1. malingering's Avatar
    Hello everyone, i'm new here... This is my first post...
    These few days i've read about how apple won against samsung... So i'm thinking would it gives effect to PB and BB.. Coz PB also use things like pinching, tap to zoom, scrolling,dragging in touchscreen,etc... Wich apple has it in their patents... If BB10 manage to compete apple's sales in the future.. Would they be able to assue RIM just like they did to samsung?
    I have storm 2 and a playbook 64Gb, i love them both and enthusiasticly wait for the BB10.. So i'm wondering would this apple patents thing would give influence on our beloved PB and BB phones...
    *i'm sory if my english is not so good...
    herculesinwyoming likes this.
    08-27-12 01:41 AM
  2. PedroBorgas's Avatar
    Hey!

    Welcome to Crackberry

    You should do a quick search before posting,because there are about 3 other threads adressing the same issue.

    We should keep the discussions centralized

    Sorry,

    Pedro

    Sent from a old but beautiful BB 8520 or a new and shinny PB 2.0
    hpjrt likes this.
    08-27-12 02:10 AM
  3. varunsain's Avatar
    Hey welcome to CB.. To begin with Apple did not have a worthy case in place of it's patents.. It was more so inclined to an overall perception of Samsung smartphones being easily mistaken for Apple and how minutely you are able to distinguish between a feature set. You see, there are just regular (read: influenced) people making decisions and they did make a mistake which made the case go back to the table.. Anywayss.. the decision was biased and we all know that..

    No one really knows the depth of patents.. As of now there might be many patents infringed by RIM but for all you know Apple might have 'taken' a few ideas themselves from here and there since they aren't really the first to 'invent' the smartphone..

    So it's more of a mud slinging thing to be honest.. You never know who will get sued for what!
    08-27-12 02:45 AM
  4. malingering's Avatar
    Oh,i see... I am just hoping that there wouldn't be any problem when bb10 shows up...
    Btw, i guest i'll to search the other similar threads...
    Thx pedro n varunsain...
    08-27-12 09:22 AM
  5. bdegrande's Avatar
    Hey welcome to CB.. To begin with Apple did not have a worthy case in place of it's patents.. It was more so inclined to an overall perception of Samsung smartphones being easily mistaken for Apple and how minutely you are able to distinguish between a feature set. You see, there are just regular (read: influenced) people making decisions and they did make a mistake which made the case go back to the table.. Anywayss.. the decision was biased and we all know that..

    No one really knows the depth of patents.. As of now there might be many patents infringed by RIM but for all you know Apple might have 'taken' a few ideas themselves from here and there since they aren't really the first to 'invent' the smartphone..

    So it's more of a mud slinging thing to be honest.. You never know who will get sued for what!
    Uh, no. This wasn't copying a good feature or two, which has gone on since the beginning of computers. There were Samsung internal memos saying that the iPhone was way ahead of us, they are doing A, B and C, we have to do A, B, and C.

    The fact that the jury decision came incredibly quickly and was so overwhelming should have been a clue that it was a VERY easy decision to make, and the jury foreman was an engineer who understood these sorts of industrial/manufacturing issues quite well.

    There are patent lawsuits where the decisions are questionable. This wasn't one of them, not even close - and it won't have any effect on RIM, or Microsoft, or anybody who makes their products normally.
    Last edited by bdegrande; 08-27-12 at 03:43 PM.
    08-27-12 11:13 AM
  6. diegonei's Avatar
    You guys may want to listen to the latest Mobile Nations podcast...

    Mobile Nations 18: Apple vs. Samsung special verdict edition

    Our podcast feed: Audio | Video
    Download directly: Audio | Video
    Subscribe in iTunes: Audio | Video
    bdegrande likes this.
    08-27-12 02:10 PM
  7. herculesinwyoming's Avatar
    To be honest I have had many times average non tech world people ask if my galaxy note is an important phone. The white color is the main reason why they ask.
    So I say do not make a slab phone in white.
    08-27-12 07:15 PM
  8. bigboybkrises's Avatar
    IMO I think Apple is just trying to find a way to limit the competition in the smartphone market. Its like they are trying to force people to buy their product instead of the consumers having a free choice of looking at other smartphones. They are scared cause finally there is a company out there that can compete with them head to head. These patents about the functionality of the phones are beyond stupid, unless the Iphones can wipe people bums then I don't see why not Apple should sue, but I'm sure RIM can sue Apple for a number of things.
    ralfyguy likes this.
    08-27-12 07:54 PM
  9. Phylth's Avatar
    Don't you think this could be a big win for RIM?

    Unlike the Android-reliant devicemakers, RIM has followed its own path. Generally it can't be accused of knocking off iphone. RIM stocked the warchest when times were good and owns an absolute ton of patents itself, so it can afford to truly innovate.

