Apple's injunction on the Nexus; UN hosting mobile patent talks.

[JHBThree]

The VZW version is currently unaffected by the injunction, so it can still be sold.

I don't believe that's true. The lawsuit was against a generic Galaxy nexus, which includes all variants.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

 

[JHBThree]

I'm not exactly sure which ones but I believe Google has been patenting the hell out of Google Glass in many aspects. I don't think Apple will have a leg to stand on.

Apples patent is very, very different. It describes in detail how images etc would be split up and shown on each lens, and how everything would be handled. It is different enough that nothing in it could apply to Google's version. The apple version was also applied for in 2006.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

 

[jroc]

Re: Apple granted injunction against the Nexus; sued over Siri.

The patent for search was filed in 2000. Google didn't even exist.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

...Google existed between the years 1996 to 1998...depending on how you look at it....They officially were named Google in 1998.

?

And every time I turn around....new years get added to when this search patent applies...lol.

 

[McSlappy]

Re: Apple granted injunction against the Nexus; sued over Siri.

I don't believe that's true. The lawsuit was against a generic Galaxy nexus, which includes all variants.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

It would appear that it is in fact still available for order on Verizon's website. They maybe allowed to sell off their current stock but just not get anymore. Or maybe like was stated earlier for some reason it doesn't apply to the VZW version.

 

[sirheck]

Re: Apple granted injunction against the Nexus; sued over Siri.

"Google was first incorporated as a privately held company on September 4, 1998"

 

[ultravisitor]

Re: 'Apple lands preliminary ban against Galaxy Nexus.' (Updated)

I'm not exactly sure which ones but I believe Google has been patenting the hell out of Google Glass in many aspects. I don't think Apple will have a leg to stand on.

This article explains the difference between the two:

Intellectual Properly: Apple's patent on Google's Project Glass that wasn't | The Verge

 

[jroc]

Re: 'Apple lands preliminary ban against Galaxy Nexus.' (Updated)

This article explains the difference between the two:

Intellectual Properly: Apple's patent on Google's Project Glass that wasn't | The Verge

Thanks for this link...which lead to another one:

Project Glass and the epic history of wearable computers | The Verge

But...even with prior art out there....that hasnt stopped Apple yet. They keep throwing....stuff....at the wall until something sticks with these lawsuits...

I don't believe that's true. The lawsuit was against a generic Galaxy nexus, which includes all variants.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

It would appear that it is in fact still available for order on Verizon's website. They maybe allowed to sell off their current stock but just not get anymore. Or maybe like was stated earlier for some reason it doesn't apply to the VZW version.

If Google already did the patch, update to remove the feature....and its available for the G Nex on Verizon....why would it not be able to be sold...assuming thats what happened. I just tried an order and everything was fine...

Something feels kinda funny about this guy's responses....lol.

 

[JHBThree]

Thanks for this link...which lead to another one:

Project Glass and the epic history of wearable computers | The Verge

But...even with prior art out there....that hasnt stopped Apple yet. They keep throwing....stuff....at the wall until something sticks with these lawsuits...





If Google already did the patch, update to remove the feature....and its available for the G Nex on Verizon....why would it not be able to be sold...assuming thats what happened. I just tried an order and everything was fine...

Something feels kinda funny about this guy's responses....lol.

From what I understand, they're able to sell off existing stock.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

 

[JHBThree]

...Google existed between the years 1996 to 1998...depending on how you look at it....They officially were named Google in 1998.

?

And every time I turn around....new years get added to when this search patent applies...lol.

Apples patent was officially filed in January of 2000. At that time, Google did only a fraction of what it does now. All it did at that point was search the web. Apples patent predates Google as the unified search platform that it is today.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

 

[JHBThree]

"Google was first incorporated as a privately held company on September 4, 1998"

They were a project of Stanford well beyond that, and they did not exist in anything resembling their current form until well into 2000-2001.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

 

[turdbogls]

Re: Apple granted injunction against the Nexus; sued over Siri.

i am not claiming to know everything and anything about the patent system, all i know is that it is in place to protect original ideas. the "slide to unlock" was a very generic patent, but was pretty easy to get around.
the localized search is also easy to get around

but appearance...c'mon.

anyone remember the doctored images apple drew up in the original tab 10.1 lawsuit?
basically they put the ipad and tab 10.1 side by side with the tabs app drawer open (so no widgets or "custom layout" could be seen, then they also shortened the 16:9 aspect ratio of the tab down to the same height of the iPad. and its not the first time. check it out

real galaxy S on far right...."legal documents" are the comparrison between GS and Iphone on left (notice the app drawer is open as well)

same thing here

this kind of "trickery" would make me throw out any claims by apple.

like i said earlier, i completely understand apple in wanting to get something from their patents, but it should be legit 100% of the time or nothing.

 

[dmmarck]

Re: Apple granted injunction against the Nexus; sued over Siri.

I don't believe that's true. The lawsuit was against a generic Galaxy nexus, which includes all variants.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

Then if that's the case, both Sprint and Verizon are in violation of the injunction (unless it's only on new stock, not old stock). Regardless, it should be fixed sooner than later with JB .

EDIT: Or a supposed OTA...

 

[metz65]

All these phones have a vague rectangular shape and apple patented vague rectangular shapes hundreds of years ago.

They are also close to getting a patent on batteries that need electricity to recharge.

I don't care what kind of phone you use, that's not how I judge someone's worth or intelligence. Sent using tapatalk 2.

 

[McSlappy]

Re: Apple granted injunction against the Nexus; sued over Siri.

They are also close to getting a patent on batteries that need electricity to recharge

Microsoft Patents Ones, Zeroes | The Onion - America's Finest News Source

The above is humor but you can patent anything you want. Getting a judge to agree while easier then common sense would dictate is a little harder then nothing.

 

[zkSharks]

Re: Apple granted injunction against the Nexus; stayed until 7/12

Looks like Samsung has been given at least a short break.. the ban has been stayed until the 12th, the date by which Apple's response is due.

 

[SSHGuru]

Re: Apple granted injunction against the Nexus; stayed until 7/12

The ban was only for sales in the USA.

That means it's not the GSM version it's Verizon's version.

So we should be getting Jellybean soon.

 

[McSlappy]

Re: Apple granted injunction against the Nexus; stayed until 7/12

The ban was only for sales in the USA.

That means it's not the GSM version it's Verizon's version.

If that was true then why did VZW continue to sell the phones while Google Play stopped?...

 

[ultravisitor]

Re: Apple granted injunction against the Nexus; stayed until 7/12

The ban was only for sales in the USA.

That means it's not the GSM version it's Verizon's version.

The GSM version was being sold in the U.S. via Google Play.

 

[JHBThree]

All these phones have a vague rectangular shape and apple patented vague rectangular shapes hundreds of years ago.

They are also close to getting a patent on batteries that need electricity to recharge.

I don't care what kind of phone you use, that's not how I judge someone's worth or intelligence. Sent using tapatalk 2.

Their design patent was much more specific than that.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

 

[JHBThree]

i am not claiming to know everything and anything about the patent system, all i know is that it is in place to protect original ideas. the "slide to unlock" was a very generic patent, but was pretty easy to get around.
the localized search is also easy to get around

but appearance...c'mon.

anyone remember the doctored images apple drew up in the original tab 10.1 lawsuit?
basically they put the ipad and tab 10.1 side by side with the tabs app drawer open (so no widgets or "custom layout" could be seen, then they also shortened the 16:9 aspect ratio of the tab down to the same height of the iPad. and its not the first time. check it out

real galaxy S on far right...."legal documents" are the comparrison between GS and Iphone on left (notice the app drawer is open as well)
Click to view quoted image


same thing here
Click to view quoted image


this kind of "trickery" would make me throw out any claims by apple.

like i said earlier, i completely understand apple in wanting to get something from their patents, but it should be legit 100% of the time or nothing.

Except hardly anyone disputes the fact that the original 10.1 was a knock-off of the original iPad. Remember the original original 10.1? It looked NOTHING like the one that actually went on sale. And it just so happened that the revised design appeared after apple showed the iPad.

Also, design patents and trade dress are very, very different than what's involved in the other cases.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2