7 ms·

Judge grants Apple an injunction against the Galaxy Nexus

59 points by Cadsby 14y ago

habosa 14y ago
So wrong. When will we have comprehensive reform on software-related patent law? In this age everything is powered by a computer of some sort, and it's very important to the intellectual future of the nation that we secure the right for individuals and corporations to innovate without fear of a patent lawsuit.
- cremnob 14y ago
  Why is it wrong exactly?
  - dataminer 14y ago
    Computer industry as we know it has got here because of sharing of ideas (someone once said "stealing ideas"), these patents wars just don't feel right and may hurt the industry a lot and stifle innovation.
  - josefresco 14y ago
    It's wrong because Apple isn't simply protecting their IP, they're waging a litigious war against a legitimate competitor in hopes that the courts will give them the edge in the marketplace and not their superior products.
    - dedward 14y ago
      They are using the legal system - an important part of modern business. I can assure you in economies with inefficient or nonexistent legal systems, things get much worse and doing business is next to impossible. Should apple not do this? This is hardball, we're talking billions... and they know they have a limitied window to take advantage of this before they have to continue. They'll make more than the hundred million they put up to do this in the time it takes to settle things. No fanboy-ism here - but the iPhone DID fundamentally change the close-minded walled-garden ripoff stagnant mobile world to get off it's ass and innovate. Are the patents absurd? Blame the patent system, not Apple for using it. Be sure their competitors are just waiting for a patent opportunity to come along to smash Apple over the head with. Let the big boys play their game. Apple anted up 95 million dollars that they lose if the case does not go in their favour... this isn't a freebie by a longshot. So until the legal system levels the playing field and fixes the patent system or otherwise makes this type of action impossible, it's dog eat dog. And in the end - the courts will decide. Don't like the patent system? talk to your representatives in government. Don't want to do that because it "won't matter"? Then you don't have much standing in my books to argue either way. Think politicians care about money? they care about VOTES, which money really helps buy - but convince them they have your votes and they money doesn't matter, they don't need campaign money if they have their votes locked.
      - mayanksinghal 14y ago
        > Are the patents absurd? Blame the patent system, not Apple for using it. I think viewpoints differ largely at this point. While I agree that Apple has every right to use any and all legal ways to defend itself and potentially harm competitors; given that everyone is aware of the absurdity of majority of patents, it does seem wrong to use them offensively. There is no law against being douch-stupid-ignorant; laws are not always moral/right - they follow morality only slowly and caters to only the most easiest morality questions. Rationality allows Apple to do whatever it can, only the current morality doesn't.
  - readme 14y ago
    The 'patents' are so vague and fundamental that they shouldn't be legal. They only are because the system is badly in need of reform (read: abolition) and non-technical people weigh in on the issues. I like Samsung stuff, I have a Galaxy Tab 10.1 and I'm an Android guy. I'm not going to go buy an iPhone if the Gnex gets banned. Ever since they sued that German cafe I have had very little hope for them ever to take the righteous path again. This is like Honda trying to sue Toyota for making a car with a steering wheel.
thechut 14y ago
These patent wars don't help anyone but Apple, and directly hurts consumers. I don't think this is what anyone wants. It actually sickens me to see the law enacted in this way. I really hope this comes back to bit Apple in the ass. It seems there has been a story about Apple doing something shitty everyday for the past few days, and the taste it leaves in my mouth is just getting worse and worse.
- Retric 14y ago
  Arguably, forcing other company's to innovate could be a Good thing. Is a rectangle with rounded edges the one and only perfect tablet shape? I don't know, but if everyone just copy's the iPad it's going to take a even longer to find out. The windows tiles may or may not be an advance, but they are clearly not a row of buttons just like the 1st gen iPhone and 2 out of every 3 smart phones that followed.
  - saket123 14y ago
    >The windows tiles may or may not be an advance, but they are clearly not a row of buttons just like the 1st gen iPhone and 2 out of every 3 smart phones that followed. Well I owned three phones back in 2002-2006 which had rows to buttons and were not iPhone. I get that iPhone is a great phone but please give credit where its due. Even BB had rows of button.
    - Retric 14y ago
      I know the iPhone was not the first phone that had icon's like that, however the Black Berry and Windows phone had both buttons and a menu interface. Which IMO is better than the early iPhone style page interface when you have lot's of icons. Apple ended up improving things by adding folders, but I did notice a lot of other phones that IMO copy'd the bad design elements of the early iPhone simply because it was so popular. Edit: Not that iPhone was the first to use those elements, just that they where copying whatever the leader did. If windows phone starts to win I expect a switch to a lot of 'tile' interfaces.
  - pook1e 14y ago
DigitalSea 14y ago
