, trade secrets ... RIM could take action only if the PB hardware were somehow protected by one or more of these legal concepts.
    08-26-12 04:11 AM
  12. spike12's Avatar
    Is unified inbox patented?
    08-26-12 04:50 AM
  13. BlackBerry Guy's Avatar
    Can anyone point me to an original source for the report that RIM contracted out the PB design to Quanta?
    It's the definition of ODM.

    ODM = company that manufactures an electronic product on behalf of an OEM, in which the ODM owns the product design and may build products according to that design for other OEMs.

    vs

    EMS = company that provides value-added electronics assembly/manufacturing services on behalf of an OEM customer, in which the design and brand name belongs to the OEM.

    Source: The Distinction Between EMS and ODM Still Matters
    Last edited by Blackberry Guy; 08-26-12 at 10:53 AM.
    Laura Knotek likes this.
    08-26-12 10:51 AM
  14. VerryBestr's Avatar
    It's the definition of ODM. ...]
    Thank you, that is an interesting article. I see I should rephrase my question.

    Quanta's clients include Apple, Sony, HP, Dell, ... These clients clearly hire Quanta as an EMS (to use the correct definitions you supplied).

    Is there any evidence that RIM did anything differently with the PlayBook? The EMS definition says that "the design and brand name belongs to the OEM [customer]." The PB brand name clearly belongs to RIM -- is there any evidence that the design does not?

    Or is this just an unfounded rumor that began with link I provided above? Note the article referenced by this link was incorrect with its the general information: the PB was not used as a "template" for the Kindle Fire, since nearly every common function (WiFi, BLuetooth, power management, screen driver, etc., everything except the SoC) is performed by different chips in the two designs. This link also had incorrect detaled information, e.g., the Kindle Fire processor turned out to be clocked at the same speed as the PB processor, not slower as the article reported.
    08-27-12 03:59 AM
  15. tack's Avatar
    Companies should protect their IP rights, period. The phone makers are suing each other a lot, including RIM.

    I don't think the suing has gotten out of control. The copying and infringement is out of control. People should license patented features if they want to build them in, just like many phone makers have done. Microsoft for example licenses technology from Palm, Apple, and several others for Windows Phone, including many of the patents Samsung violated.
    08-27-12 11:47 AM
  16. bitek's Avatar
    It's not true push and works differently then RIMs push
    it is push email none the less. just like round corners are round corners and no one cares who they were manufqctured in the first place.

    Sent from my BlackBerry Playbook using Tapatalk 2
    08-27-12 12:07 PM
  17. mikeo007's Avatar
    it is push email none the less. just like round corners are round corners and no one cares who they were manufqctured in the first place.

    Sent from my BlackBerry Playbook using Tapatalk 2
    What push-email patents does RIM hold exactly? They were found guilty of infringing on push patents from NTP years ago. They don't have a leg to stand on if they don't have a specific patent that's being infringed upon. RIM didn't invent push email...
    08-27-12 12:26 PM
  18. BlackBerry Guy's Avatar
    Thank you, that is an interesting article. I see I should rephrase my question.

    Quanta's clients include Apple, Sony, HP, Dell, ... These clients clearly hire Quanta as an EMS (to use the correct definitions you supplied).

    Is there any evidence that RIM did anything differently with the PlayBook? The EMS definition says that "the design and brand name belongs to the OEM [customer]." The PB brand name clearly belongs to RIM -- is there any evidence that the design does not?

    Or is this just an unfounded rumor that began with link I provided above? Note the article referenced by this link was incorrect with its the general information: the PB was not used as a "template" for the Kindle Fire, since nearly every common function (WiFi, BLuetooth, power management, screen driver, etc., everything except the SoC) is performed by different chips in the two designs. This link also had incorrect detaled information, e.g., the Kindle Fire processor turned out to be clocked at the same speed as the PB processor, not slower as the article reported.
    I'm not sure what RIM or other OEMs business relationships with Quanta are, but when you go to their website, they clearly call themselves an ODM. The Kindle Fire may not be exactly the same as the PlayBook internally, but it's quite conceivable that the PlayBook was used as a starting point then spec'ed downwards to meet Amazon's price point. The lowest model PlayBook was $500 at launch, vs the Fire at $200...I wouldn't expect them to be exactly the same or even close to each other.

    There's no readily available evidence to support whether or not the PlayBook was built from an ODM or EMS contract. The only thing we do know is that Quanta built both the Fire and PlayBook, and that they are a known ODM. Given at least their superficial similarity, one would make the assumption that Quanta owns the design.
    08-27-12 08:34 PM
  19. ragdeiii03's Avatar
    Can rim sue amazon over the kindle fire since it can be confused for the playbook?
    Can Ford sue Toyota because they have a steering wheel?????
    08-27-12 08:57 PM
  20. VerryBestr's Avatar
    ... The only thing we do know is that Quanta built both the Fire and PlayBook, and that they are a known ODM. Given at least their superficial similarity, one would make the assumption that Quanta owns the design.
    Hmmm ... the Nook tablet has the same sized screen and the same processor ... i suppose its manufacturer had to buy the "design" from Quanta.

    By comparison to the PB, the Kindle Fire has:

    No Bluetooth
    No cameras
    No microphone
    No HDMI video out
    No compass/magnetometer
    No gyroscope
    No GPS
    Dimmer screen
    Poorer quality speakers
    Different touch screen controller chip
    Different audio codec chip
    DIfferent WiFi chip
    Different power management controller chip
    Different bus controller chip
    No magnesium frame around the glass


    ... it's quite conceivable that the PlayBook was used as a starting point then spec'ed downwards to meet Amazon's price point. ...
    Conceivable, OK. But given all the differences, perhaps it would have been easier just to start from scratch.

    ... There's no readily available evidence to support whether or not the PlayBook was built from an ODM or EMS contract. ...
    RIM was worried enough by possibility of the PB design being ripped off in China that it required Quanta to assemble the PB in Taiwan (which in turn required Quanta to reopen a shut factory and hire Taiwanese workers). Whatever the contractual relationship was between Quanta and RIM, that indicates to me that Quanta was not free to reuse the design as it saw fit.
    08-28-12 05:05 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD