Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

*LTD*

macrumors G4
Original poster
Feb 5, 2009
10,703
1
Canada
http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2012/02/apple-requests-us-preliminary.html

Apple requests U.S. preliminary injunction against Android flagship device Samsung Galaxy Nexus based on four high-power patents

“Apple has brought a motion in the United States for a preliminary injunction against the Galaxy Nexus, the official Android 4.0 (“Ice Cream Sandwich”) lead device developed by Samsung in close cooperation with Google,” Florian Mueller reports for FOSS Patents.

“A public redacted version of the filing, which was made on Thursday with the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, became available late on Friday,” Mueller reports. “I believe the court will rule on this motion within a matter of months.”

The motion is based on four patents, which are the patent equivalent of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse:
1. the ‘data tapping’ patent based on which the ITC ordered an import ban against HTC
2. a patent related to Siri and unified search, which must be of huge concern to Google with a view to its core business
3. a new slide-to-unlock patent that even had the head of the Taiwanese government profoundly worried
4. a word completion patent that provides major speed improvements for touchscreen text entry

Mueller reports, “Three of these patents were granted only recently. Their numbers start with an ’8,’ and the eight millionth U.S. patent was issued in September 2011. The only older one, the ‘data tapping’ patent, should be a slam dunk. It succeeded in the ITC, a notoriously difficult forum where only about 1 out of 20 smartphone-related patents is deemed violated. It also says something that HTC removed the feature and didn’t even appeal that part of the ITC ruling (though Apple appealed other parts).”

“For every major version of Android, Google partners with one hardware company to develop an official lead device that comes with a time-to-market advantage for the vendor in exchange of the device makers’s compliance with Google’s rules,” Mueller reports. “Those lead devices always contain the word ‘Nexus’ in their name.”

“The version of Android that is installed on those devices is commonly referred to as ‘stock Android,’ meaning it’s Android as supplied by Google, without vendor-specific enhancements on top,” Mueller reports. “When companies like Apple assert patents against Android devices, some of the infringement contentions relate to features that reside at the level of extensions developed by OEMs. Google has sometimes refrained from implementing certain features in ‘stock Android’ just to steer clear of infringement, knowing that some of those functionalities woul be implemented by OEMs anyway.”

Mueller reports, “In this case, stock Android itself is at issue. This means that Google cannot deny its undivided responsibility for any infringement findings.”

This is a watershed moment in Apple-Samsung litigation. Apple has definitely brought the fight home to the US. And in doing so, in light of what they've accomplished both legally and materially over the past year, you can bet they've got their legal ducks in a row.

This will be very, very interesting. Do note also, that with this move, Apple is now going after Android in particular. Both Samsung and Google are in the crosshairs.
 

smoledman

macrumors 68000
Oct 17, 2011
1,943
364
Well it only means that it clears market share up for Windows Phone which Apple can't sue.
 

*LTD*

macrumors G4
Original poster
Feb 5, 2009
10,703
1
Canada
how bad it'll be for Apple when it backfires...?

With Apple's consumer base and mindshare, would they care? It certainly won't affect their sales. This is smart strategy by Apple. They have nothing substantial to lose here. For the past year we've learned a few important things about Apple litigation.

1) They have not had any injunctions worth anything placed against them, and whatever did get through, they sidestepped with relative ease (as we've seen, on the same day), while forcing a competitor to redesign their product.

2) Even when Apple was on the losing end of patent litigation, the cost to their sales was zero. They went on to enjoy record quarters. Consumers barely know about patent litigation, nor would they really care even if they did.

3) Apple is not afraid to test the legal waters, with a ridiculous amount of resources behind them.

The effect to the competition? It can vary, and they certainly have more at stake and more to lose than Apple. Google especially, given their tenuous patent position. Samsung might be ale to go toe-to-toe with Apple, though they've already demonstrated serious legal ineptitude.

Motorola is another example, though they're a lame duck anyway.

http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/20...ary-sales-trail-estimates-on-litigation-costs

Motorola Mobility’s Preliminary Sales Trail Estimates on Litigation Costs

Motorola Mobility Inc. (MMI), the phone maker that agreed to be bought by Google (GOOG) Inc., reported preliminary fourth-quarter sales that trailed analysts’ estimates, citing mounting competition and higher legal costs.
Sales were probably little changed at $3.4 billion in the period, Libertyville, Illinois-based Motorola Mobility said in a statement today. Bloomberg analysts had forecast revenue of $4 billion. Motorola, which recently won a German patent ruling against Apple Inc. (AAPL), cited higher costs from intellectual property litigation and an “increased competitive environment” in the mobile-device market in the quarter.

The handset maker said it shipped about 10.5 million devices during the period, of which more than half were smartphones.

The company said it expects to complete its transaction with Mountain View, California-based Google early this year. Motorola fell 0.4 percent to $38.30 in extended trading, after closing at $38.46. The shares rose (MMI) 33 percent last year. The company plans to report earnings on Jan. 26.
 

thekev

macrumors 604
Aug 5, 2010
7,005
3,343
Well it only means that it clears market share up for Windows Phone which Apple can't sue.

That only applies until Apple claims they've retroactively patented the smartphone:rolleyes:. Quite a number of Apple patents seem more focused on limiting others than protecting their own designs. I've read a few of them. It's like they're trying to draw an extremely wide fuzzy perimeter around anything they implement regardless of if something similar existed prior to their implementation.
 

0000757

macrumors 68040
Dec 16, 2011
3,893
850
Someone just needs to give Apple a juice box. They're being giant babies about all of this.
 

Rodimus Prime

macrumors G4
Oct 9, 2006
10,136
4
I would not be surprised that the judge tells Apple off like they did last time.

Apple is looking more and more like the standard kid on the playground who try to take all their toys and leave when facing a threat.
 

ChazUK

macrumors 603
Feb 3, 2008
5,393
25
Essex (UK)
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.3.5; en-gb; ZTE-BLADE Build/GRJ22) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1)

Out of all the legal wranglings, for me this is the most interesting with what they're targeting.

Things have just got that bit more interesting. (Grabs popcorn)
 
Last edited:

danahn17

macrumors 6502
Dec 3, 2009
384
0
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.3.5; en-gb; ZTE-BLADE Build/GRJ22) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1)

Out of all the legal wranglings, for me this is the most interesting with what they're targeting.

Things have just got that bit more interesting. (Grand popcorn)

It tastes more like stale popcorn to me :p
 

SactoGuy18

macrumors 601
Sep 11, 2006
4,733
1,798
Sacramento, CA USA
I think Apple better watch out if the FTC, DoJ Antitrust Division or European Commission antitrust authorities wonder why Apple is abusing patent laws to crush competition.

In 1947 the US government filed the famous US v. United Shoe Machinery Company case, which accused United Shoe of using its patents on shoemaking machinery to crush any potential competitors in the business. The case was litigated for many years, and the company took a major financial beating over this case.

Apple now runs the risk of suffering the same fate as United Shoe if they don't back off from using their own smartphone patents to deliberately crush all competition through litigation.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.