Apple trying to get S3 banned

[AntimonyER]

That is what makes the difference between the Apple lawsuits and everything else. The US patent law wasnt set up to create monopolies, it was set up to make sure the correct people were properly reimbursed for their unique IP. Until apple, most tech companies sued to get a settlement, or monetary damages. Apple wants an outright ban. Problem for them is, its not working, and as a result, their litigation is just costing them money with no benefits. And they are falling behind rapidly. They are getting desperate. Who wants a Wright Bros. airplane... Oh wait, never mind

 

[Shocky]

It now uses wolfram alpha to answer queries and attempts to use natural language to fulfil requests eg: "I want to call mum"

I don't think there is a good basis for a lawsuit to be honest, but S voice is a little bit more similar to Siri than previous Vlingos.

However, I think companies worthy of any respect would be trying to get paid for the use of their IP rather than seeking an outright ban on competing products.

Apple is a scumbag company and tries to compete through the courtroom rather than by decent products.

I wasnt aware of that, it looks like Vlingo too me but with more commands. It doesnt respond very well unless you stick to the set struture in the command list so I wouldnt say it like siri at all.

It does understand me better than siri though.

 

[ardyer]

Until apple, most tech companies sued to get a settlement, or monetary damages. Apple wants an outright ban. Problem for them is, its not working, and as a result, their litigation is just costing them money with no benefits.

Actually, seeking a ban on sales is a well used patent strategy with a long history. Generally, a ban is desirable for two reasons, the first being so that the patent holder doesn't have to compete (as seems to be the case here) and the second is that once a ban is in place, the alleged infringer becomes desperate to settle. But either way, Apple isn't even close to the first company to use this tactic. Just go back and look at some of the lawsuits against Microsoft over the last twenty years for plenty of examples.

 

[Skeeter125]

This could actually make people want the phone more, so it might really backfire in apple. I hope a judge sees what apple has become and throws this out.

 

[ALurker]

Problem for them is, its not working, and as a result, their litigation is just costing them money with no benefits.

Unfortunately, those costs get passed right to the consumer, and the $ spent by Samsung and others to defend those lawsuits also gets passed right to their consumer.

 

[rkkeller]

Apple did the same thing when the EVO LTE was released recently and it was held in customs for a while and the release date was pushed back.

 

[jackdubl]

Unfortunately, those costs get passed right to the consumer, and the $ spent by Samsung and others to defend those lawsuits also gets passed right to their consumer.

While this is always true, the S3 is cheaper than other flagship phones have been by about 100 bucks.

 

[lunatic59]

I am not big fan of Apple or their products and I do think all the litigation is contrary to advancement of technology, but I would ask that we cool it with the "sheeple", "isheep" and other derogatory terms for Apple users. Let's not confuse the issue by ruffling feathers. After all, there have been a lot of vocal Apple users who are equally against this nonsense.

 

[Andima]

I knew it was just matter of time. They are going after HTC One series as well. I think they are kind of indirectly admitting that iPhone can't compete just based on the technologies. So they are going all out with lawsuits.

I was a little surprised Sammy didn't change the home button design for US versions like before. Apparently they were expecting this to come, so they might have some cards for legal fights with apple.

Yes definitely, after they can't challenge with technology, they look for law.

 

[Covart]

I am not big fan of Apple or their products and I do think all the litigation is contrary to advancement of technology, but I would ask that we cool it with the "sheeple", "isheep" and other derogatory terms for Apple users. Let's not confuse the issue by ruffling feathers. After all, there have been a lot of vocal Apple users who are equally against this nonsense.

Thank you. I am one of those "isheep", since I happen to own various Apple products. But, as I said above, getting real sick of this litigation crap.

 

[rkkeller]

Its just getting sadder and sadder.

Apple takes aim at Galaxy S3 may delay US release

 

[Scootmien]

Thank you. I am one of those "isheep", since I happen to own various Apple products. But, as I said above, getting real sick of this litigation crap.

I agree. I have an iPad (which I absolutely love and has really revolutionised my day-to-day life) and up until recently I had an iPhone 4. However, I hate Macs with a passion.

I didn't buy a 4S as I didn't feel it was enough of an upgrade to the 4, TBH. When the 4 started to malfunction, I could have bought another 4, a 4s or a different phone. Both the 4 and the 4S would have cost me a significant amount, so I bought a Samsung Galaxy S2 instead, my first Android phone. I did this mainly because I wanted to try an Android device to see if I liked it over iOS.

For me, the pros and cons are as follows:

Android Pros:
Cheaper to buy
Has WAY more functionality (and for me this was the selling point)
Wider range of phones

Android Cons:
Not as user friendly or intuitive to use as iOS
Easier to get malware

iPhone Pros
Looks cool
Easier to use
It 'just works'

iPhone Cons:
Expensive
When it doesn't work, there's nothing you can do.
Less functionality

Now, I realise that some of the pros/cons are purely subjective but I make no apologies for that. I am, after all, buying a phone for me, not for anyone else.

I was thinking about holding out for the iPhone 5 but Apple have really screwed the pooch with their constant litigation as it just snacks of sheer desperation "OMG <another manufacturer> has made a phone that is far and away better than our current offering, we must find a way to stop them selling it so we don't look bad!" Poor show, Apple, very poor show.

 

[JunBringer]

Arguing now with my old drummer now on facebook who thinks Apple invented everything and the iPhone was the first of it's kind in every way. Ugh.

 

[AntimonyER]

Actually, seeking a ban on sales is a well used patent strategy with a long history. Generally, a ban is desirable for two reasons, the first being so that the patent holder doesn't have to compete (as seems to be the case here) and the second is that once a ban is in place, the alleged infringer becomes desperate to settle. But either way, Apple isn't even close to the first company to use this tactic. Just go back and look at some of the lawsuits against Microsoft over the last twenty years for plenty of examples.

But you said it, they request the ban, but only as a bargaining chip to improve the incentive to settle. Not Apple, they want a ban, for banning sake.

 

[matttye]

Thank you. I am one of those "isheep", since I happen to own various Apple products. But, as I said above, getting real sick of this litigation crap.

Same here, love my iPad and thinking about getting an Apple TV (the little dongle thing not the rumoured TV)

 

[darkestred]

I think you will find Siri is the rip Off
The S3 S2 and Note have there Voice software powered by Vlingo who hold there patent on this and its available on Apple as well so if Apple push this Vlingo will be getting interested in this
Plus Siri is in Beta so as its not a registered App the Tuff

If you want to say rip off, come to our ATM lab. We've had the actual siri voice well before apple. Even though its not ours, we could cry about it like apple...

I'm so tired of apple. always will and always have. I wish they would go away.

Oh no a button on the phone that allows you to go back to a previous window. Oh no another door manufacturer put a knob on a wooden slab! Let me sue.

 

[substring]

Android Pros:
Cheaper to buy

iPhone Cons:
Expensive

I disagree. Android has a wide spectrum of different brands and models for different budgets. But the cheap ones are the ones that nobody wants to buy. The high end Android phones like the Galaxy S III are not cheap. And I have an iPhone 4S and it did not cost me much money to buy it.

In my humble opinion, cost is not a factor when comparing the iPhone vs the top tier Android phones.

 

[lunatic59]

I disagree. Android has a wide spectrum of different brands and models for different budgets. But the cheap ones are the ones that nobody wants to buy. The high end Android phones like the Galaxy S III are not cheap. And I have an iPhone 4S and it did not cost me much money to buy it.

In my humble opinion, cost is not a factor when comparing the iPhone vs the top tier Android phones.

While this might be the case in your area (and much of the U.S.) many places do not offer subsidized phones and iPhones can cost upwards of twice what a high end Android phone does.

 

[Jayces10]

I guess it's much harder these days to see what infringes a technology patent.

I mean, the Siri and S voice capabilities for example are functions both phones have that do the same thing. These IMHO should not be patented just like both phones can be used to make phone calls.

Sure how both companies got it to work can be patented as long as each one is unique but there has to be a line drawn somewhere.

As long as Samsung can prove that their voice operated system has been created from the ground up then I really don't see what the issue is.

Apple should be working on the next best thing, not wasting time and money on this.

 

[Eryl Flynn]

I guess it's much harder these days to see what infringes a technology patent.

I mean, the Siri and S voice capabilities for example are functions both phones have that do the same thing. These IMHO should not be patented just like both phones can be used to make phone calls.

Sure how both companies got it to work can be patented as long as each one is unique but there has to be a line drawn somewhere.

As long as Samsung can prove that their voice operated system has been created from the ground up then I really don't see what the issue is.

Apple should be working on the next best thing, not wasting time and money on this.

It comes down to somethings should not be patentable. If it is obvious for example then no patent. Take for example Tivo,there were DVRs like mad out, none that could let you watch live TV and record it. At least not until Tivo figured out how and then every one at first did copy exactly how they did it. Yes now other companies have found other ways, but this is an example of something that is not obvious.

Voice recognition has been around a long time, Dragon Naturally Speaking from the 90s anyone? And integrating voice commands into a system as an idea has been around since at least the 80s at least, I can think of 2001 the movie, and HAL as an example of voice commands and interaction with a device/machine.

The next area is their exact code and mechanisms. Here we get into tenuous areas due to it being easy to find similiarities by chance trying to write code to do a similar thing. How many ways can you right code to say hello world? Imagine the idea of patenting your code for saying Hello World?

We all know the patent system is broken. What Apple and to be honest some other companies are doing are just examples of the problem being abused. Even the FTC is starting to speak out on the issue. We can hope change comes about soon, either in the law or at the bench.

 

[matttye]

It comes down to somethings should not be patentable. If it is obvious for example then no patent. Take for example Tivo,there were DVRs like mad out, none that could let you watch live TV and record it. At least not until Tivo figured out how and then every one at first did copy exactly how they did it. Yes now other companies have found other ways, but this is an example of something that is not obvious.

Voice recognition has been around a long time, Dragon Naturally Speaking from the 90s anyone? And integrating voice commands into a system as an idea has been around since at least the 80s at least, I can think of 2001 the movie, and HAL as an example of voice commands and interaction with a device/machine.

The next area is their exact code and mechanisms. Here we get into tenuous areas due to it being easy to find similiarities by chance trying to write code to do a similar thing. How many ways can you right code to say hello world? Imagine the idea of patenting your code for saying Hello World?

We all know the patent system is broken. What Apple and to be honest some other companies are doing are just examples of the problem being abused. Even the FTC is starting to speak out on the issue. We can hope change comes about soon, either in the law or at the bench.

I'm pretty sure there's already a rule regarding patenting obvious ideas. It begs the question, if something is so obvious, why hasnt somebody already created those things by the year 2011?

Bear in mind it's not only the feature itself that's patentable but the context it's used in, so the fact that voice activated assistants appeared in star trek years ago does not mean people can't patent them for smartphones, or that Microsoft can't patent them for being in Kinect.

Don't get me wrong, I think the lawsuit is a ludicrous one, but mainly because of how Apple is trying to resolve it. If somebody owns a patent, it's their right to seek payment for the use of it by competitors, but asking for an outright ban is anti competitive and they're trying to become the monopoly that Microsoft was back in the day.

IMO it's not the patents that are the issues, it's Apple's attitude towards resolving patent conflicts.

 

[Skeeter125]

While this might be the case in your area (and much of the U.S.) many places do not offer subsidized phones and iPhones can cost upwards of twice what a high end Android phone does.

IPhone full price is 650, for 16 gb sgs3 is 599 so not really a difference. You can say 64 gig is more but if you add memory to Android price also rises.

 

[Skeeter125]

The courts should make apple pay the legal fees like they did with oracle for wasting the courts time.

 

[Scootmien]

While this might be the case in your area (and much of the U.S.) many places do not offer subsidized phones and iPhones can cost upwards of twice what a high end Android phone does.

IPhone full price is 650, for 16 gb sgs3 is 599 so not really a difference. You can say 64 gig is more but if you add memory to Android price also rises.

As lunatic said, and I paraphrase, "maybe not in your area." But I still stand by what I said because in my opinion (and that's all that is important to me in this case as I am buying the phone for me, not you) the iPhone is more expensive that an Android phone if you compare like for like in terms of size, capacity, functionality and so on.

The SGS3 is still cheaper than an iPhone 4S and is a whole street ahead of the iPhone 4S in terms of functionality, components etc in my area. Maybe not in your area, and that's fine and I respect what you say, but actually we're both right with our respective opinions.

 

[jissal]

The courts should make apple pay the legal fees like they did with oracle for wasting the courts time.

oh they will, it's just a fraction of the marketing fees they are going to spend.