"A means of detecting and marking up data like a phone number or an e-mail address, and then initiating a phone call or an e-mail when the linked data is clicked" nobody should own a patent on that, what the heck? The patent system is seriously messed up. Don't get me started on the other patent: "A means of searching multiple databases and sources for data." how can anyone be awarded such a generic patent? I'm disgusted.
- flatline3 14y ago
  The automatic touch screen-based linkification of phone numbers, addresses, and calendar dates was fairly novel <edit>for smartphones</edit> when Apple introduced it. I don't believe anyone else was doing it <edit>on smartphones</edit> -- and if they were, there's prior art, and the patent should be invalidated. What made it that especially interesting was that it alleviated a large part of the need for copy+paste. If you'll recall, the first iPhone OS didn't ship with copy+paste. I'm having trouble figuring out what "A means of searching multiple databases and sources for data" actually refers to.
  - creamyhorror 14y ago
    There was a whole HN thread throwing up prior art about the linkification patent (and also on Reddit). Linkification was being done in the '80s, based on one of the programs that someone managed to scrounge up in the thread, and the '90s as well. No patents issued - people just did it. The fact that these programs were written tells us that software writers innovate regardless of whether patents are issued for their work or not. That's the nature of software (and technology in general). The difference is, some software makers don't expect to protect their new features from competitors with patents. That's the crux of it, imo.
    - flatline3 14y ago
      Thanks. I have my own negative opinions about software patent novelty, I just wanted to point out that it was somewhat unique on smart phones.
rayiner 14y ago
This is a preliminary injunction. It doesn't mean Apple wins against Samsung. From TFA: "Apple was ordered to post a bond of $95 million to enact the injunction, which would be used to pay Samsung damages if the decision is later reversed."
- mechnik 14y ago
  Can consumers sue Apple for denying them the opportunity to acquire Galaxy Nexus?
  - bane 14y ago
    Yes, in the U.S. you can sue for pretty much anything. You'll probably lose, but you can at least give it a go.
ken 14y ago
I'm no lawyer. Is this ruling stating that the court believes the patents are valid, or simply that if they are found to be valid that they are being infringed in this case? There's a huge difference between the two, and the article isn't quite clear on what the finding is. The bond makes it sound like it could be the latter, but everybody here seems to be assuming it's the former.
- dedward 14y ago
  It's a preliminary injunction to prevent damages - the court has been convinced that this will go to court and that the damage done to apple during the time it takes to resolve the case warrants an injunction. They also wanted a bond from apple in case it goes the other way so the opposition doesn't get too screwed over if THEY win.... that's money in their pocket - not sure how common that is... first time I've heard of it.
moultano 14y ago
When you work for a company that does this, you owe it to your integrity to resign. The government is too incompetent to fix this mess, and market pressure isn't going to do it either. That leaves us, the actual engineers. It's our job to tell the companies we work for that litigating instead of competing isn't acceptable.
- iamumassthrower 14y ago
  I don't expect that many apple engineers will take a look at the general, vague, and obvious wording of the patent in question and agree that it is general, vague, and obvious. Take 2 otherwise identical people and give them a question where one of them has a personal stake in the answer, while the other one doesn't, and you will generally find that these seemingly rational individuals have come to different conclusions. Such is human nature.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- ciparis 14y ago
  Perhaps you should define "this".
  - moultano 14y ago
    Uses software patents offensively.
- taligent 14y ago
  Since you work at Google I am assuming you're going to resign as well ? Because the FRAND abuses originated by Motorola and supported by Google is some of the most disgraceful behaviour seen in the industry since the days of Rambus. You don't participate in the creation of a standard and then turn around and sue companies who adopt those standards in good faith. It undermines the entire industry. If other companies had done this there would be no WiFi, Bluetooth, USB etc. Anyway I assume that you're fully supportive of the FTC/EU investigating Google for anti-competitive behaviour ?
bane 14y ago
Too bad, just got one and by no possible stretch of the imagination is it an iPhone. It's not that it's bad or good, just completely different.
serge2k 14y ago
2,3,4 and seem ridiculous.
ciparis 14y ago
Without the iPhone, there would be no Galaxy series. If you don't get that, you don't get that. It's up to those two companies to work it out. Until that happens, this is what we get -- and Samsung, at least, has little to complain about.
ciparis 14y ago
I was here when this all started. When Android surfaced, it did not look blatantly like the iPhone. That is, until the Galaxy appeared. From the moment I saw a Galaxy prototype it was obvious: they were going to get sued. Whether or not the iOS vs Android war makes sense at a high level is an interesting discussion, but this is pretty simple: Samsung practically begged to be the first to get sued. There isn't a lot to say about it after that.
rsanchez1 14y ago
Well, better go out and buy a Galaxy Nexus, now that I am eligible for an upgrade and now that Apple wants to take it away from me.
hastur 14y ago
I will never buy an Apple product again.

59 points by Cadsby 14y ago

So wrong. When will we have comprehensive reform on software-related patent law? In this age everything is powered by a computer of some sort, and it's very important to the intellectual future of the nation that we secure the right for individuals and corporations to innovate without fear of a patent lawsuit.

cremnob 14y ago
Why is it wrong exactly?
- dataminer 14y ago
  Computer industry as we know it has got here because of sharing of ideas (someone once said "stealing ideas"), these patents wars just don't feel right and may hurt the industry a lot and stifle innovation.
- josefresco 14y ago
  It's wrong because Apple isn't simply protecting their IP, they're waging a litigious war against a legitimate competitor in hopes that the courts will give them the edge in the marketplace and not their superior products.
  - dedward 14y ago
    They are using the legal system - an important part of modern business. I can assure you in economies with inefficient or nonexistent legal systems, things get much worse and doing business is next to impossible. Should apple not do this? This is hardball, we're talking billions... and they know they have a limitied window to take advantage of this before they have to continue. They'll make more than the hundred million they put up to do this in the time it takes to settle things. No fanboy-ism here - but the iPhone DID fundamentally change the close-minded walled-garden ripoff stagnant mobile world to get off it's ass and innovate. Are the patents absurd? Blame the patent system, not Apple for using it. Be sure their competitors are just waiting for a patent opportunity to come along to smash Apple over the head with. Let the big boys play their game. Apple anted up 95 million dollars that they lose if the case does not go in their favour... this isn't a freebie by a longshot. So until the legal system levels the playing field and fixes the patent system or otherwise makes this type of action impossible, it's dog eat dog. And in the end - the courts will decide. Don't like the patent system? talk to your representatives in government. Don't want to do that because it "won't matter"? Then you don't have much standing in my books to argue either way. Think politicians care about money? they care about VOTES, which money really helps buy - but convince them they have your votes and they money doesn't matter, they don't need campaign money if they have their votes locked.
    - mayanksinghal 14y ago
      > Are the patents absurd? Blame the patent system, not Apple for using it. I think viewpoints differ largely at this point. While I agree that Apple has every right to use any and all legal ways to defend itself and potentially harm competitors; given that everyone is aware of the absurdity of majority of patents, it does seem wrong to use them offensively. There is no law against being douch-stupid-ignorant; laws are not always moral/right - they follow morality only slowly and caters to only the most easiest morality questions. Rationality allows Apple to do whatever it can, only the current morality doesn't.
- readme 14y ago
  The 'patents' are so vague and fundamental that they shouldn't be legal. They only are because the system is badly in need of reform (read: abolition) and non-technical people weigh in on the issues. I like Samsung stuff, I have a Galaxy Tab 10.1 and I'm an Android guy. I'm not going to go buy an iPhone if the Gnex gets banned. Ever since they sued that German cafe I have had very little hope for them ever to take the righteous path again. This is like Honda trying to sue Toyota for making a car with a steering wheel.

thechut 14y ago

These patent wars don't help anyone but Apple, and directly hurts consumers. I don't think this is what anyone wants. It actually sickens me to see the law enacted in this way. I really hope this comes back to bit Apple in the ass. It seems there has been a story about Apple doing something shitty everyday for the past few days, and the taste it leaves in my mouth is just getting worse and worse.

Retric 14y ago
Arguably, forcing other company's to innovate could be a Good thing. Is a rectangle with rounded edges the one and only perfect tablet shape? I don't know, but if everyone just copy's the iPad it's going to take a even longer to find out. The windows tiles may or may not be an advance, but they are clearly not a row of buttons just like the 1st gen iPhone and 2 out of every 3 smart phones that followed.
- saket123 14y ago
  >The windows tiles may or may not be an advance, but they are clearly not a row of buttons just like the 1st gen iPhone and 2 out of every 3 smart phones that followed. Well I owned three phones back in 2002-2006 which had rows to buttons and were not iPhone. I get that iPhone is a great phone but please give credit where its due. Even BB had rows of button.
  - Retric 14y ago
    I know the iPhone was not the first phone that had icon's like that, however the Black Berry and Windows phone had both buttons and a menu interface. Which IMO is better than the early iPhone style page interface when you have lot's of icons. Apple ended up improving things by adding folders, but I did notice a lot of other phones that IMO copy'd the bad design elements of the early iPhone simply because it was so popular. Edit: Not that iPhone was the first to use those elements, just that they where copying whatever the leader did. If windows phone starts to win I expect a switch to a lot of 'tile' interfaces.
- pook1e 14y ago