    Meanwhile I'd suggest iphone's ubiquity will be its undoing. People are going to look up from the things soon and realize they'd like to try something different. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple finds it's turned-off a lot of fans by throwing its weight around. It's the new Microsoft. Old news, all-but unchanged for 4 years.

    The Appsung verdict gives RIM a much-needed opening just as its about to launch a new line. Big opportunity.

    Dave
    08-27-12 08:31 PM
  10. Hawnz's Avatar
    The decision was for Apple and the iPhone. Apple didn't win anything on the iPad. So no real effect right now on the PlayBook.
    08-27-12 09:18 PM
  11. FF22's Avatar
    I've only read/heard bits and pieces and maybe this or the other similar threads already discussed it but ....

    Isn't the Pinch/Zoom and Tap to zoom/unzoom part of the Apple patent that Samsung supposedly violated? And doesn't the pb use that same type of tech?

    Of course, is the much different than the Rubber-banding that use to be done with the Mouse and is or was used in MS' Streets and Trips where you'd rubberband an area and then mouse-click in the area and it would zoom that segment?

    If a real challenge to the actual patent rather than a suit saying "you violated our patent" occurs we will find out if you can patent such aspects. But as others have said, the entire issue of patents of coding and programming and such is a real mess at the moment.

    I wonder if apple violated any patents related to the shape of childrens' slates which if I recall had a black surface surrounding by a bezel, albeit wood and to prevent injury rounded corners.

    Do you think, perhaps, I should have defended Samsung? A brief search:

    antique VICTORIAN CHALKBOARD w/WOOD FRAME slate child on eBay!

    http://factorydirectcraft.com/catalo...FcKDQgodQWcAMw

    http://www.etsy.com/listing/65371224...FShxQgody3MAVw
    Last edited by F2; 08-27-12 at 10:17 PM.
    ralfyguy likes this.
    08-27-12 10:11 PM
  12. varunsain's Avatar
    See if you go through the iPad vs. Samsung Galaxy Tab article you will notice how the Jury locked on to the idea of the Samsung phone being a copy of the iPhone overall and could be mistaken easily by a consumer. Based on this fact, single points were identified which enforced upon the patents Apple was referring to, that if a customer can distinguish hardware, then software is another look-alike.

    Sure, specific detailed patents were outlined but this also was the case in the iPad vs. Samsung Tab, however, the court ruled that the Tabs do not look alike physically and software could be modified to certain extent.

    Contrary to whatever I said earlier, Samsung did lose because they infact copied a Patent held by Apple for Multi-touch. Although Apple has not been the 'inventor' of this technology, they have long acquired a company which invented this and then filed the patent which technically makes Apple the patent holder of this invention allowing them to claim that they have invented this..

    There are many types of Multi-touch and it's basically the codes which determine how multi-touch functions.. Every major corp has their own codes for implementing Multi-touch, however Samsung used the one Apple is using.

    Samsung tried to defend their case by saying that the technology that Apple has patented was long known to the engineers in the touch screen market, however this was not patented earlier and considered as public benefit research. The information and data was publicly available at one point in time thus enabling anyone to use the content as published.

    However, Apple won because 'today' it's Apple's property and they had it patented prior to the launch of any Samsung multi-touch screen device.

    The argument here seems biased towards Apple as information once made public cannot be patented since the information might have already been used for production prior to any patenting, however this is hypothetical since Samsung did not have any product in development using such technology and the iPhone was the first smartphone to introduce this feature.

    RIM uses a different set of technology to execute the same task of Multi-touch and this certainly is a raising concern in the patent abuse war, to constantly find alternate ways to initiate same function already executed on another device with no significant trade advantage within the market. In simple words, RIM and Apple both use multi-touch with very minor variation in performance, but different technology and codes. This feature does not provide any factual market benefits but greatly impacts manufacturing costs of competition in serving patent rights. This is considered a great barrier in the technology world by limiting companies in further developments as money needs to be re-invested in pioneering Multi-touch screen method.

    Apple is taking the patent right too literally without justifying any real world impact on their company or products. They have always met and surpassed their business targets every quarter hence proving that the market imitations are not influencing their sales in any way.

    In a way, the court has granted Apple 1 billion to justify that because of Samsung using the particular technology, Apple could not cater to x market and they have lost out on that much of potential business. Whereas, real world scenario states that the Samsung consumers would have preferred Samsung products in any case.

    Hence, you have Apple CEO justifying their actions as 'defending values' and not as protection against real-world loss.
    Last edited by varunsain; 08-28-12 at 12:22 AM.
    08-28-12 12:18 AM
  13. Phylth's Avatar
    Apple's patents, like RIM's, don't mean other companies can't use the patented technology. They just have to negotiate a licence for it.

    Dave
    08-28-12 05:51 AM
  14. JDELUNA's Avatar
    Enjoy and God Bless


    diegonei likes this.
    08-28-12 09:24 AM
  15. ralfyguy's Avatar
    That's why it's good not to have a copy.
    08-28-12 10:44 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD