10 ms·
Apple iPhones Found to Have Violated Chinese Rival’s Patent
- BFatts 10y agoI don't read Chinese and the patent isn't translated. Anyone have any idea what Apple violated? It's interesting, in a country where you HAVE to give up IP to competing companies to enter the market, that there can be any IP disputes - considering much of what Apple has done is directly copied into Chinese goods. If that rule didn't exist, China would be a 3rd world economy still stuck making shitty goods.
- nxzero 10y agoReally not that true; meaning yes, China copies a lot, but so does everyone and being able to copy someone takes skill. Look no further that the American auto industry for a historical example of this.
- analog31 10y agoWhere did you find the patent? If it's anything like a US design patent, then you should be able to learn a lot just by looking at the pictures.
- mkagenius 10y agoHe is perhaps referring to what the court's ruling said - http://www.bjipo.gov.cn/zlzf/zfjggg/201605/P020160609372965002381.pdf http://www.bjipo.gov.cn/zlzf/zfjggg/201605/P0201606093729650...
- WildUtah 10y ago1. China isn't and hasn't been third world by definition. It's second world. 2. Lots of E Asian countries with similar workforces developed without stealing IP. The strong arm tactics against foreigners are a way for the Chinese government to control local industries, not to grow them. It slows down economic development but keeps it under the thumb of the Communist Party.
- joelwilliamson 10y agoAfter the Sino-Soviet split, China was a third world country
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- ianai 10y agoAny evidence that this isn't a state-ran "company" claiming Apple infringed on something it copied from Apple?
- lallysingh 10y agoI think that losing that gigantic Apple manufacturing contract would be undesirable for the state.
- pizza234 10y agoWell, not so easily - "the state" is a source of equally gigantic revenue for Apple.
- samfisher83 10y agoThe infrastructure to make iphones at the scale they do doesn't really exist anywhere else.
- lallysingh 10y agoThere's already a shift to robotics in chinese manufacturing, you can put those robots in another country: http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-36376966 http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-36376966
- samfisher83 10y agoThe robots are already there. You are going to have move the robots setup the infrastructure etc. You need reliable power, transportation, etc.
- bydo 10y agoStrange that this only has any effect in Beijing, despite the company being based in Shenzhen. Do China's lowest-level courts only have citywide jurisdiction? If US patent decisions only applied to the location a suit was tried in, I suppose we'd have a lot fewer filed in East Texas.
- Steko 10y agoChina has different IP regimes at the city level. Haha. http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/06/china-has-whole-lot-intellectual-property-authorities http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/06/china-has-whol... Yet another cell phone patent dispute. Except for one thing: "Beijing" is not being used here as a metonym for "the Chinese government." It means Beijing. The city of Beijing, which apparently has its own intellectual property authority. Do other cities also have their own IP authorities? Apparently yes: {quotes: http://www.chinabusinessreview.com/enforcing-intellectual-property-rights-in-china/ http://www.chinabusinessreview.com/enforcing-intellectual-pr...} Civil enforcement of IPR in China is a two-track system. The first is the administrative track....Set up in the provinces and some cities, these local government offices operate as a quasi-judicial authority and are staffed with people who specialize in their respective areas of IP law. If they are satisfied with an IPR holder’s complaint, they investigate. The authorities can issue injunctions to bring a halt to the infringement, and they can even enlist the police to assist in enforcing their orders. How about that? Cities can't award monetary damages, but they can order your product off the shelves.
- zdw 10y ago"Design Patent", aka some look and feel thing that is stupidly vague. I seem to remember in the Apple v. Samsung case there were several of these on concepts like "a rectangular phone form factor" or similar...
- SlashmanX 10y agoRectangular with curved edges I think was the issue there.
- nv-vn 10y agoEffectively the same thing considering the fact that a perfect rectangle would be impossible to make.
- WildUtah 10y agoWith design patents, you don't have to specify transitions or curve radii. It's enough to draw that the corners are curved. There is no examination of the content of design patents and lack of specificity is generally not considered a problem by the PTO and courts.
- NEDM64 10y agoYou remember from what? From illiterate journos or YouTube comments? Apple sued Samsung for cloning. Samsung has been copying Apple to the millimeter, they have discovered a book with ways they should copy Apple, and they were spreading misinformation to the consumer like "Samsung makes the iPhone for Apple", or "it's like the iPhone, but bigger and better", and other BS. Also, there is no problem in making a rectangular phone, but making the edges EXACTLY the same radius as Apple's? That ridiculous. Samsung more than deserved what they got, from their advertising, where they attacked Apple users and offended them. For that reason, I will never buy a Samsung device, even if it's 100x better and 1/100 of the price of an Apple's (or everyone else) equivalent. And their unilateral comparisons to Apple on their product announcements? Ahah, ridiculous!
- wlesieutre 10y agohttp://g04.a.alicdn.com/kf/HTB1qM3iHFXXXXayaXXXq6xXFXXXn/221820712/HTB1qM3iHFXXXXayaXXXq6xXFXXXn.jpg http://g04.a.alicdn.com/kf/HTB1qM3iHFXXXXayaXXXq6xXFXXXn/221... Anyone else see a resemblance to the 3gs, just a couple years slimmer? "Plastic rectangle with curved edges" is a design that Apple did forever ago (in smartphone time).
- DenverR 10y agoApple will be able to appeal this and continue selling phones in the mean time. Pretty interesting regardless considering their investment in Didi last month to gain favor with Beijing. Two possible takes are that this is either a low enough court that the judge had autonomy in his ruling and wasn't influenced by the investment, or Beijing is sending a message that the Didi investment will not grant Apple any sort of impunity going forward.
- lujim 10y agoWhen did China start caring about intellectual property?
- duckfruit 10y agoWhen it started applying to Chinese companies
- chillacy 10y agoWhich seems to add evidence to the case: you care about IP when you have much to lose through copying, you disregard IP when you have much to gain by copying: https://www.techdirt.com/blog/innovation/articles/20130228/01324622146/yes-us-industrial-revolution-was-built-piracy-fraud.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/blog/innovation/articles/20130228/0...
- dspillett 10y agoWhen not caring affects them negatively. China is not that different from the west in that respect in many cases. They are making massive strides in certain areas of renewable energy and other environmental issues because it started affecting the bottom line by a mix of costs to the economy (through public health issues and related) & international reputation (as far as that affects investment from outside) and uncertainty in the economy (due to predicted problems otherwise sourcing enough fossil fuels at reasonable cost in the not too distant future if things keep growing at the intended rate). Companies and governments care when it costs them not to.
- baldfat 10y agoOh the irony.
- josteink 10y agoPlay the patent game and you are bound to lose in the end, with no high tower to go preaching from about how their patents are trivial. That said, I'm sure apple can afford to pay or lawyer their way out of this.
- NEDM64 10y agoTough luck you. Apple wasn't barred after all...
- patrickaljord 10y agoChinese brands get constantly harassed by Apple lawyers in the US about patents. Now that China is an important market for Apple, I find it hard to feel sorry for Apple getting a taste of their own medicine.
- nxzero 10y agoNot hard to believe, but would it be possible to provide an example or two of Apple winning a patent claim in court via a ruling in China? I would find it hard to believe the for a valid claim that just because a company is Chinese that it would have any impact on a case in the America.
- jdmichal 10y agoI read it as, the Chinese companies (or their US subsidiary) get sued in US courts for US patents. With that reading, I'm not sure your request makes sense.
- sangnoir 10y agoWhile not a Chinese company, I remember Samsung winning an ITC import ban of Apple products. Obama promptly overturned/vetoed the ban[1]. I do not doubt for a second that american institutions (especially the executive) do what is best for "American Interests" 1. http://www.fastcompany.com/3015243/where-are-they-now/obama-vetos-older-apple-gadget-import-ban http://www.fastcompany.com/3015243/where-are-they-now/obama-...
- pinaceae 10y agooh these poor, poor chinese knock-offs that get harrassed, harrassed! by apple lawyers. now where is the iphone produced again? it's a chinese phone sans the IP (designed by apple in cali).
- umanwizard 10y agoThe iPhone is assembled in China, but all the really complicated parts (screen, radio, processor, ...) are made elsewhere.
- aetherson 10y agoThe big picture here is not whether this ruling is just. It's that China has protectionist impulses, and that if Apple is to maintain the kind of volume of smartphone sales that propelled it to its 2015 valuation, it needs China. And China may be inclined to throw up a bunch of nasty speedbumps in its way. That said, there's plenty of value in Apple selling iPhones at the rate necessary to maintain the mostly saturated markets in the West, so don't get myopically focused on China.
- buro9 10y ago> It's that China has protectionist impulses So do US juries, hence the Apple lawyers continually referring to Samsung as Samsung Korea. http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/03/as-4th-trial-nears-samsung-asks-judge-make-apple-stop-talking-about-korea/ http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/03/as-4th-trial-near... The idea that China is doing anything that the US wouldn't is ridiculous, every country engages in this stuff the only difference how is complex the US, UK and other Western countries do it. China does it simplistically and obviously, but meh... every country does it, and Apple have been wrong to encourage this stuff to their advantage when everything comes around eventually.
- OedipusRex 10y agoExactly, China's massive cheap labor force and emerging markets give it the position of "fuck you". China knows that first world TNCs want a piece of the pie and China is grooming it's domestic (see "state run") corporations to reap the benefits.
- aetherson 10y agoSure. I wasn't making any implicit contrast with the USA. But all this focus on desert and who did what first isn't really the issue.
- 1024core 10y agoIt's all about protectionism. Apple should threaten to move the manufacturing of the iPhone out of China, laying off 100s of 1000s of people.
- OedipusRex 10y agoAnd lose all that cheap labor? China knows that threat would be empty.
- adventured 10y agoThe cheap labor is a dead-end under all scenarios. Robotic manufacturing will eliminate most of those jobs within 10-20 years. China already has half a billion people with no jobs available to them, that are pretending to work as subsistence farmers currently. The labor will always be cheap, it's the politics that will become extremely expensive. Apple should get started on moving off of that labor while they still have the vast financial capabilities to do so.
- 1024core 10y agoThe labor in countries like Vietnam is even cheaper.
- blisterpeanuts 10y agoApple opened a sapphire plant in Arizona in 2012-2013, then closed it when the plant failed to manufacture to Apple's quality standards. They're converting it reportedly into a data center. Foxconn, Apple's primary manufacturing partner in China, is opening factories in India. It looks like Apple's trying to diversify away from its dozen or so Chinese factories. Apple's talked about bringing more manufacturing back to the U.S., but so far apparently has not done very much of that, perhaps waiting until after the elections to see what the political climate is like in 2017 and beyond.
- qq66 10y agoThe China manufacturing sector is much more essential to Apple than Apple is to the China manufacturing sector.
- html5web 10y agoYou planted the trees, now enjoy your fruits!
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- odbol_ 10y agoGarbage article, doesn't even give details on what they violated.
- foxhedgehog 10y agoAlways good to see 100% completely neutral rulings from local arms of the Chinese government that are unconnected to personal interests and otherwise without blatant conflicts of interest.
- jsmith0295 10y agoThe U.S. should probably restrict companies from complying with Chinese IP laws until they respect ours.
- rdlecler1 10y agoGiven the design diversity that we might see from a large number of small phone producers, it seems inevitable that Apple may have something in common with one of these phones. I wonder if you get to a point where you can't change your design for fear of infringement.