DigitalSea 14y ago

"A means of detecting and marking up data like a phone number or an e-mail address, and then initiating a phone call or an e-mail when the linked data is clicked" nobody should own a patent on that, what the heck? The patent system is seriously messed up. Don't get me started on the other patent: "A means of searching multiple databases and sources for data." how can anyone be awarded such a generic patent? I'm disgusted.

flatline3 14y ago
The automatic touch screen-based linkification of phone numbers, addresses, and calendar dates was fairly novel <edit>for smartphones</edit> when Apple introduced it. I don't believe anyone else was doing it <edit>on smartphones</edit> -- and if they were, there's prior art, and the patent should be invalidated. What made it that especially interesting was that it alleviated a large part of the need for copy+paste. If you'll recall, the first iPhone OS didn't ship with copy+paste. I'm having trouble figuring out what "A means of searching multiple databases and sources for data" actually refers to.
- creamyhorror 14y ago
  There was a whole HN thread throwing up prior art about the linkification patent (and also on Reddit). Linkification was being done in the '80s, based on one of the programs that someone managed to scrounge up in the thread, and the '90s as well. No patents issued - people just did it. The fact that these programs were written tells us that software writers innovate regardless of whether patents are issued for their work or not. That's the nature of software (and technology in general). The difference is, some software makers don't expect to protect their new features from competitors with patents. That's the crux of it, imo.
  - flatline3 14y ago
    Thanks. I have my own negative opinions about software patent novelty, I just wanted to point out that it was somewhat unique on smart phones.

rayiner 14y ago

This is a preliminary injunction. It doesn't mean Apple wins against Samsung. From TFA: "Apple was ordered to post a bond of $95 million to enact the injunction, which would be used to pay Samsung damages if the decision is later reversed."

mechnik 14y ago
Can consumers sue Apple for denying them the opportunity to acquire Galaxy Nexus?
- bane 14y ago
  Yes, in the U.S. you can sue for pretty much anything. You'll probably lose, but you can at least give it a go.

ken 14y ago

I'm no lawyer. Is this ruling stating that the court believes the patents are valid, or simply that if they are found to be valid that they are being infringed in this case? There's a huge difference between the two, and the article isn't quite clear on what the finding is. The bond makes it sound like it could be the latter, but everybody here seems to be assuming it's the former.

dedward 14y ago
It's a preliminary injunction to prevent damages - the court has been convinced that this will go to court and that the damage done to apple during the time it takes to resolve the case warrants an injunction. They also wanted a bond from apple in case it goes the other way so the opposition doesn't get too screwed over if THEY win.... that's money in their pocket - not sure how common that is... first time I've heard of it.

moultano 14y ago

When you work for a company that does this, you owe it to your integrity to resign. The government is too incompetent to fix this mess, and market pressure isn't going to do it either. That leaves us, the actual engineers. It's our job to tell the companies we work for that litigating instead of competing isn't acceptable.

iamumassthrower 14y ago
I don't expect that many apple engineers will take a look at the general, vague, and obvious wording of the patent in question and agree that it is general, vague, and obvious. Take 2 otherwise identical people and give them a question where one of them has a personal stake in the answer, while the other one doesn't, and you will generally find that these seemingly rational individuals have come to different conclusions. Such is human nature.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
ciparis 14y ago
Perhaps you should define "this".
- moultano 14y ago
  Uses software patents offensively.
taligent 14y ago
Since you work at Google I am assuming you're going to resign as well ? Because the FRAND abuses originated by Motorola and supported by Google is some of the most disgraceful behaviour seen in the industry since the days of Rambus. You don't participate in the creation of a standard and then turn around and sue companies who adopt those standards in good faith. It undermines the entire industry. If other companies had done this there would be no WiFi, Bluetooth, USB etc. Anyway I assume that you're fully supportive of the FTC/EU investigating Google for anti-competitive behaviour ?

bane 14y ago

Too bad, just got one and by no possible stretch of the imagination is it an iPhone. It's not that it's bad or good, just completely different.

serge2k 14y ago

2,3,4 and seem ridiculous.

ciparis 14y ago

Without the iPhone, there would be no Galaxy series. If you don't get that, you don't get that. It's up to those two companies to work it out. Until that happens, this is what we get -- and Samsung, at least, has little to complain about.

ciparis 14y ago

I was here when this all started. When Android surfaced, it did not look blatantly like the iPhone. That is, until the Galaxy appeared. From the moment I saw a Galaxy prototype it was obvious: they were going to get sued. Whether or not the iOS vs Android war makes sense at a high level is an interesting discussion, but this is pretty simple: Samsung practically begged to be the first to get sued. There isn't a lot to say about it after that.

rsanchez1 14y ago

Well, better go out and buy a Galaxy Nexus, now that I am eligible for an upgrade and now that Apple wants to take it away from me.

hastur 14y ago

I will never buy an Apple product again.